New NIH “FORMS-G” Grant Application Forms and Instructions Coming for Due Dates on or after January 25, 2022

Notice Number: NOT-OD-21-169
Release Date: August 5, 2021

Related Announcements

NOT-OD-21-073 – Upcoming Changes to the Biographical Sketch and Other Support Format Page for Due Dates on or after May 25, 2021

NOT-OD-21-109 – Expanding Requirement for eRA Commons IDs to All Senior/Key Personnel

NOT-OD-21-110 – Implementation of Changes to the Biographical Sketch and Other Support Format Page

NOT-OD-21-122 – Announcing New Inbox for Inquiries Related to Changes to Biographical Sketch and Other Support Format Page

NOT-OD-21-170 – Updates: Notification of Upcoming Change in Federal-wide Unique Entity Identifier Requirements

Issued by

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH)

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

Purpose

This notice informs the applicant and recipient communities of changes to grant application forms and application guide instructions for due dates on or after January 25, 2022.

The following application forms include substantive form changes (i.e., new/deleted/modified fields). All other forms include only an OMB expiration date change.

  • SF424 R&R
  • R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded)
  • R&R Budget and Associated Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form
  • Project/Performance Site Location(s)
  • PHS 398 Training Budget and Associated Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form
  • PHS Additional Indirect Costs
  • PHS Fellowship Supplemental Form
  • PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
  • SBIR/STTR Information

Key changes:

  • As part of the federal-wide transition from the DUN and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to the new government-owned Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), applicants will be required to have a UEI to apply for federal grants or cooperative agreements. The System for Award Management (SAM) will become the central repository for the new UEI that will be incorporated into an institution’s SAM registration. Although agencies are not required to fully transition until April 2022, NIH, AHRQ, and FDA will transition for due dates on or after January 25, 2022 to align with standard application and review cycles. See NOT-OD-21-170 for more information.
  • NIH will require the use of the updated Biographical Sketch and Other Support format pages for submissions on or after January 25, 2022. See NOT-OD-21-073, NOT-OD-21-110, and NOT-OD-21-122 for more information.
  • Targeting due dates on or after January 25, 2022, all Senior/Key personnel listed on the R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) form will be required to have an eRA Commons username (Commons ID). Extension of the existing eRA Commons ID requirement to include all senior/key personnel will facilitate better data collection for individuals contributing to federally funded research as well as assist in disambiguating data on applications and facilitating the identification of conflicts of interest in peer review. See NOT-OD-21-109 for more information.

See High-level Summary of Form Changes in FORMS-G Application Packages for a full list of form changes. Participating agencies will notify the community if it is determined additional changes are needed. These changes will be implemented with application form packages identified with a Competition ID of “FORMS-G” and associated application guide instructions. Additional guidance and confirmation ofimplementation plans will be provided in Fall 2021.

Effective Date
Applicants must use FORMS-G application packages for due dates on or after January 25, 2022 and must use FORMS-F application packages for due dates on or before January 24, 2022. Applications submitted using the wrong forms for their intended due date may be withdrawn and removed from funding consideration.

Availability of FORMS-G Application Guides
Application guides for FORMS-G application packages will be posted to the How to Apply – Application Guide page no later than October 25, 2021.

Availability of FORMS-G Application Packages
FORMS-G application packages will be posted as follows

  • New funding opportunity announcements (FOAs) will be posted with FORMS-G application packages beginning October 25, 2021.
  • New FOAs posted before October 25, 2021 with initial due dates on or after January 25, 2022 will be posted without application forms until updated forms are available. Application packages will be added to these FOAs by November 25, 2021.
  • All active Parent and IC-issued FOAs with due dates on or after January 25, 2022 will be updated to add FORMS-G application packages between October 25, 2021 and November 25, 2021.

For a transition period, both FORMS-F and FORMS-G application packages will be active simultaneously. Applicants must choose the appropriate application package for their due date when presented with both FORMS-F and FORMS-G application packages on the same FOA (see table below).

If your intended due date is… You must use…

On or before January 24, 2022, including:

  • Applications submitted for due dates on or before January 24, 2022
  • Applications submitted under NIH Late Policy 2-week window of consideration for intended due dates on or before January24, 2022
  • Applications submitted by February 1, 2022 under NIH Continuous Submission Policy for the January 7, 2022 AIDS intended due date
FORMS-F application package

On or after January 25, 2022, including:

  • Applications submitted for due dates on or after January 25, 2022
  • All application types (New, Resubmission, Renewal, Revision)
  • Applications submitted early for intended due dates on or after January 25, 2022
FORMS-G application package

Applications submitted using the incorrect application package for their due date may be withdrawn and removed from funding consideration.

