NSF Public Access begins for Grants Awarded to Proposals submitted on or after 1/25/2016

Link Here

The National Science Foundation (NSF or Foundation) has developed a plan outlining a framework for activities to increase public access to scientific publications and digital scientific data resulting from research the foundation funds. The plan, entitled “Today’s Data, Tomorrow’s Discoveries,” is consistent with the objectives set forth in the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s Feb. 22, 2013, memorandum, “Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research,” and with long-standing policies encouraging data sharing and communication of research results.

As outlined in section 3.1 of the plan, NSF will require that either the version of record or the final accepted manuscript in peer-reviewed scholarly journals and papers in juried conference proceedings or transactions must:

  • Be deposited in a public access compliant repository designated by NSF;
  • Be available for download, reading and analysis free of charge no later than 12 months after initial publication;
  • Possess a minimum set of machine-readable metadata elements in a metadata record to be made available free of charge upon initial publication;
  • Be managed to ensure long-term preservation; and
  • Be reported in annual and final reports during the period of the award with a persistent identifier that provides links to the full text of the publication as well as other metadata elements.

This NSF requirement will apply to new awards resulting from proposals submitted, or due, on or after the effective date of the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that will be issued in January 2016.

This recommended change to the PAPPG will be announced in the Federal Register no later than May 2015 and will follow government-wide procedures for public notice and comment.

NSF’s current data management plan requirement and policies on costs of publication and data citation in biographical sketches will remain unchanged for the present while the Foundation undertakes activities to engage the research communities around data management in support of public access goals. Additional guidance at the Foundation, directorate, division, office or program levels may become available in the future. As stipulated in section 3.a.ii of the OSTP Feb. 22, 2013, memorandum, NSF’s plan (section 7.5) discusses a “mechanism for stakeholders to petition for changing the embargo period.”

To receive updates on NSF’s Public Access Initiative, events, and future enhancements to Research.gov and/or FastLane, subscribe to “System Updates” on the NSF listserv. To subscribe, simply email system_updates-subscribe-request@listserv.nsf.gov and you will be automatically enrolled. For general information about NSF, including information on the Public Access Initiative, sign up for email notifications at: NSF Updates.

See also NSF’s Open Government website.

See also Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results.

 

Article above from NSF’s Website and can be found at the following link: http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/public_access/

Weekly NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts
May 27, 2016
Table of Contents (TOC)
Web Version


 

 

 

 

New Podcast on Writing the Vertebrate Animal Section in Your NIH Application

Icon for the NIH All About Grants Podcast

Proposing the use of animal models in your application? All About Grants has a new podcast episode on writing the vertebrate animal section in your grant or contract research proposal. Join Dr. Patricia Brown, director of the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare for a discussion of why this application section is required, what reviewers look for, and more.  Check out “Writing Your Vertebrate Animal Section” (mp3) (transcript) and other episodes on NIH’s All About Grants page or via our podcast RSS feed.


Original post on 4/30/16 by

Innovating to Make it Easier for You to Find the NIH Grants Information You Need

More isn’t always better, especially when it comes to wading through information on NIH grant policies and processes. NIH talks about burden frequently, usually in reference to policies and processes that add burden to our grantee community. But there is another source of burden: having to spend time digging through resources to find critical information you need to apply for or manage your grant award.

For the past year NIH staff have been strategizing how to improve upon the way we deliver information, with the goal of reducing the time it takes you to find the information you need. To do this, they’ve embarked on a comprehensive, data-driven approach to understand how you use key resources, including the NIH’s grants and funding website and the application guides. They’ve examined web analytics, looked at search term patterns, surveyed website visitors, asked you how you use — and would like to use — our application guides, and engaged usability experts to ensure we are following best practices.

NIH staff listened, learned, and have put these experiences into practice. If you’ve visited grants.nih.gov last week, you likely noticed a complete transformation. What you will find now is a simplified interface that streamlines how you find information and provides the context you need for understanding the information you find.

NIH has reimagined the application guide to better serve your needs. They’ve completely disaggregated the application guides and reassembled them in a way that addresses many of the needs expressed by the community. Some highlights of the changes include:

  • Separated the details of the grants process information from the form instructions, providing both on a How to Apply – Application Guide page for at-a-glance access to key pieces of information.
  • Provided the general instructions for the newest version of NIH application forms (known as FORMS-D), in an interactive HTML version for ease of on-line use, in addition to a pdf version for those of you who still feel compelled to print.
  • Consolidated instructions for all types of grant programs into the general instructions, and reorganized the information to make very clear how each instruction applies to each of the various grant programs (research, training, career development, etc.). These general instructions are a great option for those of you who submit applications for various types of grant programs.
  • For those of you who may only be applying to single type of grant program, NIH has a more personalized option for you. They’ve created filtered PDF versions of the form instructions that show only the instructions you need for the type of grant program to which you are applying, instructions specific to research, career development, training, fellowships, multi-project, or small business (SBIR/STTR) applications.

You will find a lot of changes across the site, all designed to simplify how you get to the information you need. You may want to try the new search interface for the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, and use the “save this search” feature to get notified of future postings that match your search. Check out the new forms library. Poke around. See what’s new!

