Design of Biomedical Devices Program

Design of Biomedical Devices Program is sponsored by National Science Foundation (NSF). Supports research on biomimetic design principles for biomedical devices, focusing on structural adaptations from nature. This program should be reviewed carefully against your organization's mission, staffing capacity, timeline, and compliance readiness before you commit resources to a full application. Strong submissions usually translate sponsor priorities into concrete objectives, clear implementation milestones, and measurable public benefit.

For planning purposes, treat rolling deadlines or periodic funding windows as your working submission target unless the sponsor publishes an updated notice. A competitive project plan should include a documented need statement, implementation approach, evaluation framework, risk controls, and a realistic budget narrative. Even when a grant allows broad program design, reviewers still expect credible evidence that the proposed work can be executed within the grant period and with appropriate accountability.

Current published award information indicates $300,000 - $1,000,000 Organizations should verify the final funding range, matching requirements, and allowability rules directly in the official opportunity materials before preparing a budget. Finance and program teams should align early so direct costs, indirect costs, staffing assumptions, procurement timelines, and reporting obligations all remain consistent throughout drafting and post-award administration.

Eligibility guidance for this opportunity is: Academic institutions, nonprofits If your organization has partnerships, subrecipients, or collaborators, define responsibilities and compliance ownership before submission. Reviewers often look for implementation credibility, so letters of commitment, prior performance evidence, and a clear governance model can materially strengthen the application narrative and reduce concerns about delivery risk.

A practical approach is to begin with a focused readiness review, then build a workback schedule from the sponsor deadline. Confirm required attachments, registration dependencies, and internal approval checkpoints early. This reduces last-minute issues and improves submission quality. For the most accurate requirements, always rely on the official notice and primary source links associated with Design of Biomedical Devices Program.

NSF 24-603: Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies - SynBio Control (BRING SynBio) | NSF - U. S. National Science Foundation An official website of the United States government Official websites use .

gov A . gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .

gov websites use HTTPS. or https:// means you've safely connected to the . gov website.

Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Research Experiences for Undergraduates For Early-Career Researchers Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) How We Make Funding Decisions Request a Change to Your Award Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) NSF Public Access Repository Who to Contact With Questions Facilities and Infrastructure Updates on NSF Priorities Our Directorates & Offices Biological Sciences (BIO) Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Integrative Activities (OIA) International Science & Engineering (OISE) Mathematical & Physical Sciences (MPS) Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences (SBE) Technology, Innovation & Partnerships (TIP) National Center for Science & Engineering Statistics (NCSES) National Science Board (NSB) Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies - SynBio Control (BRING SynBio) Archived funding opportunity This solicitation is archived.

NSF 24-603: Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies - SynBio Control (BRING SynBio) Posted: September 5, 2024 Download the solicitation (PDF, 0. 9mb) Program Solicitation NSF 24-603 U. S.

National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental and Transport Systems Division of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation National Institutes of Health National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m.

submitting organization's local time): Important Information And Revision Notes This opportunity does not support Clinical Trials. Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted.

The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies - SynBio Control (BRING SynBio) The National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering (NSF/ENG) and the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIH/NIBIB) announce the Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies-SynBio Control (BRING-SynBio) Solicitation.

The BRING-SynBio Control solicitation aims to accelerate the translation of novel fundamental synthetic and engineering biology advances to early-stage biomedical technologies through interagency collaboration.

Projects responsive to the BRING-SynBio solicitation will include a two-phased plan to pursue proof of principle synthetic and engineering biology research (Phase I) and exploratory research to translate findings toward biomedical technologies (Phase II). Phase II research should build on the projected outcomes of Phase I. NSF will provide support for fundamental research activity in Phase I.

NIH will provide support for exploratory biomedical engineering technology development in Phase II. Successful completion of Phase I milestones will be administratively evaluated by NIH/NIBIB to determine eligibility to transition to Phase II. This transition is neither automatic nor guaranteed.

Potential areas of interest for BRING-SynBio include but are not limited to: Novel design principles for the characterization and design of new synthetic biology tools and parts: Gene circuit designs that enhance robustness, reliability, predictability, and tuneability of current designs. Modular designs for tools and parts that, when combined, result in predictable network outcomes.

New strategies to improve upon size limitations of gene circuit designs. Regulation and control of biological processes in cells/tissues: Synthetic gene regulatory networks for controlled modulation of gene expression and dynamic noise filtering. Design of synthetic circuits that incorporate novel feedback control strategies.

