Major Research Instrumentation Program (mri) Nsf09502
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ARCHIVED BY NSF 10-529
Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI)
PROGRAM SOLICITATION
NSF 09-502
REPLACES DOCUMENT(S):
NSF 08-503
National Science Foundation
Office of the Director
Office of Integrative Activities
Directorate for Biological Sciences
Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering
Directorate for Education & Human Resources
Directorate for Engineering
Directorate for Geosciences
Directorate for Mathematical & Physical Sciences
Directorate for Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences
Office of Polar Programs
Office of Cyberinfrastructure
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
January 22, 2009
Fourth Thursday in January, Annually Thereafter
REVISION NOTES
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) NSF 09-1 was issued on October 1
2008 and is effective for proposals submitted on or after January 5 2009. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in
NSF 09-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Proposers who opt to submit prior to
January 5th 2009 must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 09-1.
One of the most significant changes to the PAPPG is implementation of the mentoring provisions of the America
COMPETES Act. Each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include as a separate
section within the 15-page project description a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such
individuals. Proposals that do not include a separate section on mentoring activities within the Project Description will be
returned without review (see the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II.C.2.d for further information).
There have been a number of clarifications and updates, including the following:
A list of common issues that may result in a proposal being Returned without Review has been added (see below). PIs
are encouraged to look at this section carefully;
A revised checklist has been incorporated to highlight issues that are frequently encountered with MRI submissions
(Section V.B). PIs are encouraged to check this list carefully;
A specific template has been provided that must be used when including statements of collaboration (Section V.A).
Statements of collaboration beyond that specified, including letters of support/endorsement are not allowed and will be
removed;
Letters of Intent are no longer required (previously required for requests over $2 million).
Clarification of the definition of a “consortium” has been added, as has clarification on the role of consortia in placing
equipment at a facility of another Federal agency or one of their Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, or
FFRDCs (Section IV);
Clarification on the scope of the MRI program, in particular elements of a project that the MRI Program will not support, has
been added (Section II);
Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education[1]and non-degree granting organizations continue to be required to provide
30 percent cost-sharing. Effective FY 2009, cost-sharing for both acquisition and development proposals will be calculated
1
based on the total proposal project costs (Section V.B);
Proposals must meet administrative and technical requirements to be accepted by the MRI program. The following are
some key reasons for Return without Review:
Proposals describing activities that fall outside of the scope of those supported by the MRI program (Section II.A);
Proposals describing activities that fall outside of the scope of those supported by NSF (Section II.B);
Proposals that exceed an organization’s submission limit (Section IV);
Applicable proposals that do not adequately distinguish development efforts from acquisition or basic research efforts
(Section II.A);
Proposals that represent standard research projects that are appropriate for submission to regular NSF grants programs at
NSF (Section II.A);
Proposals to place an instrument at a facility of another Federal agency or one of their FFRDCs that are not submitted by
consortia (Section IV);
Proposals to place an instrument at a facility currently receiving funding through the NSF Major Research Equipment and
Facilities Construction (MREFC) account (Section IV);
Applicable proposals that do not indicate appropriate levels of cost-sharing (Line M of the budget in Fastlane), and that do
not contain required documentation demonstrating organizational commitment (Sections V.A and V.B);
Proposals that do not contain required supplemental documentation or that contain supplemental documentation other than
those required and/or encouraged by the MRI program (as prescribed in Section V.A) and by the Grant Proposal Guide
(GPG);
Proposals that do not conform to font, margin and page limitations;
Proposals that do not separately address the Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts review criteria in the Project Summary;
Proposals that do not contain a Management Plan in the Project Description (Section V.A);
Applicable proposals that do not contain Results from Prior MRI Support in the Project Description (Section V.A).
[1] Unless otherwise specified, the term “organization” refers to all categories of proposers. Universities and two- and four-year
colleges (including community colleges) are also referred to as institutions of higher education.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI)
Instrument Development and Acquisition
Synopsis of Program:
The Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI) serves to increase access to shared scientific and engineering
instruments for research and research training in our Nation's institutions of higher education, museums and
science centers, and non-profit organizations. This program especially seeks to improve the quality and expand the
scope of research and research training in science and engineering, by providing shared instrumentation that
fosters the integration of research and education in research-intensive learning environments. Development and
acquisition of research instrumentation for shared inter- and/or intra-organization use is encouraged, as are
development efforts that leverage the strengths of private sector partners as appropriate for the goals of the MRI
Program.