Original post NIH dated 4/4/2016 Open Mike

How Do I Know If I Have the NIH Right Forms, & What Do I Do If I Don’t?

Most of you are aware that NIH is updating their application forms (NOT-OD-16-081).  You must use FORMS-D forms and instructions for due dates on or after May 25, 2016 and you must use FORMS-C for due dates on or before May 24, 2016.

If you’re not sure how to tell the difference between FORMS-C and D, check out the NIH resource, Do I Have the Right Electronic Forms for My Application?

It is imperative that you choose the correct application forms for your due date and submit on time.  Incorrect form selection is not a sufficient reason to submit a late application.  If you’ve selected the incorrect forms and instructions for your due date, you’ll need to switch to the correct forms before submission.  ASSIST users can take advantage of the “copy application” feature to easily move data from one form version to another.

Original post on March 31, 2016 by

NEW! MBL Rate Agreement Information

The Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) is pleased to announce the successful negotiation of a new rate agreement with our federal cognizant agency, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The agreement, dated December 23, 2015, specifies the F&A rates to be applied to sponsored awards from federal and non-federal sponsors. Click here for more detailed information:  Rate Agreement MBL Community Letter

NIH Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards – FY 2016

The following NIH fiscal policies are instituted in FY 2016:

FY 2016 Funding Levels: Non-competing continuation awards that have already been made in FY 2016 were generally funded at levels below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level) as described in NOT-OD-16-002.  In general, such reductions will be fully restored, and non-competing continuation grants (research and non-research) including those that remain to be issued in FY 2016 will be made at the commitment level indicated on the Notice of Award.  Any exceptions will be posted at the site listed under “Additional Information” below.  Out-year commitments for continuation awards in FY 2017 and beyond will remain unchanged.  The NIH awarding Institutes/Centers (IC) will develop and post their fiscal policies consistent with overall NIH goals and available FY 2016 funds.

Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA):  Consistent with the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act and with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee to the Director regarding the Biomedical Research Workforce, the NIH will increase NRSA stipends by approximately 2 percent on average.  The full range of stipend adjustments for FY 2016 is described at NOT-OD-16-047.

New Investigators: NIH will continue to support new investigators on R01 equivalent awards at success rates comparable to that of established investigators submitting new (Type 1) R01 equivalent applications.  Achievement of comparable success rates should permit the NIH to support new investigators in accordance with the policies established in FY 2009 and subsequent years as described at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-013.html and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/index.htm.

Salary Limits: Section 202 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 prohibits payments for salaries under grants and other extramural mechanisms in excess of Executive Level II previously set at $183,300, and effective January 10, 2016, increased to $185,100.  See NOT-OD-16-045 for additional information.

Other Legislative Mandates: Other statutory requirements are described in NOT-OD-16-044.

Additional Information:   Additional details on Fiscal Operations, including specific funding strategies for ICs will be posted at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/financial/index.htm.

 

Please find more information at the following LINK.

Budget Agreement Boosts U.S. Science

December 18, 2015:  Congress today overwhelmingly passed the 2016 spending bill. The House of Representatives this morning voted 316 to 113, with a majority of Republicans and nearly all Democrats favoring the $1.1 trillion package for all federal agencies. The Senate concurred a few hours later with a vote of 65 to 33. President Barack Obama is expected to sign it into law later today.

Early on 16 December, congressional leaders released the text of an omnibus spending bill that will fund all federal agencies for the rest of the 2016 fiscal year. We’ve taken a look at how individual agencies fared under the bill (see bullets below). Science has also compiled a table showing the budgets of key research agencies and programs.

These stories appear following this summary of the legislation.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) leads the way among U.S. science agencies getting increases in the final 2016 spending bill released today.

NIH is the winner in absolute dollars. It gets a bump of $2 billion, or 6.6%, from its current budget of $30.1 billion. Spending on science programs at NASA would grow by 6.6%, to $5.6 billion, and rise by 5.6% in the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Science, to $5.35 billion. The National Science Foundation would receive an additional $119 million, or 1.6%, to $7.46 billion, and the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy would get a 6% boost, to $291 million.

“It’s fantastic news. We’re beyond excited,” says Jennifer Zeitzer of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology in Bethesda, Maryland. United for Medical Research, a Washington, D.C.–based lobbying group, says “this meaningful increase for NIH makes real progress toward catching up from the past decade of underfunding and keeping up with scientific advancements and public health needs.”

 

With the exception of NIH, these final numbers are higher than what was contained in spending bills for individual agencies passed by panels in the House of Representatives and the Senate earlier this year. The increases were made possible by a late-October agreement between Congress and the White House that set overall spending levels for the 2016 and 2017 fiscal years. It added $50 billion this year to the $1.017 trillion spent in 2015, divided equally between civilian and military spending, and $30 billion in 2017. The agreement also negated the threat of a government shutdown this fall from conservatives unhappy with any increase in federal spending.

There could be more to the story, however. Congressional leaders have not yet released the report language that accompanies the 2009-page omnibus spending bill. That language contains specific instructions to agencies about how to allocate their dollars. And those instructions could ruffle some feathers.