Projects that address only one of the phases, do not pursue advances in synthetic biology that incorporate biological control theory, or do not address a challenge with clear relevance to the mission of NIBIB are non-responsive. Non-responsive projects will be returned without review . Broadening Participation In STEM NSF has a mandate to broaden participation in science and engineering, as articulated and reaffirmed in law since 1950.

Congress has charged NSF to “develop intellectual capital, both people and ideas, with particular emphasis on groups and regions that traditionally have not participated fully in science, mathematics, and engineering." Cognizant Program Officer(s): Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Steven W. Peretti, telephone: (703) 292-4201, email: speretti@nsf. gov Aleksandr L.

Simonian, telephone: (703) 292-2191, email: asimonia@nsf. gov Stephanie George, telephone: (703) 292-7825, email: stgeorge@nsf. gov Steven M.

Zehnder, telephone: (703) 292-7014, email: szehnder@nsf. gov Shivani Sharma, telephone: (703) 292-4204, email: shisharm@nsf. gov Tuba Fehr, National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, telephone: (301) 451-7958, email: tuba.

fehr@nih. gov Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 93.

286 --- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 6 to 8 Anticipated Funding Amount: $1,800,000 to $2,400,000 Who May Submit Proposals: Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members.

Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U. S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities.

There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1 An investigator may participate as Principal Investigator (PI), co-Principal Investigator (co-PI), or Other Senior/Key Personnel on no more than one proposal submitted in response to this solicitation.

These eligibility constraints will be strictly enforced in order to treat everyone fairly and consistently. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals received within the limit will be accepted based on earliest date and time of proposal submission (i. e.

, the first two proposals received will be accepted, and the remainder will be returned without review). No exceptions will be made. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A.

Proposal Preparation Instructions Letters of Intent: Not required Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required Full Proposals submitted via Research. gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.

nsf. gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp?

ods_key=pappg . Full Proposals submitted via Grants. gov: NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants. gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants. gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.

gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf. gov/publications/pub_summ.

jsp? ods_key=grantsgovguide Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Other Budgetary Limitations: Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.

m. submitting organization's local time): Proposal Review Information Criteria National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply.

Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Award Administration Information Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply. Summary of Program Requirements Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions Proposal Preparation Instructions Research. gov/Grants.

gov Requirements NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures Merit Review Principles and Criteria Review and Selection Process Award Administration Information Notification of the Award The National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering (NSF/ENG) and the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIH/NIBIB) announce the Biomedical Research Initiative for Next-Gen BioTechnologies-SynBio Control (BRING-SynBio) Solicitation.

The BRING-SynBio Control solicitation aims to accelerate the translation of novel fundamental synthetic and engineering biology advances to early-stage biomedical technologies through interagency collaboration. The goal of the BRING-SynBio solicitation is to support fundamental and interdisciplinary proof of principle approaches in synthetic and engineering biology that spur the development of novel, early-stage biomedical technologies.

This solicitation is focused on the use of biological control theory in the design and characterization of new synthetic biological tools and parts and their downstream application to technology development in the biomedical field.

In this solicitation, biological control theory is defined as control strategies that are analogous to those exhibited in natural systems and include, but are not limited to, nested loops, multiple induction and inhibition interactions, feedback control, sensing and signaling functions, and switching between alternate pathways.

Proposals must address research on fundamental aspects of synthetic and engineering biology and their potential to lead to early-stage biomedical technology development projects eligible for support through the NIH/NIBIB. Clinical Trials are not supported by this activity.

Projects are expected to include a two-year plan (Phase I) of fundamental, proof of principle research involving novel, biological control-guided aspects of synthetic gene circuit design and a two-year plan (Phase II) describing exploratory research focused on further development and validation of Phase I emerging technologies that offer novel capabilities for biomedical technology development to achieve overall project objectives.

Phase II efforts should be predicated upon the proof of principle established during Phase I and should address major feasibility gaps for the technology that require further development and rigorous validation in a biomedically relevant setting. NSF/ENG will support fundamental research at the institution of higher education or non-profit organization in Phase I.

The early-stage biomedical technology development efforts in Phase II will be supported separately by NIH/NIBIB. NSF will coordinate and manage the review of the proposals. Proposals will be shared with NIH/NIBIB Program staff to determine programmatic fit to NIBIB's mission and suitability for funding.

Investigators are advised to consult with NSF/ENG and NIH/NIBIB program officers early in their proposal planning process.