To accomplish these goals, the MRI program assists with the acquisition or development of shared research
instrumentation that is, in general, too costly and/or not appropriate for support through other NSF programs. For
the purposes of the MRI Program, proposals must be for either acquisition or development. Instruments are
expected to be operational for regular research use by the end of the award period. A key recommendation of a
2006 National Academies report on “Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities” (ARIF) was that the NSF
should expand the MRI program so that it includes “mid-scale” instrumentation whose capital costs are greater
than $2 million, but with costs that are not appropriate for NSF’s Major Research Equipment and Facilities
Construction account. The MRI program now accepts proposals requesting over $2 million in NSF support (to the
maximum request of $4 million) for the acquisition of a single instrument. For proposals requesting $2 million or
less, investigators may seek support for instrument development or for acquisition of a single instrument, a large
system of instruments, or multiple instruments that share a common or specific research focus.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Randy Phelps, Staff Associate, telephone: (703) 292-8040, email: rphelps@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
47.041 --- Engineering
47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
2
47.050 --- Geosciences
47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
47.074 --- Biological Sciences
47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
47.076 --- Education and Human Resources
47.078 --- Office of Polar Programs
47.079 --- Office of International Science and Engineering
47.080 --- Office of Cyberinfrastructure
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 235 including up to 8 "mid-scale" awards.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $115,000,000 (Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be competing for
about $115 million, pending availability of funds, in Fiscal Year 2009. Up to $20 million of these funds will be available for the
acquisition of single instruments costing between $2 million - $4 million, i.e., "mid-scale" instrumentation.)
Eligibility Information
Organization Limit:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
See instructions on Proposal Limits and Additional Eligibility Information
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Three (3) as described below.
1. To provide a balanced instrumentation award portfolio at diverse organizations, across varied research
topics, and that serves to train and support a broadly inclusive science and engineering workforce across
the entire nation, the MRI program requires that an organization may submit or be included as a funded
subawardee/subcontractor[2] in no more than three MRI proposals. No more than two proposal
submissions may be for instrument acquisition.
2. To promote instrumentation development, the MRI program continues to require that if an organization
submits or is included as a funded subawardee/subcontractor in three MRI proposals, at least one of the
three proposals must be for instrument development. NSF reserves the right to carefully examine
development proposals to ensure that they meet the requirements for this proposal type (Section II), and
that submission limits have not been exceeded.
Note: For the purposes of the MRI Program, proposals must be for either acquisition or
development. Please see Section II: Program Description, for information on characteristics of
acquisition and development proposals.
[2] An unfunded collaboration does not count against the submission limit.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Letters of Intent: Not Applicable
Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains information that supplements the standard NSF Proposal
and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: 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 Specialized. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further
information.
C. Due Dates
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
January 22, 2009
3
Fourth Thursday in January, Annually Thereafter
Proposal Review Information Criteria
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: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further
information.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Program Requirements
I. Introduction
II. Program Description
III. Award Information
IV. Eligibility Information
V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
D. FastLane Requirements
VI. NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
B. Review and Selection Process
VII. Award Administration Information
A. Notification of the Award
B. Award Conditions
C. Reporting Requirements
VIII. Agency Contacts
IX. Other Information
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Program Goals
The Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program serves to increase access to shared scientific and engineering
instruments for research and research training in our Nation's institutions of higher education, museums and
science centers, and not-for-profit organizations. This program especially seeks to improve the quality and expand
the scope of research and research training in science and engineering, by providing shared instrumentation that
fosters the integration of research and education in research-intensive learning environments. Development and
acquisition of research instrumentation for shared inter- and/or intra-organization use is encouraged, as are
development efforts that leverage the strengths of private sector partners as appropriate to the goals of the MRI
Program. The MRI Program is intended to assist with the acquisition or development of research instrumentation
that is, in general, too costly and/or not appropriate for support through other NSF programs. Instruments are
expected to be operational for regular research use by the end of the award period.
