Title: Robert Noyce Scholarship Program
Date: 01/03/06
Replaced: NSF 05-528

Robert Noyce Scholarship Program

Program Solicitation
NSF 06-528
Replaces Document NSF 05-528

[NSF Logo]   National Science Foundation
             Directorate for Education and Human Resources
                   Division of Undergraduate Education

Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (optional):

     February 28, 2006

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     April 03, 2006

REVISIONS AND UPDATES

  1. Institutions not previously funded under the Robert Noyce Scholarship
     Program may submit proposals under the Phase I category:

  2. Institutions previously funded under the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program
     may submit two types of proposals under the Phase II category: (1)
     Scholarship and Stipend proposals to support new cohorts of Noyce
     Scholars and to conduct longitudinal evaluation studies of previously
     funded cohorts, or (2) Monitoring and Evaluation proposals to support the
     continued monitoring of previously supported cohorts of students and to
     conduct longitudinal evaluation studies, but not to provide funding for
     new scholarships or stipends.

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

General Information

Program Title:

     Robert Noyce Scholarship Program

Synopsis of Program:

     The Robert Noyce Scholarship program seeks to encourage talented
     science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors and
     professionals to become K-12 mathematics and science teachers. The
     program provides funds to institutions of higher education to
     support scholarships, stipends, and programs for students who commit
     to teaching in high need K-12 schools.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

   * Joan T. Prival, Lead Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human
     Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703)
     292-4635, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: jprival@nsf.gov

   * Kathleen A. Parson, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human
     Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703)
     292-4653, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: kparson@nsf.gov

Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):

   * 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources

Eligibility Information

   * Organization Limit:

     Institutions of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the
     Higher Education Act of 1965) in the United States or consortia of such
     institutions or nonprofit entities that have established consortia among
     such institutions of higher education may submit proposals.

   * PI Eligibility Limit: None Specified.
   * Limit on Number of Proposals: An institution, on its own or as a member
     of a consortium, may submit no more than one proposal per competition.

Award Information

   * Anticipated Type of Award: Standard or Continuing Grant
   * Estimated Number of Awards: 13 to 18 - Pending the availability of
     funding, it is anticipated that there will be 10 -12 Phase I awards and 3
     - 6 Phase II awards.
   * Anticipated Funding Amount: $7,000,000

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

   * Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is optional. Please
     see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
   * Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains
     information that supplements the standard Grant Proposal Guide (GPG)
     proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this
     solicitation for further information.

B. Budgetary Information

   * Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required by NSF.
   * Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

     No indirect costs are allowed for Phase I and Phase II Scholarship and
     Stipend projects. Indirect costs are allowed for Phase II Monitoring and
     Evaluation projects.

   * Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations apply. Please
     see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

   * Letters of Intent (optional):
          February 28, 2006
   * Full Proposal Deadline Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):
          April 03, 2006

Proposal Review Information

   * Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria.
     Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of
     this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

   * Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
   * Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

     Summary of Program Requirements

  I. Introduction

 II. Program Description

III. Eligibility Information

 IV. Award Information

  V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
       A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
       B. Budgetary Information
       C. Due Dates
       D. FastLane Requirements

 VI. Proposal Review Information
       A. NSF Proposal Review Process
       B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard

VII. Award Administration Information
       A. Notification of the Award
       B. Award Conditions
       C. Reporting Requirements

VIII.Contacts for Additional Information

 IX. Other Programs of Interest

I. INTRODUCTION

It is estimated that the nation's schools will need to hire 2.2 million
teachers, including 240,000 middle and high school mathematics and science
teachers, in the next decade due to projected enrollment increases,
anticipated retirements, and the attrition of new teachers (National
Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, 2000).
Furthermore, the demand for certified teachers has increased as student
course-taking in high school science and mathematics has increased and as
states implement the teacher quality requirements of No Child Left Behind with
respect to teacher content knowledge in the assigned field of teaching (CCSSO,
2003).