Resources:

Inquiries

Please direct all NIH inquiries to:
NIH Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration (OPERA)
Systems Policy Branch
Email: OPERAsystemspolicy@nih.gov

Original post by NIH on August 6, 2021

The Use of Internet Explorer for eRA Modules is Coming to an End July 19, 2021

Back in August of last year, Microsoft announced that it would be discontinuing its support of Internet Explorer (IE) 11 by August 17, 2021. As a result of that announcement, eRA is phasing out the use of IE for all eRA systems due to security concerns.  By July 19, 2021, eRA systems will no longer be available when using the IE browser.

Please switch to one of the other supported browsers such as Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari (and Microsoft Edge once IE is phased out), when using eRA systems (see eRA’s Browser Compatibility statement).

 

Original post by NIH Staff on April 21, 2021

PIs now have the ability to remove publications from the NSF Public Access Repository and In-progress Project Reports

Effective today, the National Science Foundation (NSF) added functionality to enable Principal Investigators (PIs) to remove publications both from the NSF Public Access Repository (NSF-PAR) and from in-progress project reports in the Research.gov Project Reporting System without assistance from the NSF Help Desk. Streamlining this process helps to reduce administrative burden for both PIs and NSF staff and improves NSF-PAR and project report data quality. There are no changes to NSF’s Public Access policy or project reporting requirements.

Here’s what you need to know:

NSF-PAR Publication Removals

  • Only the PI or co-PI who initially deposited a publication or associated an NSF award to a deposited publication can disassociate an NSF award from a publication in NSF-PAR. Disassociating an NSF award from a publication removes the publication from both the NSF-PAR publicly-facing search and the NSF.gov Award Search for the specific NSF award.
  • Removing a deposited publication in NSF-PAR by dissociating the NSF award does not remove the publication from an in-progress project report for the award in Research.gov.
  • If an NSF award is disassociated from a deposited publication in NSF-PAR, it can take up to six hours for the update to be reflected in the NSF-PAR publicly-facing search and the NSF.gov Award Search and for visual indicators to appear in project reports reminding the PI or co-PI to delete the publication from the project report.

In-progress Project Report Publication Removals

  • Only the PI or co-PI who initially deposited a publication or associated an NSF award to a deposited publication in NSF-PAR can remove the publication from a related in-progress project report in the Research.gov Project Reporting System.
  • Publications cannot be removed from approved project reports or from submitted project reports that are awaiting NSF review and approval.
  • Removing a publication from an in-progress project report in Research.gov does not remove the publication from NSF-PAR.
  • Research.gov processes NSF-PAR publication updates within six hours. After NSF-PAR removal information has been processed in Research.gov, an in-progress project report that still includes a publication removed from NSF-PAR will have a visual indicator reminding the PI or co-PI to delete the publication from the project report.

Training Resources

Questions? If you have NSF IT system-related questions, please contact the NSF Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 (7:00 AM – 9:00 PM ET; Monday – Friday except federal holidays) or via rgov@nsf.gov. Policy-related questions should be directed to policy@nsf.gov.

Original post by NSF on May 24, 2021

Uniform Guidance for Grants (2 CFR) Revised FAQs

The Office of Mangement & Budget (OMB) Grants Team is excited to announce the revised set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to the Uniform Guidance for Grants (2 CFR).  These FAQs align with the revisions to 2 CFR published in 85 FR 49506 (August 13, 2020) and replace the July 27, 2017 version.  They are available at the following CFO.gov site link:

https://www.cfo.gov/assets/files/2CRF-FrequentlyAskedQuestions_2021050321.pdf

Please reach out to the OMB Grants Team at GrantsTeam@omb.eop.gov with any questions.

Original post by OMB Grants Team on May 3, 2021

 

Expanding Requirement for eRA Commons IDs to All Senior/Key Personnel

Targeting due dates on or after January 25, 2022, NIH, AHRQ, FDA, and ORD/VA will require all individuals listed on the R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Form to have an eRA Commons username (Commons ID). Extension of the existing eRA Commons ID requirement to include all senior/key personnel will facilitate better data collection for individuals contributing to federally funded research as well as assist in disambiguating data on applications and facilitating the identification of conflicts of interest in peer review.