B. Recent History
In 2006, the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Advanced Research Instrumentation released a study,
entitled “Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities (ARIF)”
(http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11520), assessing the needs among academic and national
laboratory researchers for mid-scale instrumentation, and exploring how the federal funding agencies could best
meet these needs. One key recommendation was that NSF should increase the limit on the MRI Program in order
to support the acquisition of instrumentation with capital costs greater than $2 million but less than that appropriate
for NSF’s Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction account. The America COMPETES Act of 2007
directs NSF to increase the award limit for MRI to $4 million, and beginning in FY 2008, NSF increased the limit to
$4 million on MRI proposals for the acquisition of single instruments.
The same ARIF report noted a decline in instrumentation development efforts in academic settings. To foster
these types of efforts, NSF continues to require that if an organization submits or is included as a funded
4
subawardee/subcontractor[2] in three MRI proposals, at least one of the three proposals must be for instrument
development.
The America COMPETES Act of 2007 also directs NSF to require cost sharing in the MRI Program. Therefore,
effective FY 2008, NSF began requiring (and continues to require) cost sharing on all MRI proposals, for both
acquisition and development, from Ph.D.-granting institutions of higher education and non-degree granting
organizations. No waivers will be allowed. NSF does not require cost sharing from non-Ph.D. granting institutions
of higher education.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
A. General Information
1. MRI Program Purpose and Goals
The primary purpose of the MRI program is to facilitate scientific and engineering research and research
training through the acquisition or development of research instrumentation. Therefore, the MRI program
will not support the acquisition or development of instrumentation used primarily for standard science and
engineering courses, or for general purpose instrumentation that does not have a common or specific
research focus. Other uses of the instrumentation may serve to facilitate the broader impacts of the
project.
Proposals to the MRI program should conform to one or more of its goals:
Supporting the acquisition of major state-of-the-art instrumentation, thereby improving access to,
and increased use of, modern research and research training instrumentation by scientists,
engineers, and graduate and undergraduate students;
Fostering the development of the next generation of instrumentation, resulting in new instruments
that are more widely used, and/or open up new areas of research and research training;
Enabling academic departments, disciplinary and cross-disciplinary units, and multi-organization
collaborations to create well-equipped research environments that integrate research with
education;
Supporting the acquisition and development of instrumentation that contributes to, or takes
advantage of, existing investments in cyberinfrastructure, while avoiding duplication of services
already provisioned by NSF investments. Please consult the NSF document, “Cyberinfrastructure
Vision for the 21st Century”
(http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsf0728/index.jsp) for further information;
Promoting substantive and meaningful partnerships for instrument development between the
academic and private sectors. Such partnerships have the potential to build capacity for
instrument development in academic settings and to create new products with wide scientific and
commercial impact.
2. MRI Program Scope
The MRI program assists in the acquisition or development of major research instrumentation that is, in
general, too costly or not appropriate for support through other NSF programs. For the purposes of the
MRI Program, proposals must be either for acquisition or development.
The MRI program will NOT support proposal requests for:
General purpose equipment, including general purpose computers or assorted instruments that
do not share a common or specific research or research training focus;
Instrumentation used primarily for standard science and engineering courses. Other programs at
NSF (e.g., the Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement program) provide funding for the
development of exemplary courses and teaching practices, including instrumentation to support
such projects;
Renovation or modernization of research facilities, supporting equipment, and general purpose
platforms. The term “research facilities” refers to the bricks-and-mortar physical plant in which
sponsored or unsponsored research activities (including research training) takes place, including
routine sustaining infrastructure (e.g., standard electrical and plumbing systems, standard
computer networks, standard safety features), general purpose systems (e.g., HVAC and power
systems, toxic waste removal systems, telecommunications equipment), and supporting
equipment. The term “supporting equipment” refers to basic, durable components of a research
facility that are integral to its operation (e.g., clean rooms, fume hoods, elevators, laboratory
casework). The term “general purpose platform” refers to major fixed or non-fixed structures,
vehicles, and/or environments that host an instrument, but do not otherwise contribute directly to
data gathering.
Proposals requesting support that falls into these categories are considered to be
inappropriate for the MRI program.
a. Instrument Acquisition
The academic research enterprise relies on the availability of modern instrumentation,
much of which can be acquired with little/no modification from existing sources. MRI
acquisition proposals are characterized by a demonstrated need for the purchase or
upgrade of generally available, yet sophisticated, instruments with little or no
modification for shared use among a group of researchers. Acquisition proposals
5
requesting $2 million or less may be for a single instrument, a large system of
instruments, or multiple instruments that share a common or specific research focus.
