United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS)

United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) is sponsored by National Science Foundation (NSF). Supports collaborative research projects between U. S.

and Israeli researchers in computer science, including travel funding for U. S. researchers to Israel.

NSF 17-515: United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) | 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 17-515: United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) A Joint Program of NSF and the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) Download the solicitation (PDF, 0.

6mb) National Science Foundation Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering Division of Computing and Communication Foundations United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitter's local time): February 01, 2017 - February 15, 2017 Important Information And Revision Notes The program is unchanged relative to the previous solicitation.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) ( NSF 17-1 ), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 30, 2017. Please be advised that proposers who opt to submit prior to January 30, 2017, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 17-1.

Summary Of Program Requirements United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) A Joint Program of NSF and the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) The United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) program is a joint program of NSF and the United States - Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF).

The program supports research projects that develop new knowledge in the theory of computing; algorithm design and analysis; design, verification, and evaluation of software systems; and revolutionary computing models based on emerging scientific ideas. Through this program, NSF and BSF will jointly support collaborations among US-based researchers and Israel-based researchers.

US-based researchers will receive funds from NSF to support travel to Israel to interact with their Israeli counterparts. Israel-based and US-based researchers will receive funds allowable under the BSF program described at http://www. bsf.

org. il/ . 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.

Nina Amla, Program Director, Software and Hardware Foundations, Tracy Kimbrel, Program Director, Algorithmic Foundations, Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 6 Anticipated Funding Amount: $400,000 in total is expected to be awarded in FY 17 pending availability of funds.

Who May Submit Proposals: The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E. 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 individual can be a PI, Co-PI or Senior Personnel on only one NSF proposal seeking travel funds in association with a BSF proposal. (This requirement aligns with BSF's limit of one proposal per researcher.) 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 proposal 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 FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

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

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: Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p. m.

submitter's local time): February 01, 2017 - February 15, 2017 Proposal Review Information Criteria National Science Board approved criteria apply. Award Administration Information Standard NSF award conditions apply. Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

The United States-Israel Collaboration in Computer Science (USICCS) program supports transformative research projects that explore the foundations of computing. The program seeks advances in the theory of computing; algorithm design and analysis; design, verification, and evaluation of software systems; and revolutionary computing models based on emerging scientific ideas.

USICCS supports transformative research in the following areas of theoretical computer science and the foundations of software design and systems: Theoretical Computer Science The USICCS program supports potentially transformative research projects advancing the design and analysis of algorithms and characterized by algorithmic thinking accompanied by rigorous analysis.

Research on algorithms for problems that are central to computer science and new techniques for the rigorous analysis of algorithms are of interest. USICCS supports theoretical research that bounds the intrinsic difficulty of problems to determine the measures of complexity in formal models of computation, classical or new.

The goal is to understand the fundamental limits of resource-bounded computation and to obtain efficient solutions within those limits. Specifically, the time and space complexity of finding exact and approximate solutions in deterministic and randomized models of computation is a central concern of the program. Research on resource usage other than time and space, such as communication complexity and energy cost, is also encouraged.

In addition to the traditional sequential computing paradigm, USICCS supports research on the design and analysis of novel algorithms in parallel and distributed models, in particular, in heterogeneous multi-core and many-core machines; computational models and algorithms that capture essential aspects of computing over massive data sets; game theory; and alternative forms of computation and information processing, including quantum computing and biological models of computation.

The program supports research in algorithms needed in all areas, both within and outside computer science. Algorithmic research with applications in databases, information retrieval, machine learning, data mining, natural language processing, computer networks, communications, operating systems, programming languages, compilers, and machine abstractions is supported.

New techniques for the design and analysis of algorithms in areas such as cryptography, computational geometry, computational biology, game theory and numerical, symbolic, and algebraic computing are appropriate for this program.

USICCS supports research projects on the science of design, verification, operation, utilization, and evaluation of computer systems through novel approaches, robust theories, high-leverage tools, and lasting principles.

Such advances may offer models, methods, languages, logics, novel software artifacts, algorithms to enable new or enhanced functionality, and formal methods and tools for the design, implementation, and verification of computer systems and their applications. The USICCS program seeks transformative ideas that reformulate the relationship between requirements, design, and evolution of software and software-intensive systems.

The program welcomes research projects focusing on program analysis and synthesis, compositionality, verifiability and certifiability of software, as well as research on static, dynamic, functional and non-functional analysis and testing techniques in all stages of the software life cycle. USICCS supports fundamental research on formal and semi-formal methods for the specification, development, and verification of software systems.

The program seeks proposals that enhance the applicability, usability, and efficiency of techniques such as model checking, theorem proving, automated decision procedures, static analysis and constraint solving. Research topics involving the semantics, logics, verification, and analysis of concurrent systems are welcome.

