Enhancing the Security of Open-Source Cloud Computing Ecosystems: An Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled Vulnerability Management Perspective

Enhancing the Security of Open-Source Cloud Computing Ecosystems: An Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled Vulnerability Management Perspective is sponsored by National Science Foundation (NSF). This grant supports research focused on improving the security of open-source cloud computing ecosystems through AI-enabled vulnerability management.

NSF 26-506: Pathways to Enable Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) | NSF - U.S. National Science Foundation Active funding opportunity This document is the current version. 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.

NSF 26-506: Pathways to Enable Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) Posted: February 19, 2026 To save a PDF of this solicitation, select Print to PDF in your browser's print options.

Program Solicitation NSF 26-506 U.S. National Science Foundation Directorate for Biological Sciences Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering Directorate for STEM Education Directorate for Engineering Directorate for Geosciences Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.

m. submitting organization's local time): First Tuesday in September, Annually Thereafter First Tuesday in March, Annually Thereafter Important Information And Revision Notes Proposers must review the PESOSE website for critical information on proposal and budget preparation. Experiential Activities: Each PESOSE Track 1 or Track 2 awardee must participate in mandatory OSE experiential activities, known as "I-Corps for PESOSE."

The PESOSE website provide information on team composition, expectations for participation and budget information. Track 2 awardees that successfully completed I-Corps for PESOSE as a Track 1 awardee may waive this requirement by indicating the dates of their I-Corps for PESOSE activity on the first line of their Project Description and describing the outcomes of their activities in the body of the Project Description.

Collaborations: Although proposals may be multi-organizational, a single organization must serve as the lead and all other organizations as subawardees. Organizations ineligible to submit to this program solicitation may not receive subawards. If ineligible organizations are part of the team; their participation is expected to be supported by non-NSF sources.

Restricted Eligibility: The PESOSE solicitation restricts PI eligibility dependent on the submitting organization in order to ensure the PIs/Co-PIs have the proper authority, responsibility, continuity and oversight experience to lead the OSE efforts. Proposals must be prepared in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) . Use the version of the guide that is in effect on the proposal's due date.

Summary Of Program Requirements Pathways to Enable Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) The Pathways to Enable Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) program supports the translation of open-source science and engineering-focused research products into safe and sustainable ecosystems that address national and societal challenges.

Open-source tools such as software, hardware, machine learning models, languages, and data platforms are designed to be shared as they are publicly-accessible and modifiable. These tools spark innovation in critical fields as varied as artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing, banking, healthcare, research, education, next-gen manufacturing, mobility, and National security (including cybersecurity).

PESOSE supports the creation of managing organizations for these ecosystems, ensuring strong governance, distributed development, and broad user communities across academia, industry, and government.

PESOSE also supports enhancements to the safety, security, and privacy of Open-Source Ecosystems (OSE) by addressing significant vulnerabilities, both technical and socio-technical, to improve the resistance of the ecosystem against threats.

This solicitation seeks three types of proposals, allowing teams to propose specific activities to: 1) scope and plan the establishment of an OSE, 2) establish and expand a sustainable OSE based on a robust, promising open-source product that meets an emergent societal or national need, and 3) improve the safety, security, and privacy of an existing OSE and its products.

Expanding Participation In Stem, NSF Priorities, And Gold Standard Science NSF prioritizes cutting-edge discovery science and engineering research, advancing technology and innovation, and creating opportunities for all Americans. NSF has established priorities set forth by Congress, the administration and the NSF director to promote NSF's mission .

Proposers should review the list of NSF priorities and are encouraged to align their proposals with them, where appropriate. NSF also expects the highest standards of scientific rigor, integrity and adherence to appropriate tenets of Gold Standard Science in proposals, as appropriate for the field of science and research modality.

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. PESOSE Program, telephone: (703) 292-8804, email: PESOSE@nsf.

gov Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 47. 049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences 47. 070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering 47.

074 --- Biological Sciences 47. 075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences 47. 076 --- STEM Education 47.

084 --- NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 40 to 60 Track 1: maximum $300,000 per award, approximately 30 awards Track 2: maximum $1,500,000 per award, approximately 10 awards Track 3: maximum $1,500,000 per award, approximately 10 awards The estimated program budget, number of awards, and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $40,000,000 Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions Letters of Intent: Not required Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required For proposals submitted via Research. gov, PAPPG guidelines apply.

For proposals submitted via Grants. gov, NSF Grants. gov Application Guide guidelines apply.

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): First Tuesday in September, Annually Thereafter First Tuesday in March, Annually Thereafter 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.