In the meantime, Congress did spell out a few things in the overall bill itself. For example, NASA was given $175 million to continue work on a mission to Jupiter’s Europa moon, a pet project of Representative John Culberson (R–TX), who leads the House spending panel that oversees NASA. And DOE was told not to spend more than $115 million on the U.S. contribution to ITER, the international fusion reactor being built in France, until ITER officials present a new schedule for the troubled project. It also requires DOE to recommend, by May 2016, whether the U.S. should stay in ITER or withdraw.

*Originally posted in Science Magazine  (http://news.sciencemag.org/funding/2015/12/budget-agreement-boosts-u-s-science)

Mistakes Are Meant for Learning, Not Repeating – Biosketch Compliance

Biosketch Compliance

Title: oops post-it note On November 5, NIH started sending email notifications to applicants indicating reviewers found one or more biosketches that did not comply with our current biosketch format (NOT-OD-15-032). Hundreds of letters have already gone out. If you’ve received one of these notifications, don’t panic. These letters are currently just warnings and require no action on your part. However, they do demonstrate NIH’s commitment to enforcing compliance with our biosketch policy.

What does it mean to have a compliant biosketch?

eRA systems ensure some biosketch rules are met by flagging errors upon submission. Applications that violate these rules won’t even move forward to NIH for consideration.

  • A biosketch is attached for each and every Sr/Key person listed in the application
  • Each biosketch is less than or equal to 5 pages
  • Each biosketch attachment is in PDF format

But, there are additional rules you must follow to be compliant that aren’t systematically caught by eRA systems.

Did you catch the part where I said “reviewers found” the non-compliant biosketches? We have provided instructions to our reviewers to flag any applications with biosketches that don’t follow current guidelines. Don’t make extra work for your reviewer – give them a clean application without the distraction of non-compliant formatting they have to write up.

Having trouble keeping up with NIH’s biosketch rules and getting your key personnel to follow them? Encourage people participating on your application to use SciENcv. Not only does SciENcv help manage biosketch information, it also creates perfectly compliant biosketches.

If you’ve received a warning letter, learn from your mistakes and don’t repeat them. Eventually, these warning letters will be replaced with notifications that applications have been removed from consideration.

  • Include each section (A – Personal Statement; B – Positions and Honors; C – Contributions to Science; D – Research Support or Scholastic Performance)
  • Include no more than 5 contributions to science with no more than 4 citations per contribution
  • Ensure that if you include the optional link to a full list of your published work in a site like My Bibliography that the URL is public, accessible without providing any login or personal information, and doesn’t link to websites that may violate page limit rules
    • Note: We will restrict this link to federal (.gov) sites beginning with applications to due dates on/after May 25, 2016 (NOT-OD-16-004)
  • Refrain from including information, such as preliminary data, that belongs elsewhere in the application
  • Follow NIH guidance on font type, font size, paper size, and margins (See section 2.6 of application guide)

Original post NIH eSubmission Items of Interest posted November 16, 2015

Change is Coming: Updates to NIH Application Forms and Instructions

We periodically need to update our application forms and instructions to accommodate changing policy, new business needs, and sometimes (not often enough) to reduce the amount of information we ask of you. Given our constraints, we have been working to provide systems support to make the mechanics of these transitions easier for you. This particular set of changes implements a number of policy changes impacting applications submitted in 2016, which we announced in a series of recent NIH Guide notices. We would like to give you a quick overview of what is happening.

We will be rolling out the changes in two phases, as summarized in our notice published in the NIH Guide, since our new application forms will not be ready until the spring.

You may want to pay particular attention to the following changes, effective for applications submitted on or after January 25, 2016:

  • There will be new application requirements and review language regarding enhanced rigor and reproducibility (We’ll be elaborating on these requirements in a separate upcoming post.)
  • We will ask for less information in the vertebrate animal section of the application, to remove redundancy with information already included in IACUC reviews. (Some of this information will be shifted to the research strategy section.)
  • We are updating the NIH policy on inclusion of children to lower the age designation for children to include those under 18 years old. (The current age designation for children includes all research subjects under 21 years old.)
  • For training grants, information requirements will change and lower applicant burden

For due dates of May 25, 2016 and beyond, we will require use of new application forms (FORMS-D). We will remind you again this spring, but please understand that it is imperative that you submit your application on the right form package to ensure successful submission.

We will reissue fellowship, career development, training and all parent funding opportunity announcements this spring, to ensure the announcements include instructions that match the form requirements. We’ll also make a variety of resources available this spring to help ensure you submit using the right forms.

If you have been using the Grants.gov downloadable forms and haven’t tried ASSIST yet, members of my staff (the electronic Research Administration or eRA) are working on enhancing the copy application feature to make it even easier to move your application (including attachments) from one form version to another. During the last round of grant applications, over 25% of the applicants switched from using downloadable forms to ASSIST. They successfully submitted their applications on the first try over 90% of the time compared with only 60% of the time for those still using the standard downloadable forms.

So be on the lookout for new application instructions we will release at the end of November, and for more communications from us as we get closer to the time we move to FORMS-D.

Original post by NIH website on October 29, 2015 by