USICCS supports the entire range of programming language and compiler research, ranging from foundations to design to implementation and application, including new approaches to languages and compilers for parallel and concurrent programming. Approximately $400,000 in total will be awarded to 6 to 9 awards in FY 17 pending availability of funds. IV.

Eligibility Information Who May Submit Proposals: The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E. 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 individual can be a PI, Co-PI or Senior Personnel on only one NSF proposal seeking travel funds in association with a BSF proposal. (This requirement aligns with BSF's limit of one proposal per researcher.) 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 proposal received will be accepted and the remainder will be returned without review). No exceptions will be made. Additional Eligibility Info: 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 Grants. gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

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

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

Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation.

Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing. 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) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov .

See Chapter II. C. 2 of the GPG 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 GPG instructions. Through this program, NSF and BSF will jointly support collaborations among US-based researchers and Israel-based researchers. US-based researchers will receive funds from NSF to support travel to Israel to interact with their Israeli counterparts.

Israel-based and US-based researchers will receive funds allowable under the BSF program described at http://www. bsf. org.

il/ . All proposals must be coordinated submissions to BSF and NSF . Collaborative proposals with more than a single United States institution are not allowed.

Cover Page: A United States PI and co-PIs for an NSF proposal are expected to be named as co-PIs in a proposal with the same title, previously submitted to BSF's Computer Science program in response to BSF's call for proposals with due date in November 2016.

Proposal Titles : The BSF acronym should be followed with a colon, then the BSF Application Number with a colon, then the title of the project (identical to the title submitted to BSF). For example, if the title of the proposal to BSF is "Title of Proposal" and the Application ID is 0123456, the NSF proposal title should be "BSF:0123456:Title of Proposal."

Project Summary : The NSF Project Summary consists of three separate sections: an overview, a statement on the intellectual merit of the proposed activity, and a statement on the broader impacts of the proposed activity. The BSF Abstract should be included in the overview section, and the NSF project summary must have clear descriptions of intellectual merit and broader impacts.

(Broader Impacts appears in the BSF Impact Statement document). Project Description : The Project Description submitted to NSF should be identical to the Research Plan of the BSF proposal. References Cited : The references cited should be identical to the BSF References file.

Supplementary Documentation : All other sections of the BSF proposal (Israel-based researchers' biographical sketches, budgets, Impact Statement, Cooperation letters, etc) should be included in the NSF submission as supplementary documentation. The BSF Cooperation letters will serve as NSFs collaboration plan. Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Budget Preparation Instructions: The budget of an NSF USICCS travel award should be commensurate with the scope of the work and time spent performing research activities in Israel. Allowable expenses include actual travel and living expenses for the PI and/or the PI's student(s) and postdocs(s) while in Israel. Costs for per diem and housing while in Israel are allowable.

Travel support for meeting with the Israeli collaborator at a third location (e.g., a conference) is allowable as long as the length of collaboration exceeds three days. The intent of the travel award is to support travel for the US researcher and his/her students. The use of the funds for the Israeli collaborator visiting the US requires prior approval by the program director.

Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitter's local time): February 01, 2017 - February 15, 2017 D.

FastLane/Grants. gov Requirements For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane: To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www. fastlane.

nsf. gov/a1/newstan. htm .

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

Specific questions related to this program 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: http://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 FastLane system for further processing. Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to use FastLane 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 the GPG as 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/ . 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 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. ( GPG Chapter II.

C. 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 GPG Chapter II.

C. 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: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); 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 diverse, 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 BSF's merit review process using NSF’s merit review criteria of Intellectual Merit & Broader Impacts.

BSF will form panels each consisting of science advisors, who are established researchers from academia or research labs. Each panel will have at least one science advisor from the US. Science advisors suggest names of potential external ad-hoc reviewers from around the world.

These names are then discussed by the panel, and the panel suggests additional names, including from a list proposed by the applicants. The process continues until 4-5 substantial reviews are received. Based on reviews, science advisors prepare a summary and recommendation.

The process is concluded in a series of panel meetings of advisors, who rank the proposals and determine an order of preference. These final meetings are held in Jerusalem, with the participation of the American advisors. An NSF representative will be present as an observer.

More information about BSF's process can be found at http://www. bsf. org.

il/BSFPublic/Default. aspx NSF will use BSF's ad-hoc reviews and the summaries prepared by BSF's science advisors to select the proposals for NSF funding. 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 is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the NSF deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts 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 for review of business, financial, and policy implications and 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 a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. 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 an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail. *These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.

nsf. gov/awards/managing/award_conditions. jsp?

org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www. nsf. gov/publications/pub_summ.

jsp? ods_key=aag . C.

Reporting Requirements For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports).

No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public. Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award.

PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data. PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research. gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports.

Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research. gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete.

The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research. gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information