The MRI program will consider requests for larger “mid-scale” (greater than $2 million
and less than or equal to $4 million) proposals for the acquisition of single instruments
only.
Acquisition proposals must meet these guidelines to be considered for the MRI
program.
b. Instrument Development
The academic research enterprise relies on new generations of sophisticated research
instrumentation and NSF encourages individual investigators, and teams of researchers,
to apply for instrument development support. Development proposals are characterized
by a demonstrated need for new or upgraded instruments that can provide enhanced or
potentially transformative use and performance, open up new areas of research and
research training, and/or have potential as commercial products. "Performance" may
include accuracy, reliability, resolving power, throughput speed, sample capacity,
flexibility of operation, breadth of application, user-friendliness, and/or new types of
measurement or information gathering. Development of instrumentation that takes
advantage of new opportunities enabled by investments in cyberinfrastructure is
encouraged. Development proposals must describe the added performance of the new
instrument and the expected impact on the broader research community. The MRI
Program does not consider the acquisition of individual pieces of equipment simply
combined in a new system, the mere purchase of an upgrade, or the development of
enabling technologies, devices or products to constitute instrument development. The
maximum request for instrument development remains at $2 million.
Development proposals must meet these guidelines to be considered for the MRI
program. NSF reserves the right to carefully examine development proposals to ensure
that submission limits have not been exceeded, and that the proposed development
program is not a standard research project that would otherwise be reviewed in the
individual investigator programs.
B. Eligible Fields of Science and Engineering
Proposals for instrumentation will be considered for NSF-supported fields of science, mathematics, and
engineering. Researchers using this instrumentation need not be supported by NSF or the Federal government.
The program will not provide support for instrumentation to be used in medical education (such as medical school
courses). Instrumentation intended for research with disease-related goals, including work on the etiology,
diagnosis or treatment of physical or mental disease, abnormality, or malfunction in human beings or animals, is
normally not supported. Instrumentation for research on animal models of such conditions or the development or
testing of drugs or other procedures for their treatment also is not eligible for support. However, instrumentation for
bioengineering research, with diagnosis- or treatment-related goals that applies engineering principles to problems
in biology and medicine, while also advancing engineering knowledge, is eligible for support. Instrumentation for
Bioengineering research to aid persons with disabilities also is eligible.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be competing for about $115 million in Fiscal Year 2009; up to $20
million of these funds will be available for "mid-scale" instrument acquisition, pending availability of funds.
The maximum request is $4 million for acquisition proposals or $2 million for development proposals. Acquisition proposals over $2
million must be for single instruments only. The minimum request is $100,000; proposals requesting less than that will be considered
only from non-Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education or from the disciplines of mathematical science or social, behavioral,
and economic science at any eligible organization.
Proposers may request an award period up to three years for acquisition proposals and up to five years for development proposals.
The anticipated earliest starting date is August 1st after submission.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Organization Limit:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
See instructions on Proposal Limits and Additional Eligibility Information
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Three (3) as described below.
1. To provide a balanced instrumentation award portfolio at diverse organizations, across varied research
topics, and that serves to train and support a broadly inclusive science and engineering workforce across
6
the entire nation, the MRI program requires that an organization may submit or be included as a funded
subawardee/subcontractor[2] in no more than three MRI proposals. No more than two proposal
submissions may be for instrument acquisition.
2. To promote instrumentation development, the MRI program continues to require that if an organization
submits or is included as a funded subawardee/subcontractor in three MRI proposals, at least one of the
three proposals must be for instrument development. NSF reserves the right to carefully examine
development proposals to ensure that they meet the requirements for this proposal type (Section II), and
that submission limits have not been exceeded.
Note: For the purposes of the MRI Program, proposals must be for either acquisition or
development. Please see Section II: Program Description, for information on characteristics of
acquisition and development proposals.
[2] An unfunded collaboration does not count against the submission limit.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Additional Eligibility Info:
Organizations that are eligible to submit proposals to NSF's MRI Program (“submission-eligible organizations”) are
divided into three categories: Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education, non-Ph.D. granting institutions of
higher education, and non-degree granting organizations. For the purposes of the MRI program:
1. Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education are academic institutions that have produced more than 20
Ph.D.s or D.Sci.s in all NSF-supported fields of science, mathematics or engineering during the combined
previous two academic years (please review NSF's Guide to Programs for NSF supported fields of
science, mathematics and engineering:
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/browse_all_funding.jsp).
