NSF Scholarships in STEM Network (S-STEM-Net)

NSF Scholarships in STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) is sponsored by NSF - Directorate for STEM Education (EDU). Fosters a network of S-STEM stakeholders and develops infrastructure to generate and disseminate knowledge and practices for the success of low-income undergraduate and graduate STEM students.

NSF 23-536: Scholarships in STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) | NSF - U.S. National Science Foundation Archived funding opportunity This solicitation is archived. Important information for proposers and award recipients All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the requirements specified in the funding opportunity and in the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) and its supplements .

All NSF grants and cooperative agreements are subject to the applicable set of NSF award terms and conditions . NSF has updated its research security policies for NSF funded projects. NSF 23-536: Scholarships in STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) Posted: December 23, 2022 To save a PDF of this solicitation, select Print to PDF in your browser's print options.

National Science Foundation Directorate for STEM Education Division of Undergraduate Education Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitting organization’s local time): Second Thursday in August, Annually Thereafter Important Information And Revision Notes The S-STEM Resource and Evaluation Center (S-STEM-REC) category of proposals has been eliminated.

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation must be prepared and submitted via Research. gov or Grants. gov and may not be prepared or submitted via FastLane.

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 Scholarships in STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) Through this solicitation, NSF seeks to foster a network of S-STEM stakeholders and further develop the infrastructure needed to generate and disseminate new knowledge, successful practices and effective design principles arising from NSF S-STEM projects nationwide.

The ultimate vision of the legislation governing the S-STEM parent program [1] (and of the current S-STEM-Net solicitation) is that all Americans, regardless of economic status, should be able to contribute to the American innovation economy if they so desire. To support collaboration within the S-STEM network, NSF will fund several S-STEM Research Hubs (S-STEM-Hub).

The S-STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) will collaborate to create synergies and sustain a robust national ecosystem consisting of multi-sector partners supporting domestic low-income STEM students in achieving their career goals, while also ensuring access, inclusion, and adaptability to changing learning needs. The Hubs will investigate evolving barriers to the success of this student population.

It will also disseminate the context and circumstances by which interventions and practices that support graduation of domestic low-income students (both undergraduate and graduate) pursuing careers in STEM are successful.

The target audience for this dissemination effort is the community of higher education institutions, faculty, scholars, researchers and evaluators, local and regional organizations, industry, and other nonprofit, federal, state, and local agencies concerned with the success of domestic low-income STEM students in the United States. [1] https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=nsf22527 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.

General inquiries may be addressed to email: s-stem@nsf. gov Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 1 to 5 S-STEM-Hub – up to 5 awards, as standard grants. Anticipated Funding Amount: $15,000,000 Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

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 labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities. There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: An organization may submit at most one S-STEM-Hub proposal (as a single institution, a subawardee, or a member of a collaborative research project).

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: An individual may only serve as PI or Co-PI of one S-STEM-Hub proposal. 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: Other budgetary limitations apply.

Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m.

submitting organization’s local time): Second Thursday in August, Annually Thereafter Proposal Review Information Criteria National Science Board approved criteria apply. Award Administration Information Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply. Through this solicitation, NSF seeks to foster a community for S-STEM stakeholders and further develop the infrastructure needed to generate and disseminate new knowledge, successful practices and effective design principles arising from NSF S-STEM projects nationwide. To support collaboration within the S-STEM network, NSF will fund several S-STEM Research Hubs (S-STEM-Hub).

The S-STEM Network (S-STEM-Net) will collaborate to create synergies and sustain a robust national ecosystem consisting of multi-sector partners supporting domestic low-income STEM students in achieving their career goals, while also ensuring access, inclusion, and adaptability to changing learning needs. The Hubs will investigate evolving barriers to the success of this student population.

It will also disseminate the context and circumstances by which interventions and practices that support graduation of domestic low-income students pursuing careers in STEM are successful.

The target audience for this dissemination effort is the community of higher education institutions, faculty, scholars, researchers and evaluators, local and regional organizations, industry, and nonprofit, federal, state, and local agencies concerned with the success of domestic low-income STEM students in the United States.

S-STEM Research Hubs (S-STEM-Hubs): A maximum of $3 million (up to $3 million over a period of up to five years per S-STEM-Hub) will be awarded to support up to five (5) S-STEM-Hubs for a total investment of $15 million. Requirements for S-STEM Hubs: Lead Organization: The lead organization must demonstrate significant experience with the S-STEM program or with research about or services to support domestic low-income students in STEM.

Evaluation: Proposals must include formative and summative assessments of the quality and success of the S-STEM-Hub activities as appropriate. This evaluation must be conducted by an independent experienced evaluator who is external to the project and to the institution.

Letters of Collaboration: All institutional collaborations must be ratified by a corresponding letter of collaboration signed by an administrator (dean or above) following the PAPPG requirements for these letters, confirming that the institution is aware of the proposed work and willing to support the project in full if awarded.

Participation in S-STEM PI meeting: PI and Co-PIs should plan to participate in the S-STEM PI meeting that occurs every other year. Budgets should include travel for the leadership team for the 3-day event in years 1, 3 and 5 of the execution.

Number, Funding Level and Goal The primary goal of each S-STEM Research Hub is to support and carry out high-quality, innovative research on the factors, structures or interventions involved in supporting and promoting the success of domestic low-income undergraduate and graduate STEM students, regardless of other demographic factors.

In addition, proposals aiming to investigate other STEM-related questions or issues but not focused on low-income student success, including those focused on the development of new STEM curriculum or academic programs, or specific research opportunities for undergraduates in some STEM-related topic, are not appropriate for the S-STEM-Hub funding opportunity and will be returned without review.