No more than 21 months after the Phase I start date, award recipients may submit a Phase II transition package via email to the Program Officer at NIH/NIBIB including a Phase I report describing in detail progress towards completion of the Phase I milestones and may be asked to include other information necessary for successful evaluation of the Phase I of the project. This transition package may be shared with NSF Program Staff.

Satisfactory completion of the Phase I milestones will be assessed administratively by agency staff to determine eligibility for transition to Phase II. Transition to Phase II is neither automatic nor guaranteed. After administrative review of the Phase I progress, it is possible that a project will not be recommended for transition to Phase II.

Transition to Phase II will depend upon demonstration of milestone completion, feasibility of plans, programmatic priorities, and availability of funds. See Section VI. B for additional information.

NSF will provide $150,000 in total cost per award per year for 2 years for Phase I. NSF estimates to make 6-8 awards total for Phase I per funding round. NIH will provide $275,000 in direct cost per award over 2 years for Phase II.

Please refer to the Phase II budget in the Additional Documents section of the solicitation for details. NIH estimates to make 4-5 awards total for Phase II per funding round. Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

Anticipated Funding Amount estimates solely reflect NSF or NIH contributions in a given fiscal year. IV. Eligibility Information Who May Submit Proposals: Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members.

Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U. S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities.

There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1 An investigator may participate as Principal Investigator (PI), co-Principal Investigator (co-PI), or Other Senior/Key Personnel on no more than one proposal submitted in response to this solicitation.

These eligibility constraints will be strictly enforced in order to treat everyone fairly and consistently. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals received within the limit will be accepted based on earliest date and time of proposal submission (i. e.

, the first two proposals received will be accepted, and the remainder will be returned without review). No exceptions will be made. Additional Eligibility Info: Non-domestic (non-US) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply for funding under this solicitation, nor to act as lead or collaborating institutions.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.

gov or Grants. gov. Full Proposals submitted via Research.

gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=pappg .

Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.

Full proposals submitted via Grants. gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants. gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants. gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide is available on the Grants. gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants. gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.

gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following: Collaborative Proposals.

All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via Research. gov. PAPPG Chapter II.

E. 3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals. See PAPPG Chapter II.

D. 2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

Proposal Titles: Proposal titles must begin with BRING-SynBio, followed by a colon and the title of the project, for example BRING-SynBio: Title. If a proposal is submitted as part of a set of collaborative proposals, the title of the proposal should begin with Collaborative Research followed by a colon, then BRING-SynBio, followed by a colon, and the title.

For example, the title of each proposal in a collaborative set of proposals would be Collaborative Research: BRING-SynBio: Title. Phase I and Phase II Headings: A single Project Description must be submitted, and it must contain separate, clearly labeled headings for Phase I and Phase II. Under each heading, the research activities pursued under that phase must be described in detail.

Objectives for Phase II should be based on the anticipated results from Phase I. Proposals must include both Phase I and Phase II to be considered complete and eligible for review. Milestones: Delineation of milestones for Phase I is a key requirement of this solicitation.

Proposals must provide a section entitled "Milestones," at the end of the Phase I Project Description. This section must include a clear description of the Phase I milestones that, if met, will justify proceeding to Phase II. A milestone is defined as a scheduled event in the project timeline or a quantitative performance measure that signifies completion of a major project stage/activity.

Criteria for success of proposed tools and methodological approaches should be clearly outlined in the milestones and should be defined in terms of outcomes achieved (rather than tasks to be completed) to demonstrate initial validation of proposed tools and feasibility.

The milestones proposed in the proposal must be objective, quantifiable, rigorously defined, feasible (in terms of the study timeline and approach), and scientifically justified. They should not be a restatement of the Phase I specific aims. An example of an NIH proposal containing milestones can be found at https://www.

niaid. nih. gov/grants-contracts/sample-applications#r21r33 .

Ethical, Legal, and Social Implication (ELSI): The Project Description must contain discussion of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of the proposed work. Developments in synthetic and engineering biology have ethical, legal, and social implications. Proposals are required to integrate ethical considerations and implications of the research including research integrity, diversity of the research team, and societal impacts.

This could include consideration of issues such as: transparency, inclusivity, social responsibility, impartiality, reliability, security and privacy. Related issues are openness and fairness of societal access to new technologies, responsible development of safe, secure, and robust operations in expected or foreseeable social and/or engineering contexts.

Investigators are encouraged to consider the ethical implications of both intended and unintended outcomes, positive and negative, of new technologies and how best to mitigate risk to society. Broader Impacts: Please follow the guidance provided in the PAPPG to prepare the Broader Impacts section. As a reminder, this must be a separate section labeled "Broader Impacts."