2. Non-Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education (i.e., primarily bachelor and/or master degree granting
academic institutions) are two- and four- year colleges and universities that have produced 20 or fewer
Ph.D.s or D.Sci.s in all NSF-supported fields of science, mathematics, and engineering during the
combined previous two academic years.
3. Non-degree granting organizations are independent not-for-profit organizations, museums and science
centers, or consortia of organizations working in NSF-supported fields of science, mathematics, and
engineering.
MRI proposals may be submitted by the following:
1. US colleges, universities and institutions of higher education located in the US, its territories and
possessions. Distinct academic campuses (e.g., that award their own degrees, have independent
administrative structures, admissions policies, alumni associations, etc.) within multi-campus systems
qualify as separate institutions.
2. US independent museums and science centers located in the US, its territories and possessions. (These
organizations must have an independent administrative structure, e.g., an office of sponsored research.)
3. US independent not-for-profit organizations located in the US, its territories and possessions. (Such an
organization must have an independent administrative structure, e.g., an office of sponsored research,
and have 501(c)(3) tax status).
4. To facilitate access to unique instrumentation for a broad user base, and to encourage collaboration and
sharing of instrumentation, the MRI program has historically accepted proposals from consortia of
organizations. MRI consortium proposals may be submitted as follows:
4a. Legally incorporated not-for-profit consortia consisting of submission-eligible members may
submit proposals on behalf of the consortium. Such a consortium is one with an independent
administrative structure, e.g., an office of sponsored research, and 501(c)(3) status.
4b. Other consortia may submit MRI proposals through a submission-eligible consortium
member as described in items (1), (2) and (3) above. The cover sheet must clearly indicate the
consortium nature of the proposal in the title, and it must identify a PI and co-PI(s) from at least
2 submission-eligible consortium organizations (i.e., for a consortium acquisition proposal,
employees from 2 or more submission-eligible organizations must be identified as primary users;
for a consortium development proposal, employees from 2 or more submission-eligible
organizations must be active participants in the development effort). These proposals may also
include partners that are not otherwise eligible to submit MRI proposals (e.g., government labs
and US small businesses located in the US, its territories and possessions).
4c. The MRI program accepts proposals for instrumentation to be located at a facility of another
Federal agency or one of their Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs),
but only through a submission-eligible organization as a consortium proposal that includes the
facility/FFRDC as a non-lead partner. Such instruments must make unique contributions to the
needs of researchers elsewhere or establish access to new multi-user facilities. The current list
of FFRDCs can be found at:
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf05306/. Note: The MRI Program will not accept proposals to
place instruments at facilities receiving funding through the NSF Major Research Equipment and
Facilities Construction (MREFC) account.
5. US small businesses located in the US, its territories and possessions are eligible for instrument
development support as private sector partners with submitting organizations; they may not submit
proposals as a lead organization.
Prospective PIs may contact the cognizant MRI program officer regarding questions relating to
organizational eligibility, and for information on other NSF funding opportunities for
instrumentation (see also Section IX for a list of related NSF programs for research
7
instrumentation).
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Full Proposal Instructions: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in
accordance with the guidelines specified 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-PUBS (7827) or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.
___1. Cover Sheet:
Select this program solicitation number from the pull down list. Where asked to identify the NSF Unit of Consideration, select the
most appropriate Division within an NSF Directorate or the most appropriate Office to consider your proposal. "Major Research
Instrumentation" will be automatically selected as the program for your proposal. Selection of more than one unit for consideration is
encouraged for multi-/cross-/trans-disciplinary efforts (PIs are especially encouraged to submit a list of suggested reviewers, as a
Single -Copy Document, for these types of proposals – see the GPG for additional information).
The project title must convey the primary purpose of the proposal, e.g., "MRI: Acquisition of ____", or "MRI: Development of ____".
Consortium project titles must also be identified in the title: "MRI-Consortium: Acquisition of ___", or "MRI-Consortium:
Development of ___".
NSF applications identify only a single PI and up to four co-PIs with those titles. For the purposes of the MRI program any other
major participants may be indicated as “senior personnel”, and they should be listed in the Proposal Budget, even if receiving no
support.