Research on effective teachers has shown persistent correlations between
student performance and teacher quality (Sanders and Rivers, 1996; Jordan,
Mendro, and Weerasinghe, 1997). Teachers' content knowledge, particularly in
science and mathematics, is an important factor in determining student
achievement (Goldhaber and Brewer, 1996, National Research Council, 2000). A
large percentage of science and mathematics teachers lack even a minor in
their teaching field, with 56% of public secondary students receiving
instruction in the physical sciences from teachers without a major or minor in
the physical sciences and 27% of students receiving mathematics instruction in
classes taught by teachers lacking a minor in mathematics. Although the
problem of out-of-field teaching is widespread, students in high-poverty
schools are 77% more likely to be taught by an out-of-field teacher than
students in low poverty schools (Ingersoll, 1999, 2002). As many as 50% of new
teachers in urban school districts leave the teaching profession within their
first three years, further exacerbating shortages and misassignment of
teachers. A survey of urban school districts conducted by the Council of the
Great City Schools and Recruiting New Teachers, Inc., in 1998-99, indicated
that 95% of responding urban school districts had an immediate demand for high
school science and mathematics teachers. Eighty percent reported a need for
middle school science and mathematics teachers (Urban Teacher Collaborative,
2000).

The Robert Noyce Scholarship Program, authorized under the National Science
Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-368), responds to the critical
need for K-12 teachers of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics by
encouraging talented science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
students and STEM professionals to pursue teaching careers in elementary and
secondary schools. The program provides funding to institutions of higher
education to provide scholarships, stipends, and programmatic support for STEM
majors and STEM professionals to enter and complete teacher credentialing
programs. Scholarship recipients are required to complete two years of
teaching in a high need school district for each year of scholarship or
stipend support. The program seeks to increase the number of K-12 teachers
with strong STEM content knowledge who teach in high need school districts.

II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The NSF Robert Noyce Scholarship program awards grants to institutions of
higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of
1965) in the United States or consortia of such institutions or nonprofit
entities that have established consortia among such institutions of higher
education to provide scholarships for juniors and seniors who are majoring in
science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) and stipends for STEM
professionals seeking to become teachers. A goal of the program is to recruit
individuals with strong STEM backgrounds who might otherwise not have
considered a career in K-12 teaching. Proposals may address either the
scholarship or the stipend program or both programs. Scholarship and stipend
recipients should be selected on the basis of academic merit, with
consideration given to financial need and the diversity of participants in the
program. Institutions are expected to provide the program and support to
enable scholarship and stipend recipients to obtain teacher certification or
licensing and to become successful elementary or secondary teachers. This
support should be based on effective, evidence-based strategies and should be
available to recipients during their participation in the program and continue
after their completion of the program to ease the transition into teaching and
aid retention during and beyond the obligatory service period. Program
activities for scholarship and stipend recipients may include serving as
resources for science and mathematics instruction in K-12 classrooms. The
project leadership team is expected to include STEM discipline faculty.

Scholarships for STEM Majors

Scholarship amounts must be at least $7,500 per year but no more than $10,000
per year; however, no individual may receive a scholarship for any year that
exceeds the yearly cost of attendance (as defined in section 472 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll)). Scholarship recipients must be U.S.
citizens or nationals, or permanent resident aliens, must be majoring in
mathematics, engineering, or a science discipline, and must be in the last 2
years of a baccalaureate degree program. It is expected that these students
will complete a major in a STEM discipline. Students enrolled in institutions
requiring a fifth year or post-baccalaureate program for teacher certification
may apply the scholarship to the post-baccalaureate program. A recipient may
receive up to two years of scholarship support. Recipients of scholarships
must commit to completion of two years of service as a mathematics or science
teacher for each year the scholarship is received. Service must be performed
within 6 years after graduation from the program for which the scholarship was
awarded and must be performed in a high need local educational agency that
meets one or more of the following criteria:

       A. It has at least one school in which 50 percent or more of the
          enrolled students are eligible for participation in the free and
          reduced price lunch program established by the Richard B. Russell
          National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.1751 et seq.).

       B. It has at least one school in which: (i) more than 34 percent of the
          academic classroom teachers at the secondary level (across all
          academic subjects) do not have an undergraduate degree with a major
          or minor in, or a graduate degree in, the academic field in which
          they teach the largest percentage of their classes; or (ii) more
          than 34 percent of the teachers in two of the academic departments
          do not have an undergraduate degree with a major or minor in, or a
          graduate degree in, the academic field in which they teach the
          largest percentage of their classes.