Phase I Budget: The Phase I budget is to be provided as described in the PAPPG. The estimated Phase II budget is not included in that submitted budget, it is to be provided as an additional document as described below. Supplementary Documents: Supplementary documents are limited to the specific types of documentation listed in the PAPPG, with the following exceptions: 1.

Human Subjects Protection: Proposals involving human subjects should include a supplementary document of no more than two pages in length summarizing potential risks to human subjects; plans for recruitment and informed consent; inclusion of women, minorities, and children; and planned procedures to protect against or minimize potential risks. Human subjects plans must include the NIH enrollment table . 2.

Vertebrate Animals: Proposals involving vertebrate animals should include a supplementary document of no more than two pages in length that addresses the following points: Detailed description and justification of the proposed use of the animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and number to be used; Information on the veterinary care of the animals; Description of procedures for minimizing discomfort, distress, pain, and injury; and Method of euthanasia and the reasons for its selection 3.

List of Project Personnel and Partner Institutions: (Note - In separately submitted collaborative proposals, only the lead organization should provide this information). Provide current, accurate information for all personnel and institutions involved in the project. NSF staff will use this information in the merit review process to manage reviewer selection.

The list should include all PIs, co-PIs, Senior/Key Personnel, funded or unfunded consultants and collaborators, Postdocs, and project-level advisory committee members. The list should include all personnel involved in sub-awards. This list should be numbered and include (in this order) Full name, Organization(s), and Role in the project, with each item separated by a semi-colon.

Each person listed should start a new numbered line. For example: <First Name><Last Name>; <Organization Name>; <Role> <First Name><Last Name>; <Organization Name>; <Role> <First Name><Last Name>; <Organization Name>; <Role> <First Name><Last Name>; <Organization Name>; <Role> 4.

Letters of Collaboration: There are two types of collaboration, one involving individuals/organizations that are included in the budget, and the other involving individuals/organizations that are not included in the budget. Collaborations that are included in the budget should be described in the Project Description.

Any substantial collaboration with individuals/organizations not included in the budget should be described in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources section of the proposal. In either case, a letter of collaboration from each named participating organization other than the submitting lead, non-lead, and/or sub-awardee organizations must be provided at the time of submission of the proposal.

These letters must not deviate from the restrictions and requirements set forth in Chapter II. D. 2 of the PAPPG.

5. Phase II Budget: An estimated Phase II budget must be submitted using the SF424 R&R budget form ( https://apply07. grants.

gov/apply/forms/sample/RR_Budget_3_0-V3. 0. pdf ).

A detailed budget for both years of Phase II activities must be included. The combined budget for direct costs for the two-year Phase II project period may not exceed $275,000. No more than $200,000 in direct costs may be requested in any single year.

Indirect costs, such as facilities and administrative costs can be requested in addition to the direct costs for each year of the Phase II project, however the overall Phase II budget must remain under $275,000 in direct costs over the two-year budget period. This budget document is an estimate. Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitting organization's local time): D.

Research. gov/Grants. gov Requirements For Proposals Submitted Via Research.

gov: To prepare and submit a proposal via Research. gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www. research.

gov/research-web/content/aboutpsm . For Research. gov user support, call the Research.

gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail rgov@nsf. gov . The Research.

gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of Research. gov systems. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants. gov: Before using Grants. gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile.

Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants. gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.

gov is available on the Grants. gov Applicant Resources web page: https://www. grants.

gov/web/grants/applicants. html . In addition, the NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide (see link in Section V. A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants. gov.

For Grants. gov user support, contact the Grants. gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants.

gov . The Grants. gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.

gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation. Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.

gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants. gov.

The completed application will be transferred to the NSF Research. gov system for further processing. The NSF Grants.

gov Proposal Processing in Research. gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants. gov Application Guide , Grants.

gov Proposal Processing in Research. gov how-to guide , and Grants. gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions .

Grants. gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research. gov at NSF.

When submitting via Grants. gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p. m.

submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants. gov.

Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research. gov. Proposers that submitted via Research.

gov may use Research. gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.

gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants. gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.

gov should be used to check the status of an application. VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgment and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review.

All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process.

Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional.

Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards.

A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1. A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ . Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 .

These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U. S.

technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which 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. A.

Merit Review Principles and Criteria The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education.

To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes."

NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects. 1. Merit Review Principles These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards.

Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply: All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge. NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals.

These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.

Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful.

Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project. With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project.

Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities. These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent. All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two