___2. Project Summary (maximum length, 1 page). Describe the proposed major research instrumentation, the type of research
and/or research training it will enable, and the activities that would result if NSF funds the project. Proposals that do not separately
address both merit review criteria (intellectual merit and broader impacts) within the one-page Project Summary will be returned
without review.
___3. Project Description (maximum length, 15 pages, including all figures and charts). The project description must include
subsections (a)-(d), and address the intellectual merits and broader impacts of the proposed effort. Suggested lengths for individual
subsections are provided for guidance only.
a. Research Activities (suggested length: 9 pages for instrument acquisition; 4 pages for instrument development). Describe the
research and research training activities and projects that will be enabled with the desired instrumentation, and any sources that will
support those activities and projects. In narrative or tabular form describe the personnel by research area, number, and type (e.g.,
senior personnel, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, undergraduate students). Include only those who will most actively use
the instrumentation for research and research training on a regular basis. Other more minor users of the instrument, when
applicable, should be described in a more condensed format.
This section must include Results from Prior NSF MRI Support if the PI or any of the co-PIs (i.e., personnel listed on the Cover
Sheet) have participated in an NSF MRI award as a PI within the past five-year period. This section also should include information
on the operations and maintenance, downtime and usage history on the previously funded instrument. Standard GPG reporting
requirements for Results from Prior NSF Support should be followed if the PI or co-PIs have not participated as a PI in an NSF MRI
award within the past five-year period, with preference given to a discussion of any instrumentation awards.
b. Description of the Research Instrumentation and Needs (Suggested length: 2 pages for instrument acquisition; 6 pages for
instrument development).
Indicate in a single sentence the physical location of the proposed instrumentation.
Acquisition proposals should include a technical description of the requested instrumentation, including manufacturer and model
number where appropriate. The description of needs should be comprehensive enough to allow reviewers to evaluate the extent to
which the equipment is essential and appropriate. The proposal should clearly explain why the requested equipment is needed given
similar and/or related instrumentation at or near the performing organization. The existence nearby, and availability of comparable
instrumentation should be outlined in the Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources - see Section 8 below.
For development proposals, present the rationale for the new instrumentation, the design concept, and the development strategy and
methods in sufficient detail to allow for the evaluation of its technical feasibility. Reviewers must be able to evaluate the expected
capabilities of the instrument upon completion, and its likely availability for shared use at the end of the award period. Provide
appropriate preliminary results from existing equipment, or appropriate calculations and/or models to indicate the added utility or
enhanced performance (e.g., sensitivity, capacity, stability, resolution, or signal-to-noise ratio) to be achieved by the new instrument.
Justify the necessity and adequacy of the new instrumentation for the proposed research projects, with reference to instruments that
are currently available.
c. Impact on Research and Training Infrastructure (suggested length: 2 pages). Describe how the instrumentation will contribute to
meeting the research and research training goals and capabilities of the participating organizations (and the Nation as appropriate).
For example, indicate how the instrumentation will attract researchers and students, particularly underrepresented groups and women
pursuing advanced degrees in science and engineering, and improve the quality of research training. Discuss the potential impact of
the instrument on the academic research infrastructure goals of the participating organizations. Describe how students will be
involved and how their education will be enhanced by their involvement in the planned efforts. Any proposal requesting direct
student support in operations and maintenance or development efforts must justify that involvement in terms of both project needs
and training the next generation of instrumentalists – reviewers will be asked to evaluate the appropriateness of this type of
involvement. If the instrument will be physically located at other than the performing organization, this section must clearly identify
and explain the need for an alternate location.
Proposals seeking to acquire “mid-scale” (greater than $2 million and less than or equal to $4 million) instruments must address the
potential impact of the instrument at both the National level and on the research community of interest, by presenting concrete plans
8
for enabling access by external users (including those from non-Ph.D. and/or minority-serving institutions), and by describing the
uniqueness of the requested instrumentation.
d. Management Plan (suggested length: 2 pages for instrument acquisition; 3 pages for instrument development). To be considered
by the MRI program, all proposals must include a management plan, as outlined below.
Instrument acquisition proposals. Given the relatively high operation and maintenance costs of major research instrumentation,
investigators seeking support for such instrumentation must provide detailed business and management plans with information on
space, technical staffing for operation, maintenance and training of users, access for external users, and the sources of funding and
plans for long-term operation and maintenance, i.e.:
Describe the facility in which the instrument will be placed. Specify the organization’s commitment regarding its housing,
and the plans associated with instrument maintenance and operations (both during the award period and longer-term).
