Cyber Trust

Cyber Trust is a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) that funds research advancing the knowledge and practices needed to build more trustworthy computing and networked systems. The program supports projects developing new foundations for security, privacy, reliability, and resilience in computing infrastructure. Research may span systems security, software assurance, network security, and human factors in cybersecurity.

Eligible applicants include universities, research institutions, and nonprofit organizations. Award amounts vary by project scope. Note that the NSF 04-524 solicitation for this program has been archived; applicants should check the NSF website for successor programs and active cybersecurity-related solicitations.

NSF 04-524: Cyber Trust | NSF - U.S. National Science Foundation Archived funding opportunity This solicitation is archived. NSF's implementation of the revised 2 CFR NSF Financial Assistance awards (grants and cooperative agreements) made on or after October 1, 2024, will be subject to the applicable set of award conditions, dated October 1, 2024, available on the NSF website .

These terms and conditions are consistent with the revised guidance specified in the OMB Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance published in the Federal Register on April 22, 2024.

Important information for proposers All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the requirements specified in this funding opportunity and in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets these requirements.

Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Updates to NSF Research Security Policies On July 10, 2025, NSF issued an Important Notice providing updates to the agency's research security policies, including a research security training requirement, Malign Foreign Talent Recruitment Program annual certification requirement, prohibition on Confucius institutes and an updated FFDR reporting and submission timeline.

For the FAQs for this announcement, please see nsf04017 Download the solicitation (PDF, 0. 3mb) This solicitation has been archived. National Science Foundation Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering Letter of Intent Due Date(s ) (required for Center-Scale Center-Scale Proposals Only Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.

m. proposer's local time): Single Investigator or Small Group Proposals and Team Proposals Summary Of Program Requirements Networked computers reside at the heart of systems on which people now rely, both in critical national infrastructures and in their homes, cars, and offices. Today, many of these systems are far too vulnerable to cyber attacks that can inhibit their function, corrupt important data, or expose private information.

Cyber Trust promotes a vision of a society in which these systems more predictable, more accountable, and less vulnerable to attack developed, configured, operated and evaluated by a well-trained and diverse workforce; and used by a public educated in their secure and ethical operation.

To improve national cyber security and achieve the Cyber Trust vision, NSF will support a collection of projects that together: advance the relevant knowledge base; creatively integrate research and education for the benefit of technical specialists and the general populace; and integrate the study of technology with the policy, economic, institutional and usability factors that often determine its deployment Proposals funded will support single and multiple-investigator projects within the broad range of disciplines contributing to the Cyber Trust vision.

Projects will be supported in three categories: Single Investigator or Small Group projects, Team projects, and Center-Scale projects. The resulting Cyber Trust award portfolio will: advance the cyber security research frontier; build national education and workforce capacity (including undergraduate, graduate, and faculty development and training); and ensure that new knowledge can be put into practice.

All awards made are subject to the requirements of P. L. 107-305, the Cyber Security Research and Development Act.

Cognizant Program Officer(s): Carl Landwehr, Program Director, Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering, Division of Computer and Network Systems, 1175 N, telephone: (703) 292-8950, fax: (703) 292-9010, email: clandweh@nsf. gov D.

Helen Gill, Program Director, Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering, Division of Computer and Network Systems, 1175 N, telephone: (703) 292-8950, fax: (703) 292-9010, email: hgill@nsf. gov Taieb Znati, Senior Program Director, Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering, Division of Computer and Network Systems, 1175 N, telephone: (703) 292-8950, fax: (703) 292-9010, email: tznati@nsf.

gov Bhavani Thuraisingham, Program Director, Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, 1115 N, telephone: (703) 292-8930, fax: (703) 292-9073, email: bthurais@nsf. gov Harriet G.

Taylor, Program Manager, Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering, Division of Computer and Network Systems, 1175 N, telephone: (703) 292-8950, fax: (703) 292-9010, email: htaylor@nsf. gov Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 47. 070 --- Computer and Information Science An individual may appear as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel on no more than two proposals.

Limit on Number of Proposals: None Anticipated Type of Award: Standard or Continuing Grant or Cooperative Agreement Estimated Number of Awards: 20 to 40 - Up to 3 center-scale awards, up to 10 team awards, and up to 30 Single Investigator or Small Group awards will be made, dependent on Anticipated Funding Amount: $30,000,000 Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A.

