# Presentation: 302509

## The National Science Foundation: Supporting Basic Science Research in the United States for over 50 years

**The National Science Foundation: Supporting Basic Science Research in the United States for over 50 years**

**Sonia Esperança, Ph. D.**
**Program Director, Division of Earth Sciences**

## Historical Notes

**July 1945 – President Roosevelt and Dr. Vannevar Bush exchanged letters**
***“******Science – The Endless Frontier”***** -  document that makes the recommendation to start a new agency to fund basic science**
**Act of 1947 – Bill introduced to Congress to create new agency – vetoed by President Truman **
**1947-1950 – some erosion of the ambitious vision proposed in *****Science - The Endless Frontier***** **
**Act of 1950 - established the National Science Foundation to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes. The President approved the act on May 10, 1950.**

- Dr. Vannevar Bush

## What NSF Does

**With an annual budget of about $5.92 billion, we are the funding source for approximately 20 percent of all federally supported basic research conducted by America's colleges and universities. In many fields such as mathematics, computer science and the social sciences, NSF is the major source of federal backing. **

## NSF’s Organization

**NSF leadership has two major components: **
**a **_**[director](http://www.nsf.gov/od/index.jsp)**__** who oversees **__**[NSF staff and management](http://www.nsf.gov/staff/orglist.jsp)**__** responsible for program creation and administration, merit review, planning, budget and day-to-day operations; **_
**a 24-member **_**[National Science Board (NSB)](http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/)**__** of eminent individuals that meets six times a year to establish the overall policies of the foundation. The director and all Board members serve six year terms. Each of them, as well as the NSF deputy director, is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. **_
**NSF workforce - 1,200 career employees, 150 scientists from research institutions on temporary duty, 200 contract workers and the staff of the NSB office and the Office of the Inspector General.  Unlike other agencies, NSF does not maintain their own research laboratories.**

## Growth of NSF

**1950 -  NSF starts with a budget of U$151,000**
**In 1952, the NSF had the resources to fund only 28 research grants - budget of 3.5 million dollars **
**In 2007 the Foundation funded more than 11,400 new research grants (of ~ 44,500 research grant requests)**

- The budget request for Fiscal Year 2008 is U$6.43 billion.

## How are decisions made and who makes them?

**How are decisions made and who makes them?**

## NSF’s Merit Review Process

**The great majority of NSF proposals are peer-reviewed either by ad hoc mail reviewers (~10%), panel committee (~50%) or both (32%).**
**Program Directors make a recommendation to award or decline based on the input from the peer reviewers.**
**Division Directors agree or not with this recommendation.**
**Financial Officers make the official award recommendation.**
**Committee of Visitors looks at the details of the Program process and outcomes and makes recommendations for improvement if needed.**

## NSF’s Merit Review Process

## Proposal Preparation and Submission

**Program Solicitations are prepared by Program Officers (scientific staff)**
**Published in the Website at least 3-months in advance of deadline**
**Proposals are submitted by Organizations on behalf of the Investigators before due date**

## Proposal Review and Processing

** ****Program Directors and Division Directors are government employees or temporary academics that have scientific background**
** ****Program Directors have autonomy.  They select reviewers, panel members and they are responsible for balancing input from all sources**

## NSF’s Merit Review Criteria

**What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?**
- How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields?
- How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project?
- If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work. To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
- How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?
- Is there sufficient access to resources?

## NSF’s Merit Review Criteria

**What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?**
- How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning?
- How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)?
- To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships?
- Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding?
- What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

## Types of Reviews

**Ad hoc Mail Review only**
**Panel Review plus Ad hoc Review **
**Panel Review only**
**Internal Review Only by NSF Program Officers (e.g. Small Grants for Exploratory Research)**

## Reviewer Selection

**Types of reviewers recruited:**
- Reviewers with specific content expertise
- Reviewers with general science or education expertise
**Sources of reviewers:**
- Program Officer’s knowledge of the research area
- References listed in proposal
- Recent professional society programs
- Computer searches of S&E journal articles related to the proposal
- Reviewer recommendations included in proposal or sent by email - proposers are invited to either:
- Suggest persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal.
- Identify persons they would prefer not review the proposal.