Background
eRA Commons IDs are already required as part of application submission for PD/PIs, multiple PD/PIs, sponsors on fellowship applications, component leads on multi-project applications, candidates for diversity supplement support, and the primary mentor identified on individual mentored career development applications. While it has always been strongly encouraged that all other senior/key personnel to obtain eRA Commons IDs, it has not been required. Without a unique personnel credential, it is difficult to correctly identify conflicts of interest in peer review as well as gather unambiguous data on personnel involved in federally funded research.

Implementation
Targeting due dates on or after January 25, 2022, an eRA Commons ID must be entered in the “Credential, e.g. agency login” field for all Senior/Key Personnel (as defined in NIH GPS 1.2) listed on the R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Form.  An eRA system validation will be implemented to check for a valid eRA Commons ID. For multi-project applications, this requirement also applies to the individual components of the application and not to just the Overall component

To facilitate awareness of this policy change, starting late April, applicants will encounter an eRA system validation if the “Credential, e.g. agency login” field is blank or does not contain a valid eRA Commons ID. This validation will be a warning for no less than 2 council rounds before being escalated to an error that must be corrected before the application can be submitted to the agency.

Reminder: Individuals needing scientific roles (Program Directors, Principal Investigators, Scientist, Post-Doc, Graduate Students, Undergraduate Students, Project Personnel) should only have one eRA Commons ID for the life of their research career. Always check for an existing eRA Commons account prior to creating a new one. If a person already has an eRA Commons scientific account and is changing institutions, a Signing Official (SO) or an Account Administrator (AA) role at the new institution can affiliate that account with the new institution (see steps). If you find that you have more than one account please contact the eRA Service Desk at https://public.era.nih.gov/submithelp/ or 1-866-504-9552.

Inquiries

Please direct all eRA technical inquiries to:
eRA Service Desk
Submit a web ticket: https://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html
Toll-free:1-866-504-9552
Phone:301-402-7469

Please direct NIH systems policy inquiries to:
NIH Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration (OPERA)
Systems Policy Branch
Email: OPERAsystemspolicy@nih.gov

Please direct all AHRQ inquiries to:
Priti Mehrotra, PH.D.
Director, Division of Scientific Research
Office of Extramural Research, Education, and Priority Populations
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Email: Priti.Mehrotra@ahrq.hhs.gov

Notice Number:
NOT-OD-21-109
Key Dates
Release Date: April 20, 2021
Related Announcements: None
Issued by:

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH)

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

Office of Research and Development (ORD), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA))

You can find the full document here.

Original post by NIH on April 20, 2021


Tips for Proofreading Your Next Grant Application

Developing a proofreading strategy can greatly improve the quality of your federal grant application.  Here are some tips from grant-making offices across the government that you can use for developing this strategy.

Grant Writing Tips

1. Enlist content proofreaders early in the process.

“Request that your colleagues or mentors review a first draft of your specific aims early in the process,” advises NIH.

Consider asking your early proofreaders to focus on macro issues, such as the organization of narrative sections or the logical flow within your application narrative. Even if your proposal is not completely ready, you can still have your designated proofreaders review some sections of the proposal. An Office of Justice Programs resource concurs, stating that early proofreading will allow for “sufficient time to deal with missing information,” as well as other common issues.

2. Develop a master checklist.

“Use [a] checklist to be sure that you have included everything that is required,” advises an Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) resource. “Missing or incomplete items often result in outright rejection or at least a lower score, limiting your chance for funding.”

A checklist can mean different things to different people; applicants should think of a multi-page checklist that includes not only a list of required forms and attachments, but also formatting requirements, and a bulleted list of the agency’s judging criteria.

3. Give your application a grade.

“Rate your own application,” advises the NIH resource. Grade your own proposal after completing a solid first draft, or you can ask a qualified individual outside your organization to evaluate it. Doing this well before the deadline will enable your team to identify weak areas before it’s too late.

If you bring in an outside reader, ARC suggests that you “ask them to read the proposal quickly. That is how reviewers will likely go through it, at least initially.”

4. Enlist a proofreader late in the process to focus on micro issues.

“Enlist the help of someone not involved in the preparation of the application and proposal to review the proposal,” advises a USDA resource. This proofreader can focus solely on micro issues – word choice, sentence structure, and typographical errors.

Want more tips about the federal grant writing process? Click here to see other posts in the Grant Writing Basics blog series.