       C. It has at least one school whose teacher attrition rate has been 15
          percent or more over the last three school years.

Stipends for STEM Professionals

Stipends of up to $10,000 are available for a maximum of one year for science,
technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) professionals who hold a
baccalaureate, masters, or doctoral degree in science, mathematics, or
engineering and enroll in a teacher certification program. Stipend recipients
must be U.S. citizens or nationals, or permanent resident aliens. Recipients
of stipends must commit to serving two years as a mathematics or science
teacher in a high need local educational agency, as defined above, within 6
years after graduation or completion of the program for which the stipend was
awarded. Current K-12 teachers seeking new certification or re-certification
are not eligible to receive Noyce scholarships or stipends.

Categories of Proposals

In FY 2006, the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program provides funding for two
categories of proposals:

   * Phase I proposals are invited from institutions that have not previously
     been funded under the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program.
   * Phase II proposals are invited from institutions that have previously
     been funded under the Robert Noyce Scholarship program and whose award
     expiration date occurs on or before September 30, 2006.

Phase I proposals provide scholarships for juniors and seniors who are
majoring in a science discipline, technology, engineering, or mathematics
(STEM) and stipends for STEM professionals seeking to become teachers.
Proposals may address the scholarship component or the stipend component or
both. Up to 15% of the proposed budget may be allocated for administrative and
program costs associated with recruiting and preparing the teachers, providing
support for the teachers as they begin teaching, and conducting monitoring and
evaluation activities.

Within Phase II, two options are available: Scholarship and Stipend (S&S)
Projects and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) projects. Phase II S&S Awards
provide funds for prior awardees to expand and extend the evaluation efforts
initiated under the original award and to support additional cohorts of
scholarship and stipend recipients. Phase II proposals are expected to show
evidence of the success of the previous award that warrants additional
funding. These proposals must include plans for conducting longitudinal
evaluation studies of students supported under the previous Noyce award as
well as monitoring and evaluation of new cohorts of students. Proposals must
include plans for evaluating the impact of the program on recruitment of
teachers and the effectiveness of the Noyce recipients as K-12 teachers. Up to
20% of the budget may be allocated for administrative and program costs and
for evaluation and research activities associated with the Phase II S&S
project. The maximum total budget for Phase I and Phase II S&S proposals is
$500,000 with a project duration of up to 4 years.

Phase II M&E Awards provide funding to measure project outcomes through
longitudinal evaluation studies and the continued monitoring of Noyce
recipients to ensure they have completed their teaching requirement. Since M
&E awards do not include funds for awarding additional scholarships and
stipends, indirect costs may be included in the proposal budget. The maximum
total budget for proposals in this category is $150,000 with a project
duration of up to 3 years.

Specific requirements for Phase I and Phase II proposals are described in
Section V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions.

Institutional Responsibilities

The institution shall require that each recipient of the scholarship or
stipend accepts the terms of the scholarship or stipend and agrees to provide
the institution with annual certification of employment and up-to-date contact
information and to participate in surveys provided by the institution of
higher education as part of an evaluation program. Monitoring the compliance
of scholarship and stipend recipients with respect to their service
requirements will be the responsibility of the institution of higher education
receiving the award. It is expected that failure to satisfy the academic
requirements of the program or to complete the service requirement will result
in forfeiture of the scholarship or stipend award with repayments pro-rated
accordingly to reflect partial service completed. The institution is
responsible for collecting the repayment amounts, including interest, in
accordance with P.L. 107-368, SEC. 10 (g). All forfeited scholarship or
stipend funds, less grantee administrative costs associated with collection of
the repayment not to exceed 5% of the forfeited amount, will be returned to
the United States Treasury. The institution is expected to establish
procedures that ensure compliance with the service requirement with allowances
for extreme hardship or other circumstances for which it is not in the best
interests of the school district or not feasible for the scholarship/stipend
recipient to fulfill the service obligation. The institution may establish
procedures for waiving or suspending repayment of scholarships or stipends in
cases of extreme hardship or other circumstances that would preclude the
fulfillment of the service obligation.