Proposal Preparation Instructions Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required for Center-Scale proposals only . Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains information that supplements the standard Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) proposal preparation guidelines.

Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is required for Center-Scale proposals only (Percentage). Cost Sharing Level/Amount: 20% Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable.

Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable. Letters of Intent ( required for Center-Scale proposals only ) : Center-Scale Proposals Only Full Proposal Deadline Date(s) (due by 5 p. m.

proposer's local Single Investigator or Small Group Proposals and Team Proposals Proposal Review Information Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply.

Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Today’s computing systems comprise a broad range of processors, communication networks, and information repositories. They are increasingly ubiquitous, and consequently they are increasingly subject to attack, misuse, and abuse.

Computing systems are vulnerable to these threats due to technical and economic factors and to policy decisions. For example, it is exceedingly difficult to reason precisely about the behavior of a complex digital system. It is an art to design usable control interfaces for complex systems.

Specifications and designs often neglect privacy concerns. It is hard to find security policies that are simple and flexible enough for users to tolerate, yet clear enough to guide system design and implementation. Power and bandwidth limitations constrain the security features in lightweight wireless devices.

Cost and time-to-market considerations limit the use of high assurance implementation methods. Economics dictates having bundled software distributions that include vulnerable functions many users may not need. The data needed to understand the range and severity of security problems and to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative solutions are lacking or closely held.

Finally, insecure system designs impose costs on individuals and organizations who use them rather than on those who produce them. The Cyber Trust program supports research and education activities that will lead to trustworthy computing systems. The Cyber Trust vision is of a society in which: People can justifiably rely on computer-based systems to perform critical functions securely.

These systems include not only critical national-scale infrastructures--- such as the computer and communication networks, the electric power grid, gas lines, water systems, and air traffic control systems---but also more localized systems that perform safety-critical functions in aircraft, automobiles, and even home appliances. These systems must be dependable even in the face of cyber attacks.

People can justifiably rely on systems to process, store, and communicate sensitive information securely. Increasing volumes of information flow on our financial networks, health networks, and even our library systems, not to mention our conventional communication systems and our networked systems of personal and corporate computers.

Confidence that these systems conform to policy (and that the policy is understood) even in the face of cyber attacks will permit people to make informed and rational decisions. People can justifiably rely on a well-trained and diverse workforce to develop, configure, modify, and operate essential computer-based systems.

Educational systems must not only be able to graduate qualified technical specialists who can design, develop, and operate critical systems and investigate attacks on them, but they must also be able to educate the general public in secure and ethical use of technology. Trustworthiness is a system property, and many factors influence how systems are put together.

Consequently, Cyber Trust covers both the full spectrum of information processing technologies and the social, legal, organizational, and economic factors surrounding the use of those technologies. To make progress towards the Cyber Trust a) Advances in knowledge and technology.

This need motivates basic research on ways to make computing systems more b) Improved understanding of the human, organizational, legal, and economic contexts in which trusted systems are developed and operated. This need motivates multi-disciplinary research to identify overall effects of technical developments.

c) Improved education both of those who will produce systems using new technology and those who will configure, operate, investigate, and use the systems produced. This need motivates activities to develop a diverse and robust workforce. Research is needed in a wide range of areas, addressing trustworthiness at all levels of system design, implementation, and use.

It is difficult enough to design and build digital systems that work properly in a benign environment. It is far harder to build systems that can withstand attack or abuse. To achieve the Cyber Trust vision, the science and technology of trustworthy systems must be developed, and it must be developed taking account of the social, economic, policy, and legal factors that determine whether and at what rate technology is deployed.

Application domains span the scale from global networks and large-scale computing to the ever smaller processing and network elements finding their way into cars, buildings, and infrastructure systems of all types. Better abstractions are needed for reasoning about system behavior and attributing responsibility for system actions.

Better means are needed for benchmarking, measurement, and data collection to build the empirical underpinnings of the field. Innovative approaches are needed in education, so that capable students participate in research and research results are quickly integrated into the educational process.

System trustworthiness considerations must be included throughout the computer and information science and engineering curriculum, not just in courses for specialists.