 

Original Post on July 14, 2020

Ever Wondered What Happens During the Scientific Review of an NIH Grant Application?

Understanding how peer review works is key to writing a good grant application.  In this 44-minute video, NIH Peer Review: “Live” Mock Study Section, scientists have gathered virtually to review three fictional applications in response to a fictional Request For Applications (RFA).

Watch their discussion to learn how applications are scored, what questions are commonly asked, and what mistakes to avoid in your application.

This video was originally recorded on October 28, 2020 during the 2020 NIH Virtual Seminar on Program Funding and Grants Administration. Find other presentations from the Seminar here.

Original post on February 23, 2021 by

RAPID, EAGER, and RAISE Proposal Types Now Available in Research.gov

Effective today, the National Science Foundation (NSF) enabled three new proposal types in the Research.gov Proposal Submission System and in the recently launched Research.gov demo site.  These are the Rapid Response Research (RAPID), EArly-concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER), and Research Advanced by Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering (RAISE) proposal types.  New automated compliance checks and associated error and warning messages were also implemented.

In addition, based on feedback from the research community, NSF has removed the font type and font size automated compliance checks and compliance warning messages for Research.gov proposals to align with FastLane and NSF policy.

New and updated system-related Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are available on the Research.gov About Proposal Preparation and Submission page via the left navigation menu.

RAPID, EAGER, and RAISE Proposals

Proposers can now select a RAPID, EAGER, or RAISE proposal in the Research.gov proposal creation wizard, in addition to the existing Research proposal option.  These proposal types are also available in the Research.gov proposal preparation demo site.

New automated compliance checks for RAPID, EAGER, and RAISE proposals have been added to Research.gov and are listed on the updated Research.gov Compliance Checklist dated November 23, 2020 on the Automated Compliance Checking of NSF Proposals page.  Error messages prohibit proposal submission to NSF, whereas warning messages still permit proposal submission.

Refer to the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 20-1) for RAPID, EAGER, and RAISE proposal requirements.

Removal of Font Type and Font Size Compliance Checks

Although the automated compliance checks and associated compliance warnings for font type and font size have been removed, proposals may still be returned without review if the font type or font size is not compliant with the PAPPG Chapter II.B.2.a.

Refer to the updated Research.gov Compliance Checklist dated November 23, 2020 on the Automated Compliance Checking of NSF Proposals page for a complete listing of the current automated proposal compliance checks for Research.gov proposals.

What’s Ahead?
Research.gov is being developed incrementally, and features are expanding to support the transition of all proposal preparation and submission functionality from FastLane to Research.gov in accordance with NSF Important Notice 147: Research.gov Implementation Update issued September 22, 2020.  Please refer to the new Proposal Submission Capabilities list on the Research.gov About Proposal Preparation and Submission page left navigation menu to see what is in development.

Questions?  If you have IT system-related questions, please contact the NSF Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 (7:00 AM – 9:00 PM ET; Monday – Friday except federal holidays) or via rgov@nsf.gov.  Policy-related questions should be directed to policy@nsf.gov.

Original post by NSF on November 24, 2020

NSF’s Dear Colleague Letter: Strengthening American Infrastructure (SAI)

The National Science Foundation (NSF) – through its Directorates for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE), Engineering (ENG), Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE), Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS), Geosciences (GEO), Biological Sciences (BIO), Education and Human Resources (EHR), and the Office of Integrated Activities (OIA) – seeks to stimulate fundamental exploratory, potentially transformative research that strengthens America’s infrastructure. Effective infrastructure, whether it be physical, cyber, or social, provides a strong foundation for socioeconomic vitality and broad quality of life improvement.  Strong, reliable, and effective infrastructure spurs private-sector innovation, grows the economy, creates jobs, makes public-sector service provision more efficient, strengthens communities, promotes equal opportunity, protects the natural environment, enhances national security, and fuels American leadership.  To achieve these goals requires expertise from across the science and engineering disciplines.  In particular, knowledge of human reasoning and decision making, governance, and social and cultural processes are essential to efforts to envision, build, and maintain an effective infrastructure that improves lives and society and builds on advances in technology and engineering.

This Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) invites workshop and Early Concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER) proposals that incorporate scientific insights about human behavior and social dynamics to better develop, design, build, rehabilitate, and maintain strong and effective American infrastructure.  (Workshops associated with this DCL are identified as Conference proposals in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) and will hereafter be referred to as “conferences.”)  The DCL is intended to support exploratory work, in its early stages, on untested but potentially transformative research ideas or approaches that can identify and help build this new area of research.  The activities NSF hopes to stimulate with this DCL may be considered especially “high risk – high reward” in the sense that the Foundation seeks radically different approaches, application of new expertise, or engagement of novel disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives.

BACKGROUND

When people rent or purchase a home, register to vote, enroll their children in school, or check their cellphones for warnings of an impending storm, they rely on critical infrastructure.  Businesses rely on critical infrastructure to acquire loans and communicate with customers, and to protect their security and assets.  Cities, towns, and rural and tribal areas rely on extensive networks of a built and civic infrastructure.  And scientific progress depends on a substantial research ecosystem infrastructure.  Strong, effective infrastructure stimulates innovation and job growth, enables discovery and generation of new knowledge, provides safety and security, improves quality of life, and facilitates community welfare for many years into the future.

Many infrastructure projects entail extensive planning and large initial costs.  Substantial initial infrastructure investments are worthwhile to the extent they provide long-term benefit and meet the needs of all people for a range of functions.  Building such effective infrastructure requires understanding economic and social dynamics, and the perceptions and choices of many diverse individuals and communities. Whether involving transportation, security, health, education, communication, or other essential services, infrastructure design that puts people and social welfare first, is more likely to gain public support, to function more effectively, and to be less expensive to build and maintain.

The large costs and potentially large benefits of infrastructure investments mean that it is essential for people who build or maintain infrastructure to understand and incorporate relevant human and social factors in the earliest stages of design.  For example, transportation infrastructure to support automated vehicles will require advance knowledge of economic and social structural influences on people’s transportation choices, as well as human perceptual and cognitive responses in a wide range of critical decision-making and task-switching scenarios.  Infrastructure developed to expand economic opportunity is likely to be more effective if it takes into account recent evidence concerning explicit and implicit human biases, as well as from discoveries regarding how social structures affect opportunity across social groups.  Infrastructure designed to increase the speed and effectiveness of disaster response will work more effectively if its design is informed by often complex cultural and human trust contingencies and differences in group access to response resources.  Healthcare and other public infrastructure that is reliant on the provision of fast and accurate information will be more effective if built from a knowledge base that includes dynamics of how people process information and misinformation and how this changes under stress, as well as how social constraints foster or inhibit use of such infrastructure.  How people interact with their environment is critical to understanding consequences of large-scale infrastructure projects such as highways, dams, or levees.

SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITY

With this DCL, the NSF seeks to build research capacity that can address these and many other challenging infrastructure contexts that require a human- and-social-centered approach.  NSF anticipates nurturing and growing a research community in SAI over the longer term. This DCL constitutes the first step in that direction.  We invite conference and EAGER proposals that will bring together experts across disciplines to support substantial and potentially pathbreaking, untested fundamental research grounded in user-centered concepts and offering the potential to substantially improve or transform the design, use, development, cost-effectiveness, or maintenance of U.S. infrastructure.  These proposals should include a central focus on at least one SBE program area with the lead PI being an expert in social, behavioral, or economic science.  Proposals must also demonstrate an interdisciplinary approach beyond that of any single Program or NSF Directorate.

NSF is particularly interested in proposals that integrate a deep understanding of human cognition, perception, information processing, decision making, social and cultural behavior, legal frameworks, governmental structures, and related areas into the design, development, and sustainability of infrastructure.  Infrastructure may be of any kind, including cyber, economic, educational, physical, and social.

NSF is also interested in proposals that include development of new or improved performance metrics that can help stakeholders more effectively and efficiently assess infrastructure usability, cost-effectiveness, sustainability, resilience, and adaptability to changing circumstances.

NSF welcomes proposals that include efforts to broaden participation of underrepresented groups (women, minorities, and persons with disabilities) in the development of the research agendas.  Proposals from MSIs are encouraged, as are opportunities for participation by undergraduate and graduate students and postdoctoral fellows, K-12 students, industry representatives, and others.  Public-private partnerships can also be proposed for conferences.

PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

Proposals should reflect novel interdisciplinary and cross-Directorate approaches; however, each proposal submitted in response to this DCL must be grounded in a human- and/or social-centered approach to designing, building, and sustaining infrastructure.  To facilitate effective review, proposal titles for conferences must begin with “Conference: SAI,” and proposal titles for EAGERs must begin with “EAGER: SAI.”  Proposals of either type should identify both the relevant SBE program area(s) and the specific infrastructure that is being addressed; proposals must be submitted to the SAI Program (PD 21-145Y).