Eligible institutions must provide evidence of exemplary teacher preparation
efforts to ensure that scholarship and stipend recipients become successful
science and mathematics teachers in elementary or secondary schools.
Successful proposals also will provide evidence of functioning partnerships
between institutions of higher education and school districts and an
infrastructure that is supportive of new teachers. All projects are expected
to include an evaluation plan for measuring the impact of the project and
effectiveness of proposed strategies in attracting, preparing, and retaining
STEM individuals in teaching careers as well as the effectiveness of the Noyce
scholarship/stipend recipients as teachers. The evaluation plan should include
a mechanism for tracking the scholarship/stipend recipients as they fulfill
their teaching obligation and a method for collecting demographic data on
these individuals. In addition to the project-specific evaluation, all
projects will be expected to cooperate with an NSF third party monitoring and
evaluation of program impact that will require data collection. It is expected
that individual project evaluation, as well as the overall program evaluation,
will contribute to the knowledge base of effective strategies for attracting
and retaining effective teachers with strong STEM content knowledge.

Proposers may wish to explore the resources related to K-12 teacher education
available at MSPnet, http://www.hub.mspnet.org/ , an electronic learning
community for the Math and Science Partnership (MSP) program. Information
about current awards funded under the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program
resources can be found at the Division of Undergraduate Education
website:http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5733&org=DUE&from=home

References

Council of Chief State School Officers (2003). State Indicators of Science and
Mathematics Education 2003. Washington, DC: Author

Goldhaber, D.D. and D.J. Brewer (1997). Evaluating the Effect of Teacher
Degree Level on Educational Performance. In W.J. Fowler (ed.), Developments in
School Finance, 1996. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics

Ingersoll, R.M. (1999). The Problem of Underqualified Teachers in American
Secondary Schools. Educational Researcher, 28(2): 26-37.

Ingersoll, R.M. (2002). Out-of-field Teaching: Educational Inequality and the
Organization of Schools: An Exploratory Analysis. Seattle, WA: University of
Washington Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy

Jordan, H., R. Mendro, & D. Weerasinghe. (1997). Teacher Effects on
Longitudinal Student Achievement.

National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century
(2000). Before It's Too Late. Jessup, MD: Education Publications Center.

National Research Council (2001). Educating Teachers of Science, Mathematics,
and Technology: New Practices for the New Millennium (Committee on Science and
Mathematics Teacher Preparation). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Sanders, W.L. and J. C. Rivers, (1966). Cumulative and Residual Effects of
Teachers on Future Academic Achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of
Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.

Urban Teacher Collaborative (2000). The Urban Teacher Challenge: Teacher
Demand in the Great City Schools. Washington, D.C: Council of the Great City
Schools.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

Institutions of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965) in the United States or consortia of such institutions
or nonprofit entities that have established consortia among such institutions
of higher education may submit proposals. An institution, on its own or as a
member of a consortium, may submit no more than one proposal per competition.

IV. AWARD INFORMATION

Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are
subject to the availability of funds. The anticipated funding amount in FY
2006 is $7 million.

Phase I Awards

Depending on the quality of submissions and the availability of funds, NSF
expects to fund approximately 10 -12 awards of up to $500,000 for a total
award amount and duration of 3 to 4 years. Up to 15% of the proposed budget
may be allocated for administrative and program costs, including monitoring
and evaluation as detailed in Section II "Program Description" above.

Phase II Awards

Depending on the quality of submissions and the availability of funds, NSF
expects to fund approximately 3 - 6 Phase II awards. Phase II S&S proposals
may request up to $500,000 for a total award amount and duration of 3 to 4
years. Up to 20% of the proposed budget may be allocated for administrative
and program costs, including monitoring and evaluation as detailed in Section
II "Program Description" above. Phase II M&E Proposals may request up to
$150,000 in total budget for a duration of 3 years. Indirect costs may be
charged in Phase II M&E proposals.

V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Letters of Intent (optional):

Letters of Intent:

A Letter of Intent is optional, but encouraged, before submitting a full
proposal. The Letter of Intent is not a preliminary proposal. It is intended
to enhance the efficiency of the review process. Letters of Intent should be
electronically submitted through FastLane by February 28, 2006. The Letter of
Intent should indicate the category of proposal (Phase I, Phase II S&S, or
Phase II M&E). It should include a brief synopsis of the project, indicating
the grade level (elementary, middle, or high school) and discipline focus of
the project. Additional institutions and school districts should be listed in
the Participating Organizations section of the FastLane Letter of Intent.