## Role of the Peer Reviewer

**Review all proposal materials and consider:**
- The two NSF merit review criteria and any program specific criteria.
- The adequacy of the proposed project plan including the budget, resources, & timeline.
- The priorities of the NSF program & in the field.
- The potential risks and benefits of the project.
**Make independent written comments on the quality of the proposal content.**
**Each reviewed proposal gets *****at least***** three individual peer reviews**

## Role of the Peer Review Panel

**Discuss the merits of the proposal with other panelists who reviewed the proposal.**
**Write a summary proposal review based on discussion.**
**Some panels may be supplemented with ad hoc reviewers if additional expertise is needed.**

## Avoiding Conflicts of Interest

**Primary purpose is to remove or limit the influence of ties to an applicant institution or investigator that could affect reviewer advice**
**Second purpose is to preserve the trust of the scientific community, Congress, and the general public in the integrity, effectiveness, and evenhandedness of NSF’s peer review process **
**Examples**
**Institution – no reviewers from the same institution (even adjunct appointments)**
**Collaboration – last four years as co-authors or two years as co-editors**
**Personal Relationships – conflicts of your spouse apply to yourself**
**Employment Opportunities – if considering employment at the investigator’s institution**

## Program Portfolio Considerations

**Integration of Research and Education**
**Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities**
**Increasing the Geographic Distribution of Awards**
**Diversification of Institution Types (i.e. undergraduate only institutions)**
**Stages in Career Development of Investigator (i.e., new investigators or those coming up for tenure)**

## Funding Decisions

**The peer reviewer comments and the panel summary provide input to the NSF Program Officers**
**NSF Program Officers make funding recommendations guided by program goals and portfolio considerations.**
**NSF Division Directors either concur or reject the program officer’s funding recommendations.**
**NSF’s grants and agreements officers make the official award - as longs as:**
- The institution has an adequate grant management capacity.
- The PI/CO-PIs do not have overdue annual or final reports.
- There are no other outstanding issues with the institution or PI.

## Business Review and Award

** ****NSF awards are made by a Financial Officer (Division of Grants and Agreements)**
** ****Institutions (Organizations) are responsible for the financial management of the award.  Investigators are responsible for the scientific research**
** ****Oversight of the award finances and outcomes conducted by NSF**

## Feedback to InvestigatorsInformation from Merit Review

**Verbatim copies of all mail reviews including the reviewer ratings**
**Panel Summary of Discussion Highlights**
**Short analysis of how well proposal addresses both review criteria**
**Proposal strengths and weaknesses**
**Reasons for a declination**
**Context Statement – an explanation of the review process for all competing proposals in the round**

## Oversight of Process: The Committee of Visitors (CoV)

**A Committee of Visitors (CoV) meets once every three years to evaluate the review process in the Program and the research outcomes from the awards made in the last three years.**
**Findings of the CoV are publicly available after it has been presented to the Advisory Committee at a higher level in the Directorate**
**Changes that are recommended are incorporated in future processes**
**Same Conflict of Interest rules apply to the CoV**

## Office of the Inspector General

**	****The Office of the Inspector General was created in 1989 to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in administering NSF programs and operations; prevent and detect fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement in NSF programs and operations; and prevent, detect, and handle cases involving misconduct in science. **