Proposals submitted in response to this DCL should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the guidelines contained in the most recent PAPPG.

CONFERENCE PROPOSALS

Conference proposals submitted in response to this DCL must be submitted by November 30, 2020.  Initial inquiries to NSF-SAI@nsf.gov are encouraged to determine fit.  Awards funded in this category will provide support for a period of one year and may be requested at a level not to exceed $50,000 for the total budget (including indirect costs).  Proposers should clearly outline how the conference activity will contribute to developing novel potentially transformative interdisciplinary research, the participant groups, anticipated target audience to be engaged and the plan to disseminate the findings after the conference(s).  Convening events can take the form of conferences or other types of meetings and can include multiple sequential events.  See PAPPG Chapter II.E.7 for specific instructions about preparing Conference proposals.  Conference proposals must be submitted via FastLane or Grants.gov.

EAGER PROPOSALS

Prior to submission, potential research teams are required to send a research concept outline, including project title, team members, institutions involved, and a summary of the project concept (up to two pages) by email to NSF-SAI@nsf.gov.  To ensure proper processing, the subject line of the initial email inquiry should begin with: “EAGER: SAI-E”.  Concept outlines should be submitted by December 11, 2020 (earlier if possible).  NSF Program Directors will review the research concept outlines and will authorize those that fall within the scope of this DCL for submission of a full EAGER proposal.  Proposals submitted without written authorization from an NSF Program Director will be returned without review.

Full proposal submissions are due January 15, 2021 and will only be accepted if accompanied by written (email) authorization to submit (obtained in response to the research concept outline).  Proposers should upload the email documentation from the NSF Program Director in the Supplementary Documents section of the proposal.

EAGER proposals in response to this DCL should adhere to the following guidelines.

  1. Research teams should show demonstrated expertise in the SBE sciences and at least one of the research areas represented by other participating directorates (ENG, CISE, GEO, MPS, BIO, EHR, and OIA) related to infrastructure.  An individual may participate as a PI or co-PI in only one EAGER proposal pursuant to this DCL.  However, individuals named as a PI or co-PI in an EAGER proposal may also participate in one or more Conference proposals.
  2. Proposals should describe how each participating discipline will contribute to intellectual merit and broader impacts for strengthening American infrastructure.  The research should be interdependent and integrated, contribute novel understanding, and provide innovation in addressing infrastructure challenges.
  3. EAGER is a funding mechanism for supporting exploratory work, in its early stages, on untested but potentially transformative research ideas or approaches.  Thus, proposals responsive to this DCL must include a section stating the appropriateness for an EAGER award (for instance, proposals submitted in response to this DCL may be “high-risk, high-reward” by way of involving radically different approaches, applying new expertise, or engaging novel disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives).  EAGER proposals may request up to $300,000 in total costs over two years (including indirect costs).

See PAPPG Chapter II.E.2 for specific instructions about preparing EAGER proposals.  EAGER proposals may be submitted via FastLane, Research.gov or Grants.gov.

Inquiries about the DCL, general inquiries, and questions about submission of SAI proposals should be directed to NSF-SAI@nsf.gov.

Original post by NSF on November 8, 2020

NSF Revision of Award Terms and Conditions Effective on November 12, 2020

The following sets of NSF Award Conditions have been updated for consistency with the revised 2 CFR §200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards:

  • Grant General Conditions (GC-1);
  • Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CAFATC); and
  • Cooperative Agreement Modifications and Supplemental Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions for Major Multi-User Research Facility Projects and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers.

The revised terms and conditions will apply to all new NSF awards and funding amendments to existing awards made on or after November 12, 2020.

The terms and conditions incorporate revised 2 CFR §200 coverage including: requirements for award termination and enforcement; compliance with Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which prohibits the use of Federal assistance funding on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment;  as well as other significant changes and clarifications.   All sets of award conditions are accompanied by a summary of changes made to that document.

NSF will separately announce the release of the Agency Specific Requirements to the Research Terms and Conditions (RTC), as well as the Administration of NSF Conference or Group Travel Award Grant Conditions (FL-26).

Questions about NSF award conditions may be sent to policy@nsf.gov.

Original post by Jean Feldman, NSF on November 6, 2020