Full Proposal Instructions:

Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement/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:
http://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 pubs@nsf.gov.

The following instructions supplement the GPG guidelines.

Project Summary

The one-page Project Summary should indicate the specific category of proposal
(Phase I, Phase II S&S, or Phase II M&E) and name all institutions, including
school districts, that are involved in the proposal. Proposers are reminded
that the Project Summary must explicitly address, in separately labeled
statements, both NSB-approved merit review criteria: Intellectual Merit and
Broader Impacts. Proposals failing to explicitly address Intellectual Merit
and Broader Impacts in the Project Summary will be returned without review.

Project Description

Phase I Proposals must include the following elements in the Project
Description section:

   * Results from Prior NSF Support: Address prior support relevant to the
     proposed project.
   * A description of the proposed scholarship or stipend program, including
     the number and size of scholarships and stipends, academic requirements,
     and projected cumulative number of new teachers to be produced over the
     duration of the program, including a comparison to number of teachers
     currently produced by the proposing institution(s);
   * A description of the teacher preparation program in which the Noyce
     scholarship or stipend recipients will be enrolled. The proposal must
     include evidence of exemplary teacher preparation efforts to ensure that
     scholarship and stipend recipients become successful science and
     mathematics teachers in elementary and secondary schools;
   * A description of recruitment activities designed to attract a large and
     diverse pool of applicants;
   * A description of the selection process that will ensure the most
     qualified applicants are selected based on academic merit, with
     consideration given to financial need and increasing participation of
     minorities, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented genders
     relative to specific teaching areas;
   * A description of the management and administrative structure and
     capability to administer the scholarship or stipend program;
   * Evidence of an infrastructure that is supportive of new teachers. Include
     a description of the activities and support mechanisms that will be
     available to recipients to ensure they are able and willing to fulfill
     their commitment to teaching;
   * Evidence of functioning partnerships between institutions of higher
     education and school districts;
   * A description of plans to monitor and enforce compliance with the
     required teaching commitment;
   * Evidence that the institution is committed to making the program a
     central institutional focus; and
   * An evaluation plan that will provide information on the effectiveness of
     the project in attracting, preparing, and retaining STEM individuals in
     teaching careers and should include methodologies for measuring the
     effectiveness of the Noyce scholarship/stipend recipients as teachers.
     The evaluation plan should include a mechanism for tracking the
     scholarship/stipend recipients during the period in which they are
     fulfilling their service obligation and a plan for collecting demographic
     data and statistics on scholarship and stipend recipients.

Phase II Scholarship and Stipend (S&S) Proposals should include the following:

   * Results from Prior NSF Support: Describe the outcomes of prior support
     under the previous Robert Noyce Scholarship grant to include the number
     of students supported through scholarships and/or stipends with major
     field of study and level of teaching, and the number who have begun the
     teaching requirement in a high need school district. The success of the
     project in increasing the number of STEM majors or STEM professionals who
     enter the teaching workforce should be a particular focus of this
     discussion. The proposal should explain how the results of the prior work
     and evaluation findings have informed the proposed work.
   * A description of the proposed scholarship or stipend program, including
     the number and size of scholarships and stipends, academic requirements,
     and projected cumulative number of new teachers to be produced over the
     duration of the program, including a comparison to number of teachers
     currently produced by the proposing institution(s);
   * A description of the teacher preparation program in which the Noyce
     scholarship or stipend recipients will be enrolled. The proposal must
     include evidence of exemplary teacher preparation efforts to ensure that
     scholarship and stipend recipients become successful science and
     mathematics teachers in elementary and secondary schools;
   * A description of recruitment activities designed to attract a large and
     diverse pool of applicants;
   * A description of the selection process that will ensure the most
     qualified applicants are selected based on academic merit, with
     consideration given to financial need and increasing participation of
     minorities, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented genders
     relative to specific teaching areas;
   * A description of the management and administrative structure and
     capability to administer the scholarship or stipend program;
   * Evidence of an infrastructure that is supportive of new teachers. Include
     a description of the activities and support mechanisms that will be
     available to recipients to ensure they are able and willing to fulfill
     their commitment to teaching;
   * Evidence of functioning partnerships between institutions of higher
     education and school districts;
   * A description of plans to monitor and enforce compliance with the
     required teaching commitment;
   * Evidence that the institution is committed to making the program a
     central institutional focus;
   * Discussion of how the proposed project builds on the prior support beyond
     simply continuing the work.
   * Discussion of plans to sustain activities and impact of the project
     beyond Phase II support.
   * Evidence that the institution has made the program a central
     institutional focus.
   * Evidence of the impact of the Noyce Scholarship project on STEM
     departments.
   * Details of a plan to expand and extend the evaluation activities
     initiated under the original award. Evaluation studies should include
     longitudinal studies to measure the impact of the project on students
     supported under the first award in terms of their performance as
     teachers, their completion of the teaching requirement, and their
     retention in the teaching profession. In addition, plans for monitoring
     and evaluating the impact of the project on new cohorts should be
     included. The evaluation plan should address recruitment, preparation,
     and retention of the Noyce Scholars and should lead to results that will
     inform the community of what works and why. This study should go beyond
     the required tracking of recipients to include indicators of the
     effectiveness of the program in attracting STEM majors into teaching, the
     impact of the program on departments and the institution, and the
     effectiveness of the Noyce Scholars as measured by their performance in
     the classroom and their impact on student learning. The proposal should
     include plans to disseminate the findings of this study through peer
     reviewed publications and national conferences.