S-STEM Research Hubs are primarily formed to organize groups of researchers to conduct and disseminate rigorous qualitative and quantitative research on topics related to the S-STEM program and low-income student success. Each Research Hub should have a central focus that intersects a clear group of current and prospective S-STEM institutions.

For example, a Research Hub might be organized around research on specific interventions (e.g., impact of math Summer bridge programs) or desirable outcomes (e.g., development of STEM identity) for S-STEM scholars.

Other thematic topics that Research Hubs might focus on include research on issues affecting a specific discipline or academic context (e.g., low-income undergraduates in computer science; access to doctoral e programs for domestic low-income students in strategic disciplines such as quantum science, robotics, or AI; first-generation S-STEM scholars at two-year colleges; low-income veterans pursuing STEM careers).

Any other common interests that exist among active S-STEM projects might also be appropriate for development of a Research Hub, including geographic regions with common factors affecting scholars (e.g., S-STEM Research Hub of the Midwest) or type of institution (e.g., S-STEM Hub for Rural-serving Institutions) or about a pervasive issue experienced by low-income scholars across certain types of institutions (e.g., S-STEM Research Hub about Strategies to Overcome Impostor Syndrome at Highly Competitive Institutions).

Research Hubs coordinate groups of researchers engaged with S-STEM projects to explore methodologies, data streams, and opportunities for new research directions. Consequently, the Research Hub must conduct activities that will foster new and innovative collaborative research activities involving researchers from beyond the host institution. It is anticipated that the activities in which the hub engages may evolve.

Thus, it is important that a Research Hub leverages its interinstitutional nature and builds a flexible structure that could facilitate such changes over its lifespan.

Activities required of all S-STEM-Hub projects: Regardless of focus, all Research Hubs must propose and budget for activities to: identify, develop, and support promising innovative research ideas that generate valuable new knowledge on the US higher education enterprise in general and the S-STEM community in particular; gather, analyze, and utilize the data and insights resulting from the experiences of those participating in S-STEM projects to share information about what works and what does not under given circumstances, regarding low-income STEM student achievement; share and leverage effective practices on a national scale to improve the achievement and success of domestic low-income students pursuing careers in STEM (including veterans, graduate students, and students in rural areas, if appropriate); provide intellectual infrastructure for collaborations with potential to expand the knowledge base about support for domestic low-income, high-achieving STEM students; develop mechanisms for dissemination of successful practices, the context in which they work and research results; and, ensure that the Research Hub’s activities are inclusive of the broad collection of institutions with S-STEM projects in the research focus of interest including, but not limited to, 2-year colleges, PUIs, minority-serving institutions, and/or research-intensive universities, as appropriate.

Regardless of the focus, all proposals for a Research Hub must describe a plan to include and leverage the full spectrum of stakeholders, approaches, disciplines, and ideas that may exist within a thematic topic, and a strategy to explore new knowledge and generate best practices that will be transferable to other locations.

While the exact structure of a Research Hub may take many different forms, a successful S-STEM-Hub proposal must: present the rationale for the creation of a Research Hub as opposed to a regular research grant.

Research questions grounded in the literature that constitute the starting point for the Hub should also be included; justify the research work that otherwise could not be advanced without the funded collaboration (why a large award with multiple PIs is needed); identify the relevant stakeholders for the proposed Research Hub focus; involve multiple S-STEM constituencies and institutions and present a clear plan to recruit researchers and solicit perspectives and expertise from institutions including, but not limited to, 2-year colleges, PUIs, minority-serving institutions, and/or research-intensive universities, as appropriate; demonstrate that the proposed S-STEM-Hub’s leadership and advisory structures are reflective of the institution types that most significantly intersect their focus area; describe how the S-STEM-Hub will leverage varied institutional data streams and/or tackle challenges that cannot be accomplished by a single institution or a team of PIs; and describe a project management plan and a mechanism to encourage and enable interaction between S-STEM-Hub stakeholders.

present an external evaluation plan for the Hub’s activities. Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 1 to 5 S-STEM-Hub – up to 5 awards, as standard grants. Anticipated Funding Amount: $15,000,000 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 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 labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities. There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: An organization may submit at most one S-STEM-Hub proposal (as a single institution, a subawardee, or a member of a collaborative research project).

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: An individual may only serve as PI or Co-PI of one S-STEM-Hub proposal. 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. Please see Section II of this solicitation for details on all the expected critical activities of S-STEM-Hub and the corresponding requirements for proposals.

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. Other Budgetary Limitations: For S-STEM-Hub proposals, limit of $3 million total over a maximum of 5 years.

Budget Preparation Instructions: S-STEM-Hub proposers should budget for an external evaluator to evaluate the project and provide reports of at least 2 formative evaluation exercises during the life of the award and one summative evaluation report at the end of the award. All proposers should also include their travel funds for the entire leadership team to attend the 3-day S-STEM PI Meeting every other year.

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitting organization’s local time): Second Thursday in August, Annually Thereafter 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-portal/appmanager/base/desktop? _nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission. html .

For Research. gov user support, call the Research. gov Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail rgov@nsf.

gov . The Research. gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.

gov system. 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 webpage: 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 Research.

gov for further processing. 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 acknowledgement 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/ . 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 National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two merit review criteria are listed below.

Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.

D. 2. d(i).

contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II. D.

2. d(i), prior to the review of a proposal. When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful.

These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions.

To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria: Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria: What is the potential for the proposed activity to Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)? To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success? How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?

Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities? Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.

NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes.

Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate. B. Review and Selection Process Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months.

Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement.

Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer.

A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk. Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents.

Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding. VII.

Award Administration Information A. Notification of the Award Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program.

Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI. B.

for additional information on the review process.)

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice.

Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by