Many research outputs - such as software code, tutorials, datasets, hardware designs, models, standards, and protocols - are released as open-source products. These products are freely available for anyone to view, use, modify, or share. Open-source products encourage collaboration, transparency, and community-driven development, which helps speed up innovation.

Over time, many of these products become part of critical national infrastructure, including energy grids, water systems, healthcare records, financial networks, and the internet. The economic value of open-source products is enormous, with recent estimates exceeding $13 trillion per year.

Open-source software is used almost everywhere and supports key technologies such as artificial intelligence, data science, cloud computing, telecommunications, scientific research tools, and critical facilities. Despite these benefits, the number of open-source developers is relatively small, and many projects lack sufficient resources. This can slow innovation and make maintenance difficult.

In addition, weaknesses in open-source software - such as security flaws, supply-chain risks, or insider threats - can spread across many connected systems. In extreme cases, these weaknesses could lead to large-scale failures that affect national or global systems.

The NSF Pathways to Ensure Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) program, facilitated by the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP), addresses these challenges through several goals. The first two goals focus on planning and building organizations that can effectively manage open-source ecosystems. Strong management supports ongoing development, long-term sustainability, and growth.

Because open-source systems can also introduce security risks, the third goal of PESOSE focuses on building resilient ecosystems that support innovation while reducing risk. The PESOSE program supports NSF's mission by accelerating innovation that benefits the Nation.

Funded projects lower barriers for researchers and startups, protect public and private investments, strengthen safety, security, and privacy, and support interoperability and standards. Together, these outcomes help increase U.S. competitiveness in the global economy.

The Pathways to Enable Secure Open-Source Ecosystems (PESOSE) program, managed by the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships, creates a new pathway to turn research into innovation by supporting strong, sustainable, and secure open-source ecosystems (OSEs). These ecosystems are built around existing open-source products, tools, and artifacts that already show promise.

The goal is to transform research results into widely used technologies and services that benefit society. Open-source ecosystems depend on distributed development, where contributors from many organizations work together to improve and maintain the product. When successful, these ecosystems grow active communities of developers and users, attract resources, and help innovations make a lasting impact.

Track 1: Scoping and planning. This track helps organizations that need experience building developer and user communities. This includes planning and training in governance, legal issues, licensing, fundraising, and administration.

Track 2: Establishing and expanding. This track focuses on building or improving governance for robust, promising OSEs that meet emerging societal or national needs. Managing organizations coordinate developers, support users, and provide training.

They also ensure security and reliability, maintain governance, and sustain long-term viability. Successful ecosystems share common traits: a clear vision, documented demand for products, flexible deployment, active developer communities, collaborative growth, and engaged users. Track 3: Improving safety, security, and privacy.

This track addresses vulnerabilities in open-source products and infrastructure. Risks can be technical, such as code flaws. Risks can also be socio-technical such as supply chain weaknesses, insider threats or poisoned machine learning models.

Projects will identify vulnerabilities, assess dependencies, and review past incidents. They will also create plans for prevention, detection, and recovery. Actions may include hardening codebases, improving secure development practices, enhancing monitoring and response, and building recovery processes.

The PESOSE program will help open-source ecosystems become secure, sustainable and widely adopted. These ecosystems support innovation, reduce costs, and enable collaboration across research, industry, and government. By improving governance and security, PESOSE ensures that open-source technologies remain reliable and resilient.

It also ensures opens-source products serve critical needs in areas such as healthcare, energy, and national security. Ultimately, the program strengthens the nation's digital infrastructure and promotes technologies that benefit society.

Proposals should advance one or more of the following measures of success: Data sets established or expanded New technologies or techniques established STEM Education and Workforce Participants hired into a STEM related field Anticipated Type of Award: Continuing Grant or Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 40 to 60 Track 1: maximum $300,000 per award, approximately 30 awards Track 2: maximum $1,500,000 per award, approximately 10 awards Track 3: maximum $1,500,000 per award, approximately 10 awards The estimated program budget, number of awards, and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

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 sub-awards 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. For-profit organizations: U.S.-based commercial organizations, including small businesses, with strong capabilities in scientific or engineering research or education and a passion for innovation.

State and Local Governments Tribal Nations: An American Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges as a federally recognized tribe pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. §§ 5130-5131.

Other Federal Agencies and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs): Prospective proposers from other Federal Agencies and FFRDCs, including NSF sponsored FFRDCs, must follow the guidance in PAPPG Chapter I.E.2 regarding limitations on eligibility.

For Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs): By the submission deadline, any PI, co-PI, or other Senior/Key Personnel must hold either: a tenured or tenure-track position, or a primary, full-time, paid appointment in a research or teaching position, or a staff leadership role in an Open-Source Program Office or equivalent position at a U.S.-based campus of an Institution of Higher Education (see above), with exceptions granted for family or medical leave, as determined by the submitting institution.

Individuals with primary appointments at overseas branch campuses of U.S. institutions of higher education are not eligible. Researchers from foreign academic institutions who contribute essential expertise to the project may participate as Senior/Key Personnel or collaborators but may not receive NSF support.

For all other eligible proposing organizations: The PI must be an employee of the proposing organization who is normally resident in the U.S. and must be acting as an employee of the proposing organization while performing PI responsibilities.

The PI may perform the PI responsibilities while temporarily out of the U.S. Individuals with primary appointments at non-U.S. based non-profit or non-U.S. based for-profit organizations are not eligible. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: There are no restrictions or limits.

Additional Eligibility Info: Ownership and Control Requirements: Non-profit and for-profit proposing organizations must be U.S.-based, and U.S.-owned and controlled, as described in the following: A majority (more than 50%) of a proposing organization's equity (e.g., stock) must be directly owned and controlled by one of the following: One or more individuals who are citizens or permanent residents of the U.S.; Other U.S. firms, each of which is directly owned and controlled by individuals who are citizens or permanent residents of the U.S.; A combination of (1) and (2) above.

If an Employee Stock Ownership Plan owns all or part of a proposing organization, each stock trustee and plan member is considered an owner. If a trust owns all or part of the organization, each trustee and trust beneficiary is considered an owner. The above ownership requirement states that at least a majority of a proposing organization's equity must be held by certain types of eligible entities (individuals and/or other firms).

Therefore, when determining your organization's eligibility, you must be able to identify an ownership majority (of individuals and/or entities) that is made up of eligible individuals and/or other firms.

Each individual included as part of the eligible ownership majority of a proposing organization must be either a citizen or permanent resident of the U.S. The term "individual" refers only to actual people - it does not refer to companies or other legal entities of any sort. "Permanent resident" refers to an individual admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

If you include other firms as part of the eligible ownership majority of a proposing organization, you should verify that each such firm is more than 50% owned and controlled by individuals who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Ownership refers to direct ownership of stock or equity of a proposing organization. Equity ownership is determined on a fully diluted basis.

This means that the determination considers the total number of shares or equity that would be outstanding if all possible sources of conversion were exercised, including, but not limited to: outstanding common stock or equity, outstanding preferred stock (on a converted-to common basis) or equity, outstanding warrants (on an as-exercised-and-converted-to-common basis), outstanding options and options reserved for future grants, and any other convertible securities on an as-converted-to-common basis.

The purpose of the ownership requirement is to ensure that a recipient organization is controlled directly by individuals who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents or by firms that are majority-owned by U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Therefore, actual control of the organization must reside within the eligible ownership majority and may not reside outside of that ownership block.

One of the following must describe the control of the proposing organization – the company must be more than 50% controlled by: One U.S. citizen or permanent resident; or more than one U.S. citizen or permanent resident; One other U.S. firm that is directly owned and controlled by U.S. citizens or permanent residents; More than one other U.S. firm, each of which is directly owned and controlled by U.S. citizens or permanent residents; or Any combination of the above.

Cost Principles for For-Profit Organizations: For-profit entities are subject to the cost principles contained in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 31 . Legal Right to Work: The PI and all employees of the proposing organization who will receive PESOSE funding support must have a legal right to work in the U.S. for the proposing organization. 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. You must prepare your proposal according to Chapter II. D. 2 of the PAPPG , unless this solicitation specifies different instructions.

Always use the version of the PAPPG in effect on your proposal's due date. For proposals submitted via Research. gov, PAPPG guidelines apply.

For proposals submitted via Grants. gov, NSF Grants. gov Application Guide guidelines apply.

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. Proposal Preparation Instructions: IMPORTANT: Institutions submitting proposals to this solicitation must have an active UEI (Unique Entity Identifier) through SAM.

gov. Please note: Registration through SAM. gov can take several weeks. Collaborative Proposals .

Although proposals may be multi-organizational, a single organization must serve as the lead and all other organizations as subawardees. Organizations ineligible to submit to this program solicitation may not receive subawards. If ineligible organizations are part of the team; their participation is expected to be supported by non-NSF sources.

Title . Proposal titles must begin with "PESOSE: " followed by a colon (":"), the track (Track 1, 2 or 3), and then the title of the project; e.g., PESOSE: Track 2: (title). Project Summary .