Phase II Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Proposals should include the
following elements in the Project Description section:

   * Results from Prior NSF Support: Describe the outcomes of prior support
     under the previous Robert Noyce Scholarship grant, including the number
     of students supported through scholarships and/or stipends with major
     field of study and level of teaching, and the number who have begun the
     teaching requirement in a high need school district. The success of the
     project in increasing the number of STEM majors or STEM professionals who
     enter the teaching workforce should be a particular focus of this
     discussion. The proposal should provide results of the evaluation
     activities.

   * Details of a plan to expand and extend the evaluation activities
     initiated under the original award. Evaluation studies should include
     longitudinal studies to measure the impact of the project on students
     supported under the first award in terms of their performance as
     teachers, their completion of the teaching requirement, and their
     retention in the teaching profession. The evaluation plan should address
     recruitment, preparation, and retention of the Noyce Scholars and should
     lead to results that will inform the community of what works and why.
     This study should go beyond the required tracking of recipients to
     include indicators of the effectiveness of the program in attracting STEM
     majors into teaching, the impact of the program on departments and the
     institution, and the effectiveness of the Noyce Scholars as measured by
     their performance in the classroom and their impact on student learning.
     The proposal should include plans to disseminate the findings of this
     study through peer reviewed publications and national conferences.

Additional Requirements for Phase I and Phase II Proposals

The PI and Co-PI leadership must include at least one faculty member from a
STEM discipline. Letters of support from the Dean of Arts & Sciences, Dean of
Education, and school district Superintendent(s) or comparable administrators
should be submitted as evidence of institutional support for the proposal.
Letters should be uploaded into the Supplementary Documentation section in
FastLane.

A Project Data Form must be submitted (via FastLane) as part of all proposals.
The information on this form is used to direct proposals to appropriate
reviewers and to determine the characteristics of projects supported by the
Division of Undergraduate Education. In FastLane, this form will show up in
the list of forms for your proposal only after you have (1) selected the
"Noyce" program solicitation number on the Cover Sheet and (2) saved the Cover
Sheet.

Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation
number (06-528) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the proposal
Cover Sheet. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the
relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information
may delay processing.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Cost sharing is not required by NSF in proposals submitted under this Program
Solicitation.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

No indirect costs are allowed for Phase I and Phase II Scholarship and Stipend
projects. Indirect costs are allowed for Phase II Monitoring and Evaluation
projects.

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Phase I proposals: Up to 15% of the proposed budget may be allocated for
administrative and program costs, including monitoring and evaluation, as
detailed in Section II "Program Description" above.

Phase II S&S proposals: Up to 20% of the proposed budget may be allocated for
administrative and program costs, including monitoring and evaluation, as
detailed in Section II "Program Description" above.