The concepts of proper system operation and ethical use of technology must have even broader reach, to touch students throughout the academic Research is warranted in aspects of the entire system life cycle: development of security and privacy policies; definition of requirements; construction, validation and verification of components and systems; operation, monitoring, maintenance, and recovery after failures or incidents; and forensics, sanitization, and disposal.

Research that spans the technical areas affecting integrated information technologies is strongly encouraged.

This includes projects to advance or apply combinations of technologies to solve particularly challenging problems, to understand engineering tradeoffs among competing or complementary technical approaches, and to explore synergies among Multi-disciplinary research that includes behavioral and social science disciplines is also strongly encouraged. System engineering tradeoffs are rarely based solely on technical issues.

Social, organizational, economic, regulatory, and legal factors often play a major role in determining which technologies are developed, which ones are applied, and how they are used. These choices can have a major influence on overall system trustworthiness.

Many technologies that hold great potential for increasing system trustworthiness have seen little use in practice because, for example, they are seen as too time-consuming or as imposing too great a performance penalty in relation to any expected market advantage.

Through multi-disciplinary Cyber Trust projects, NSF seeks to increase understanding both of the technical implications and the role of social, economic and other factors in developing trustworthy systems. The following paragraphs elaborate some areas that require investigation to achieve the Cyber Trust vision. They should be considered representative, not exhaustive.

The breadth of application of computers and communications continues to expand as computing and communication continues to become faster and cheaper. The needs and policies of applications—whether for computation, information processing, or real-time sensing and control—drive the trustworthiness requirements on lower system layers.

Lower system layers cannot provide all the needed protection, because they lack knowledge of application semantics. At the same time, information systems and applications cannot stand alone: They need to be integrated securely with middleware, operating systems, and networks.

A better understanding is needed of how to make engineering tradeoffs among these layers to achieve desired application security at acceptable cost and performance.

Sample research areas include: authentication, access control, and privacy technologies for policy specification, trust negotiation, collaboration; application information flow certification; audit and application forensics; security and privacy in databases and high interest applications (e.g., voting, healthcare, data mining, semantic web, digital libraries); and comprehensible user interfaces for trust Systems software provides the basis on which future applications will be built, and it governs system behavior, yet cost, power, weight, and response-time constraints—as well as the complexity of the task—often inhibit the development of controls that might prevent misuse or abuse.

Security mechanisms are needed that can protect both conventional computers and increasingly pervasive embedded systems at all scales, from lightweight protection for tiny embedded sensors to complex controls for systems that require end-to-end protection. While broadly applicable research results are always desired, progress in this area may sometimes come through detailed work in a particular platform or system context.

Sample research areas include: trustworthy operating system architectures; long-lived data archiving mechanisms; access control for real-time operating systems; combined software/hardware approaches to trustworthiness; middleware for trustworthy software-controlled The increasing scale and diversity of communication networks amplifies their vulnerability by expanding the number of possible failures and providing more points of access to attackers.

Research to improve the trustworthiness of networks at all scales and to explore the evolving nature of the security protocols and policies in communications networks is of interest.

Sample research areas include: design principles for secure network services affordable network security designs; denial of service prevention and avoidance; security for collaborative environments and deployment, testing and validation of network security tools and mechanisms; anonymity and accountability in networks; Research that establishes a sound scientific foundation and technological basis for computing and communications in a world that may include malicious actors is of interest.

Foundational research in secure, dependable information systems and software-controlled systems, methods for assuring correct behavior of algorithms and protocols, assessing the trustworthiness of systems and certifying proper information flow, as may be required to enforce privacy and security policies.

Results of fundamental research are expected to have broad application and not to be limited to a particular platform or operating system.

Sample methods for specifying, reasoning about, and developing trustworthy components and networks, including novel hardware/firmware designs; evaluation and certification methods; maintaining trustworthiness as systems quantifying engineering trade-offs in trustworthy measuring, modeling, analyzing, and validating Education and Workforce Development Education to develop and maintain both a highly skilled Cyber Trust workforce and an informed populace is essential to the Nation.

Capacity-building activities are essential to educate the experts who will design and develop future trusted systems, to provide a thorough background in cyber trust for those who will manage, configure, and operate such systems, and to provide fundamental cyber security education for all citizens to secure systems of To develop, maintain, and enhance this critical educational infrastructure, all proposals must include an educational and workforce component.