The last line of the Project Summary must have a prioritized list of 2-5 keywords or phrases that best characterize the technical field or impact area of the OSE, e.g., "AI" or "healthcare." The list should start with "Keywords:" followed by a list of keywords separated by semi-colons (";"). Track 1: 7 pages maximum.

Tracks 2 and 3: 15 pages maximum.

All PESOSE proposals must have: a pointer to the existing publicly-available open-source product that is being transitioned (note: as URLs may not be included in Project Description; proposers should use an in-line citation and an entry in the References Cited section to point to the open-source product); details on the current status of the open-source product development and testing model, methods of dissemination, user base, and contributor base; a description of the problem being addressed; and a strong justification that makes the case that the team is qualified to conduct this work.

Proposers are encouraged to consider the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) , guidance for developers on securing software supply chains and the Open Source Security Foundation's best practices as they develop their proposals.

Experiential Activities: Each PESOSE Track 1 or Track 2 awardee must participate in mandatory OSE experiential activities, known as "I-Corps for PESOSE." These activities will enable each team to ascertain the potential for a relevant and sustainable OSE for their open-source product, learn best-practices for building a secure, private, and sustainable OSE, and identify the broader societal impacts for their OSE.

Experiential activities in ecosystem discovery will focus on community building, governance, and the sustainability of OSEs. Track 2 awardees that successfully completed I-Corps for PESOSE as a Track 1 awardee may waive this requirement by indicating the dates of their I-Corps for PESOSE activity on the first line of their Project Description and describing the outcomes of their activities in the body of the Project Description.

The PESOSE website will provide information on team composition, expectations for participation and budget information. Track 1: Scoping and planning Track 1 proposal should describe the current context of the open-source product and, as far as possible, the long-term vision and potential impact of the proposed OSE.

Proposals must outline scoping activities that inform plans for ecosystem discovery, governance structures, continuous development and deployment, and community building for users and contributors. Track 1 awards support planning, not product development.

Track 1 proposals should address: Ecosystem Discovery : Define strategies to assess the need for the innovation, justify why an OSE is the right approach, and identify potential users and developers. Organization and Governance : Outline activities to establish governance and licensing models, development and integration processes, security and privacy safeguards, and metrics for long-term success.

Risk Analysis/Security Plan : Identify anticipated security, safety, and privacy risks and explore mechanisms for quality assurance, secure modification and release, identity management, and chain of custody. Community Building : Describe plans to engage users and developers through activities such as workshops, hackathons, competitions, and research networks.

Track 2: Establishing and expanding Track 2 activities are intended to build a strong, sustainable OSE that can grow, remain secure, and deliver lasting value. They aim to ensure robust governance, continuous development, risk management, and active community engagement so that these ecosystems support innovation, reliability, and broad societal impact.

Track 2 proposals should address: Ecosystem Growth : Provide a clear strategy for establishing and expanding the OSE. Include plans to identify, engage, and support users, contributors, and partners. Industrial and international collaborations are encouraged.

Organization and Governance : Outline a sustainable governance model, including coordination processes and licensing. Explain how decisions on product updates and development roadmaps will be made. Continuous Development : Describe the methodology and infrastructure for ongoing development, integration, and deployment.

Include processes to ensure quality, security, and privacy in an open, distributed environment. Risk Analysis and Security : Identify major security, safety, and privacy risks. Present a plan to address these risks, covering identity and access management, secure modification and release practices, vulnerability patching, and chain of custody.

Community Building : Provide a long-term strategy to attract, onboard, and support users and contributors who will maintain and advance the product. Sustainability : Define clear goals for financial support and strategies to sustain active communities of users and developers. Evaluation Plan : Include an actionable plan with metrics and benchmarks to measure success and assess progress.

For Track 3: Improving safety, security, and privacy Track 3 activities are intended to strengthen the security, privacy, and resilience of critical OSEs so they can continue to deliver reliable, trusted technologies. By identifying vulnerabilities, mitigating risks, and ensuring sustainable governance, Track 3 aims to protect users and dependent systems while safeguarding societal and economic interests.

Track 3 proposals should address: Societal, National, and Economic Impact . Explain the broader impacts of the OSE. Describe any other products or systems that depend on the secure and privacy-preserving function of the OSE.

Targeted Vulnerabilities and Risks . Specify the classes of vulnerabilities to be addressed and the expected impact of mitigating them. Discuss attack methods being targeted, including technical risks and socio-technical risks.

Include any known prior incidents or patterns of exploitation. Development Plan . Provide a detailed plan for addressing vulnerabilities, including key milestones for each year of the award.