Budget Preparation Instructions:
Scholarships and stipends should be indicated in Section F.1 Participant
Support - "Stipends" of the FastLane budget.

C. Due Dates

Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):

Letters of Intent (optional):

     February 28, 2006

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     April 03, 2006

D. FastLane Requirements

Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this
announcement/solicitation through the FastLane system. Detailed instructions
for proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are 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
announcement/solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff
contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this announcement/solicitation.

Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized
Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal
Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II,
Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications).
The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five
working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Proposers
are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover
Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the
FastLane Website at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov

VI. PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION

A. NSF Proposal Review Process

Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise
in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These
reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the
review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at the time of
submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers. Care is taken
to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts
are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving
institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the
proposal.

The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating proposals
at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72). All NSF proposals are evaluated
through use of the two merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF
will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific
objectives of certain programs and activities.

On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127, Implementation
of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts
Criterion. This Important Notice reinforces the importance of addressing both
criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals submitted to NSF. NSF
continues to strengthen its internal processes to ensure that both of the
merit review criteria are addressed when making funding decisions.

In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January 2002
issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation guidelines
relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project Description.
Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators (PIs) must
address both merit review criteria in separate statements within the one-page
Project Summary. This chapter also reiterates that broader impacts resulting
from the proposed project must be addressed in the Project Description and
described as an integral part of the narrative.

Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do
not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project Summary.
It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and processing
guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of broader impacts to
NSF-funded projects.

The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed below
(see the Grant Proposal Guide Chapter III.A for further information). The
criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations
are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers
must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address
only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered
and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.

     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 the prior
     work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore
     creative and original concepts? How well conceived and organized is the
     proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?

     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?

NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making funding
decisions:

     Integration of Research and Education
     One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster
     integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and
     activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These
     institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may
     concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and
     students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education
     with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the
     diversity of learning perspectives.

     Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
     Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens
     -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with
     disabilities -- 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.

     Additional Review Criteria:

     In considering the above criteria, reviewers will be asked to comment on
     the following:

     Phase I Proposals:

        * Capacity and ability of the institution to effectively conduct the
          program
        * Number and quality of students that will be served by the program
        * Ability of the program to recruit STEM majors who would not
          otherwise pursue a career in teaching
        * Quality of the preservice educational program
        * Quality of the preservice student-support and new teacher-support
          infrastructure
        * Extent to which the proposed strategies reflect effective practices
          based on research
        * Degree to which the proposed programming will enable scholarship or
          stipend recipients to become successful mathematics and science
          teachers
        * Feasibility and completeness of an evaluation plan that will measure
          the effectiveness of the proposed strategies
        * Institutional support for the program and the extent to which the
          institution is committed to making the program a central
          organizational focus

     Phase II S&S Proposals:

        * Evidence that the previously funded project was consistent with the
          criteria listed above
        * Evidence of institution and school district support for continuing
          the project
        * Evidence that the project has recruited STEM majors who would not
          otherwise pursue a career in teaching
        * Evidence that a high quality new teacher support structure is in
          place
        * Demonstrated success of the previously funded project in terms of
          recruitment of STEM majors and/or STEM professionals into K12
          teaching and preparation to become effective teachers
        * Plans for advancing the work beyond the original project
        * Plans for conducting a longitudinal evaluation study of previous
          cohorts of Noyce Scholarship and/or stipend recipients as well as
          evaluation and monitoring of new cohorts to address teacher and
          student outcomes
        * Plans for disseminating results of the evaluation studies
        * Plans for sustainability

     Phase II M&E Proposals:

        * Evidence that the previously funded project was consistent with the
          criteria listed above for Phase I proposals
        * Plans for conducting a longitudinal evaluation study of previous
          cohorts of Noyce Scholarship and/or stipend recipients focusing on
          their effectiveness as teachers, their completion of the teaching
          requirement, and their retention in the teaching profession.
        * Plans for disseminating results of the evaluation studies.

B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard

All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside
NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal.
Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation will be
reviewed by Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or
decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's
review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a
recommendation.

A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by
each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents.
Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to
the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Director. In
addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or
decline funding.

NSF is striving to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been
declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval
begins on the closing date of an announcement/solicitation, or the date of
proposal receipt, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division
Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.