## NSF’s authorization is broad

**A. Initiate and support, scientific and engineering research and programs to strengthen scientific and engineering research potential, and education programs at all levels, and appraise the impact of research upon industrial development and the general welfare.**
**B. Award graduate fellowships in the sciences and in engineering.**
**C. Foster the interchange of scientific information among scientists and engineers in the United States and foreign countries.**
**D. Foster and support the development and use of computers and other scientific methods and technologies, primarily for research and education in the sciences.**
**E. Evaluate the status and needs of the various sciences and engineering and take into consideration the results of this evaluation in correlating our research and educational programs with other federal and non-federal programs.**
**F. Provide a central clearinghouse for the collection, interpretation and analysis of data on scientific and technical resources in the United States, and provide a source of information for policy formulation by other federal agencies.**
**G. Determine the total amount of federal money received by universities and appropriate organizations for the conduct of scientific and engineering research, including both basic and applied, and construction of facilities where such research is conducted, but excluding development, and report annually thereon to the President and the Congress.**
**H. Initiate and support specific scientific and engineering activities in connection with matters relating to international cooperation, national security and the effects of scientific and technological applications upon society.**
**I. Initiate and support scientific and engineering research, including applied research, at academic and other nonprofit institutions and, at the direction of the President, support applied research at other organizations.**
**J. Recommend and encourage the pursuit of national policies for the promotion of basic research and education in the sciences and engineering. Strengthen research and education innovation in the sciences and engineering, including independent research by individuals, throughout the United States.**
**K. Support activities designed to increase the participation of women and minorities and others underrepresented in science and technology.**

## Programs for Specific Groups/Purposes

**ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers **
**Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI)**
**Human and Social Dynamics (HSD)**
**Major Research Instrumentation (MRI)**
**NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education **
**Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)**
**Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI)**
**Faculty Early-CAREER Development**

## ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers 

**Program Goal: ****To develop systemic approaches to increase the representation and advancement of women in academic science and engineering careers, thereby contributing to the development of a more diverse science and engineering workforce. **

## Human and Social Dynamics (HSD)

**Goal: Aims to stimulate and support growth in knowledge about human action and development as well as organizational, cultural and societal adaptation and change**
**Fourth Year Emphases:**
- Agents of Change (AOC)
- Dynamics of Human Behavior (DHB)
- Decision Making, Risk, and Uncertainty (DRU)

## Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI)

**Program Goals:**
- synergize university-industry partnerships by making project funds or fellowships/traineeships available to support an eclectic mix of industry-university linkages.
- This solicitation targets high-risk/high-gain research with a focus on fundamental topics, new approaches to solving generic problems, development of innovative collaborative industry-university educational programs, and direct transfer of new knowledge between academe and industry. .
- Seeks to fund research that lies beyond that which industry would normally fund by themselves.

## Major Research Instrumentation (MRI)

**Program Goals: **
- Increase access to scientific and engineering equipment for research and research training in our Nation's organizations of higher education, research museums and non-profit research organizations.
- Improve the quality and expand the scope of research and research training in science and engineering, and to foster the integration of research and education by providing instrumentation for research-intensive learning environments.

## NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education (GK-12)

**Program Goals:**
- Provides funding to graduate students in NSF- supported science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines to acquire additional skills that will broadly prepare them for professional and scientific careers in the 21st century.
- Expected outcomes include improved communication, teaching and team building skills for the fellows; professional development opportunities for K-12 teachers; enriched learning for K-12 students; and strengthened partnerships between institutions of higher education and local school districts.

## Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)

**REU Sites**
**Program Goals:**
- Initiate and conduct projects that engage a number of undergraduate students in research.
- Involve students in research who might not otherwise have the opportunity, particularly those from academic institutions where research programs are limited.
**Recruitment:**
- Significant percentage of students from outside host institution

## Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI)

**Program Goals:**
- Support high quality research with active involvement of undergraduates.
- Strengthen the research environment in undergraduate institutions.
- Promote integration of research and education in undergraduate institutions.
**Proposal Types:**
- Regular research
- Multi-user instrumentation
- Research Opportunity Awards
**Eligibility Information:**
- Institutions that award an average of 10 or fewer Ph.D. or D.Sc. degrees per year in all NSF-supportable disciplines