For software-focused OSEs, note technical considerations such as using memory-safe languages or software bills of materials. Evaluation Plan . Describe how success will be measured.

Include metrics, tools, and benchmarks for assessing progress and effectiveness. Ideally, the evaluation plan should incorporate testing and validation opportunities with existing users. Budget and Budget Justification.

The maximum budget must not exceed $300,000 for up to 1 year for Track I proposals and $1,500,000 for up to 2 years for Track 2 and Track 3 proposals. Additional information to aid in budget preparation can be found on the PESOSE website. Other Supplementary Documents: 1.

Letters of Collaboration (required) A minimum of three and up to five letters of collaboration from third-party users and/or contributors of the open-source product must be uploaded. These letters must be from current users or contributors (who are not directly related to the proposing team) of the open-source product.

Each letter should clearly describe how they have contributed and will continue to contribute to the development of the proposed OSE. If the OSE will depend on facilities infrastructure provided by the proposing organization or another organization after the conclusion of the award, one letter of collaboration describing the extent and term of this provision should be included.

For Track 3: Letters must he importance of the vulnerabilities to be addressed from the perspective of users. PESOSE letters of collaboration do not have to conform to the standard format specified in the PAPPG.

In addition to the above information, each letter of collaboration (not to exceed two pages) must include the name of the letter writer, current affiliations (institution or place of employment), and relationship to the members of the proposing team. 2. List of Project Personnel, Collaborators, and Partner Organizations (required) Provide current, accurate information for all personnel and organizations involved in the project.

NSF staff will use this information in the merit review process to manage reviewer selection. The list must include all PIs, co-PIs, Senior/Key Personnel, funded/unfunded consultants, collaborators (including everyone who has provided a letter of collaboration), subawardees, postdocs, and project-level advisory committee members.

The list of project personnel, collaborators, and partner organizations should be outlined in tabular format, include (in this order) Full name, Organization(s), and Role in the project. Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. C.

Research. gov/Grants. gov Requirements You can submit proposals in response to this solicitation through Research.

gov or Grants. gov, unless otherwise noted. Information on how to prepare and submit proposals is available on the Submitting Your Proposal page on NSF.

gov. VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures Information on NSF's proposal processing and review procedures is available on the Overview of the NSF Proposal and Award Process page on NSF. gov. A.

Merit Review Principles and Criteria All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board-approved merit review criteria: Intellectual Merit , which encompasses the potential to advance knowledge. Broader Impacts , which encompass the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

Information on NSF's merit review principles and process can be found on the How We Make Funding Decisions page on NSF. gov. Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria Track 1: Scoping and planning: Does the proposal present a convincing case that the OSE will address an issue of significant societal or national importance that is not currently being adequately addressed?

Does the proposal clearly describe the long-term vision for sustaining the OSE? Does the proposal clearly describe a recruitment strategy for new contributors to the ecosystem and for growing the userbase? Does the proposal present a specific, actionable list of milestones and evaluation plan?

Track 2: Establishing and expanding: Does the proposal present a convincing case that the OSE will address an issue of significant societal or national importance that is not currently being adequately addressed? Does the proposal clearly describe the long-term vision for sustaining the OSE?

Does the proposal present a specific, actionable plan for building a community of contributors, retaining contributors and establishing a sustainable organizational structure? Does the proposal include a clear, detailed licensing approach for the open-source product that is the subject of the OSE? Does the proposal clearly describe a build and test infrastructure, and procedures to address quality control and security of new content?

Does the proposal present a specific, actionable list of milestones and evaluation plan? Track 3: Improving safety, security, and privacy: Does the proposal present a convincing case that the targeted OSE addresses an issue of significant societal or national importance? Does the proposal clearly describe the vulnerability landscape for the OSE and its product(s)?

Does the proposal present clear plans for addressing critical vulnerabilities? Does the proposal clearly describe a build and test infrastructure, and procedures to address quality control and security of new content? Does the proposal present a specific, actionable list of milestones and evaluation plan?

B. Review and Selection Process Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review. After a proposal passes an initial compliance check, it will be reviewed by an NSF Program Officer.

In most cases, three or more external experts will also review it (either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists or both). Visit the Overview of the NSF Proposal and Award Process page for more information on the proposal review and selection process. VII.

Award Administration Information A. Notification of the Award Notification of an award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Information on NSF award conditions can be found on the Award Terms and Conditions page on NSF.

gov and Chapter VII of the PAPPG . Administrative and National Policy Requirements : Information on administrative and national policy requirements can be found on the National Policy Requirements for Recipients of NSF Awards page on NSF. gov. Special Award Conditions: CHIPS and Science Act