Proposals must specifically describe their education and workforce development contributions, including the planned benefits and impact of the activities described.

Appropriate goals for these activities include integration of research and education, promotion of knowledge transfer, reaching diverse populations and promoting diversity in the cyber security workforce, building capacity within educational institutions for cyber security education, faculty development, and building academic and/or industrial partnerships.

Sample developing materials to integrate trustworthiness considerations into existing courses; disseminating best practices and models having graduate students mentor technical support staff of K-12 institutions; offering summer industry internships for developing online resources for faculty; developing student competitions to encourage more trustworthy programming practices.

Cyber Trust awards made will support single or multiple-investigator projects within the broad range of relevant disciplines. Awards will be made in three categories: Single Investigator or Small Group awards, Team awards, and Center-Scale awards. Single Investigator or Small Group awards are expected to be small scale, focused, and intensive.

Of particular interest are fresh starts that aim at developing new expertise or formulating new research and education directions. Team awards support intensive research and education activities undertaken by teams of researchers and educators. They will focus teams on challenging Cyber Trust problems that may cross disciplinary boundaries.

Center-Scale awards promote synergy among academic, industrial and other partners. They address the combined needs for in-depth or multidisciplinary research investigations, education and workforce development, and incorporation of research results into deployed products and systems. Single Investigator or Small Group projects and Team projects will be supported as standard or continuing grants.

Center-Scale projects will be supported as cooperative Proposal preparation guidance for projects in each of these categories is elaborated in Section V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions of this solicitation. III.

Eligibility Information The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program announcement/solicitation.

Awards funded under this theme may support projects working within a broad range of disciplines related to the Cyber Trust vision, including those that address, for example, usability, economics, or policy aspects in combination with technological aspects of Cyber Trust. There are three types of awards.

1) Single Investigator or Small Group awards last up to 3 years, average about $150,000 per year, and do not exceed $175,000 2) Team awards last up to 3 years and do not exceed $750,000 per year. 3) Center-scale awards range from $1 million to $2 million per year for 5 years. Estimated program budget, number of awards, and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions Letters of Intent ( required for Center-Scale proposals only ): For center-scale proposals only, a Letter of Intent, three pages or less, is required.

It must include: Name of the proposed activity, the name of the lead/submitting institution, and the names of any partner organizations.

Brief statement of the vision and goals of the activity and description of its research, education / workforce development, and external collaboration and technology transfer programs at a sufficient level of detail to permit identification of conflicts of interest and allow potential reviewers to be selected. List of faculty participants, including full names, roles in the activity, departmental and institutional affiliations.

List of individuals, with organizational affiliations, who are not members of the proposing team and whose selection as reviewers might constitute a conflict of interest due to involvement in proposal development, thesis supervision, co-publication or authorship, co-PI relationships, etc. List of suggested reviewers, with organizational affiliations, who have the expertise to review the proposal and have no affiliations that would cause conflicts.

Full Proposal Instructions: Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement/solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF Website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/cgi-bin/getpub? gpg . Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (301) 947-2722 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.

gov .

Individual Investigator or Small Group Proposals Proposals in this size class must specifically describe their integrated research and education and workforce development contributions, including the planned benefits and impact of the activities Proposals in this size class must describe substantial and ambitious research and education projects, either to focus a team of researchers and educators on a particularly challenging technical area or to create a multi-disciplinary team to address important cross-disciplinary challenges that will contribute to realization of the Cyber Trust vision.

Proposals for these projects should describe plans for distributing the research results and should strive to assist scientists and engineers to use their results in ways that go beyond traditional academic publications. They must also creatively address education and workforce development contributions, including the planned benefits and impact of the activities described.

The project description should explain why a budget of the requested size is required to carry out the proposed activities and why the work needs to be conducted as a team effort. Midterm external reviews and/or site visits may be expected at NSF's discretion. Center-scale projects promote synergy among academic, industrial and other partners.

Proposals must address the combined needs for in-depth or multi-disciplinary research investigations, education and workforce development, and incorporation of research results into deployed products and systems that lead to the realization of the Cyber Trust vision.

The project description for a center-scale proposal must incorporate five main elements: the research objectives of the project; objectives that bring diverse scientific, engineering, and other disciplines together to address fundamental research issues crucial to achieving the Cyber Trust vision. Provide a detailed research plan with a timeline for the activities proposed.