In all cases, 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.

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 Division 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.A. for additional
information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, 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 letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General
Conditions (NSF-GC-1); * or Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) Terms and
Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be
incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreement awards
are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and
Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC). Electronic mail notification is
the preferred way to transmit NSF awards to organizations that have electronic
mail capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of
Grants and Agreements.

Consistent with the requirements of OMB Circular A-16, Coordination of
Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities, and the Federal
Geographic Data Committee, all NSF awards that result in relevant geospatial
data must be submitted to Geospatial One-Stop in accordance with the
guidelines provided at: www.geodata.gov.

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions is contained in the NSF
Grant Policy Manual (GPM) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF
Website at http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpm. The GPM
is also for sale through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing
Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402. The telephone number at GPO for
subscription information is (202) 512-1800. The GPM may be ordered through the
GPO Website at http://www.gpo.gov/.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/. Paper copies of these documents may be
obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or
by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the
PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at
least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.

Within 90 days after the expiration of an award, the PI also is required to
submit a final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports
delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for the PI and all
Co-PIs. 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 FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project
reports. This system permits electronic submission and updating of project
reports, including information on project participants (individual and
organizational), activities and findings, publications, and other specific
products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information
previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the
electronic system.

VIII. CONTACTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

   * Joan T. Prival, Lead Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human
     Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703)
     292-4635, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: jprival@nsf.gov

   * Kathleen A. Parson, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human
     Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703)
     292-4653, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: kparson@nsf.gov

For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

   * Ms.Antoinette Allen, Computer Specialist, Division of Undergraduate
     Education, telephone: (703) 292-4646, email: duefl@nsf.gov

   * FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188, email: fastlane@nsf.gov

IX. OTHER PROGRAMS OF INTEREST

The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding for research and
education in science, mathematics, and engineering. The NSF Guide to Programs
is available electronically at http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. General
descriptions of NSF programs, research areas, and eligibility information for
proposal submission are provided in each chapter.

Many NSF programs offer announcements or solicitations concerning specific
proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these
requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices. Any changes in
NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to
Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, which is updated daily on
the NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov/home/ebulletin, and in individual
program announcements/solicitations. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's
MyNSF News Service (http://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/) to be notified of new funding
opportunities that become available.

Related Programs:

   * Teacher Professional Continuum (NSF 05-580)

ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds research and education in most
fields of science and engineering. Awardees are wholly responsible for
conducting their project activities and preparing the results for publication.
Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such findings or their
interpretation.

NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists, engineers and educators.
The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons with
disabilities to compete fully in its programs. In accordance with Federal
statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color,
age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from participation
in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF, although some
programs may have special requirements that limit eligibility.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED)
provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with
disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research
assistants) to work on NSF-supported projects. See the GPG Chapter II, Section
D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

   The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific
   progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and
   cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences,
   mathematics, and engineering.

   To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download
   copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the
   NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov

          * Location:                       4201 Wilson Blvd.
                                            Arlington, VA 22230
          * For General Information         (703) 292-5111
            (NSF Information Center):
          * TDD (for the hearing-impaired): (703) 292-5090

          * To Order Publications or Forms:

                Send an e-mail to:          pubs@nsf.gov

                   or telephone:            (703) 292-7827

          * To Locate NSF Employees:        (703) 292-5111

PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS

The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited
under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as
amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the
selection of qualified proposals; project reports submitted by awardees will
be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and
to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers
and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to applicant
institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review
process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government
contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to
complete assigned work; to other government agencies needing information as
part of the review process or in order to coordinate programs; and to another
Federal agency, court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding
if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be
added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as
peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50,
"Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal
Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and
Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). Submission of
the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete
information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to an information collection unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours
per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments
regarding this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne
Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Division of Administrative Services,
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230.

OMB control number: 3145-0058.

 Policies and Important Links |Privacy|FOIA|Help|Contact NSF|Contact Web Master|SiteMap

[National Science Foundation]The National Science Foundation, 4201         Last Updated:
                             Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia         06/09/05
                             22230, USA                                    Text Only
                             Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 |
                             TDD: (800) 281-8749
                                        [Image]