Education and Outreach— Describe activities designed to create a culture in which graduate and undergraduate students of diverse backgrounds work in cross-disciplinary teams, in close collaboration with external partners. Integrate education and research and expose students to the integrative aspects of Cyber Trust-related systems and industrial practice to build competence for their future careers.

Develop curriculum innovations derived from the activity’s goals. Produce graduates with the depth and breadth of education needed to sustain leadership throughout their careers.

Center-Scale Activities will include one or more community-extending concepts such as creative undergraduate education activities; programs to address the under-representation of women and minorities in the Cyber Trust workforce; links to institutions with strong traditions of teaching, mentoring, and workforce development; or participation by institutions in EPSCoR Effective Partnership and Technology Transfer— Describe activities designed to develop and sustain strong partnerships between academic and other partners.

Activities may involve collaboration with partners in industry, including service industries, public agencies, or government laboratories. Partners may be involved through integral mentoring students, and supporting proof-of-concept testbeds—­all modes that strengthen the partnership and speed technology transfer.

Describe the intellectual foundation for partners to collaborate with faculty and students to address both long-range and shorter-term challenges, producing the knowledge needed to ensure steady advances in technology and to speed their transition to the marketplace, while training graduates who are more effective in their subsequent careers. Management Plan —Describe the management and coordination of the proposed activities.

The plan must identify the Project Director, the NSF Principal Investigator, responsible for leading the activity and administering the award in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Cooperative Agreement issued by the NSF in the event of an award.

In addition, it should address the following needs: A central point of communication with NSF, Management of project activities, Coordination of technology transfer activities, Fulfillment of educational and workforce development responsibilities, An Advisory Board of outside experts to advise the Director.

Evaluation Plan —Specify evaluation methods that will support assessment of both research results and the effectiveness of education and workforce development activities. Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation number ( 04-524 ) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the proposal Cover Sheet.

Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.

Cost Sharing ( required for Center-Scale Applies to Center-Scale proposals only, see Section Cost sharing at a level of 20 percent of the requested total amount of NSF funds is required for all proposals submitted in response to the Center-Scale category of this announcement/solicitation.

Only items which would be allowable under the applicable cost principles, if charged to the project, may be included in the awardee's contribution to cost sharing. Contributions may be made from any non-Federal source, including non-Federal grants or contracts, and may be cash or in kind (see OMB Circular A-110, Section 23).

It should be noted that contributions counted as cost sharing toward projects of another Federal agency may not be counted towards meeting the specific cost sharing requirements All cost sharing amounts are subject to audit.

Failure to provide the level of cost sharing reflected in the approved award budget may result in termination of the NSF award, disallowance of award costs and/or refund Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s): Letters of Intent ( required for Center-Scale proposals only ) : Center-Scale Proposals Only Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m.

proposer's local time): Single Investigator or Small Group Proposals and Team Proposals Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this announcement/solicitation through the FastLane system. Detailed instructions for proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: http://www. fastlane.

nsf. gov/a1/newstan. htm .

For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail fastlane@nsf. gov . The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system.

Specific questions related to this program announcement/solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this announcement/solicitation. Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets .

The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal.

Proposers are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: http://www. fastlane.

nsf. gov VI. Proposal Review Information A.

NSF Proposal Review Process Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers.

Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal. The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating proposals at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72) .

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127 , Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts Criterion.

This Important Notice reinforces the importance of addressing both criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals submitted to NSF. NSF continues to strengthen its internal processes to ensure that both of the merit review criteria are addressed when making funding decisions.

In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January 2002 issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation guidelines relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project Description. Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators (PIs) must address both merit review criteria in separate statements within the one-page Project Summary.

This chapter also reiterates that broader impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed in the Project Description and described as an integral part of the narrative. Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project Summary.

It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and processing guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of broader impacts to NSF-funded projects. The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed Proposal Guide Chapter III. A for further information).

The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.

What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project?

(If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?

Is there sufficient access to resources? What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning?

How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding?

What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making Integration of Research and Education One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.

These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.

Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

Additional Review Criteria : Additional criteria for center-scale proposals only: Quality of research plan: Are