Specify how and by whom the requested instrumentation will be operated. Any proposal requesting direct student
involvement in operations and maintenance must justify both the need and appropriateness of this type of involvement.
Describe the anticipated costs and the technical expertise needed to maintain and operate the instrument. If the expertise is
not currently available, describe how it will be obtained.
Describe procedures for allocating the instrument time, if appropriate, and describe plans for attracting and supporting new
users. Include information on usage and downtime.
Sufficient detail should be given to enable reviewers to evaluate whether the project includes appropriate technical expertise and
infrastructure to allow effective usage of the instrument by the end of the award period, as well as facilitate multi-user accessibility.
Instrument development proposals. Given the often complex nature of instrument development efforts, investigators seeking
support for such instrumentation must provide detailed management plans for the design, construction and commissioning phases of
the project, including discussion of required personnel and anticipated costs in each phase of the project, risk mitigation, and
knowledge transfer upon completion, i.e.:
Describe the design, construction and commissioning phases of the project, including the work breakdown schedule of the
project activities (i.e., activities broken into tasks). Include a description of parts and materials, the estimated deliverables,
associated timelines and the anticipated cost of each activity.
Describe the technical expertise that is needed, and that will be available, to execute each activity. Describe the
organization of the project staff and methods of assessing performance. For each member of the team, include a
description of the responsibilities and explain why a given position is necessary for the completion of the design and
construction of the new instrument.
Assess the risks associated with each activity and describe potential methods for mitigating the risks, and for re-analyzing
and modifying the project plan to keep it within scope, schedule and budget.
Include plans for making the instrument design readily available to other researchers, for example by means of publications,
by transferring the technology to other U.S. academic, industrial, or government laboratories, and/or by commercializing the
instrument.
Sufficient detail should be provided to allow reviewers to analyze the cost and likely success of the development effort.
___4. References Cited. The format must follow the guidelines as given in the GPG.
___5. Biographical Sketches. The proposal must include two-page biographical sketches of the PI and any Co-PI(s) (i.e., those
personnel listed on the cover sheet), as well as any designated senior personnel (see Section V.A.1) who are major
users/developers of the relevant research instrumentation. If applicable, also provide a separate biographical sketch of the individual
responsible for the management of the instrument. These are the only Biographical Sketches that are allowed. The format for
biographical sketches must follow the guidelines as given in the GPG.
___6. Budget and Budget Justification. Provide yearly and cumulative budget pages, listing those eligible project costs that NSF is
being asked to fund. The total requested amount represents NSF's contribution to the project and does not include the
organization's cost sharing (when applicable). All budget requests (particularly those for operations and maintenance in acquisition
proposals and personnel support in development proposals) must be well-justified and commensurate with the scale and complexity
of the instrumentation and/or development effort. Cost-sharing, when required, should be shown explicitly in the proposal budget
pages. The budget justification, which must not exceed three pages, should itemize and explain all eligible project costs, assigning
each to either the NSF request or the organization’s cost-sharing, and explaining the basis for all cost estimates. Specify the
sources and amounts of eligible cost-sharing funds (see Section V.B below for further information on cost-sharing) and a projection
of when they will be available. Note that cost-sharing, when applicable, must occur during the award period.
___7. Current and Pending Support. Provide a listing for only the PI and Co-PIs (i.e., those listed on the cover sheet), as well as
designated senior personnel (see Section V.A.1).
___8. Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources. Provide a listing of similar and/or related instrumentation at or near the
performing organization as “Other Resources”.
___9. Supplementary Documents.
Required:
a. Provide a statement from the sponsored research office classifying the performing organization as either non-Ph.D. granting,
Ph.D. granting, or non-degree granting (as defined in Section IV).
b. If the proposal involves organizations other than the submitting organization, list all partners.
c. For proposals that include subawards/subcontracts, a statement from those sponsored research offices, acknowledging that this
proposal is included in their submission limit, must be included. Otherwise, an organization may exceed its submission limit, with
the result that the proposal including the subaward/subcontract will be returned without review.
d. A letter (one-page maximum) documenting the organization’s commitment for required cost-sharing, if applicable, must be
included.
e. When applicable: If a proposed effort involves a private sector partner, a statement, confirming the collaboration (as described
9
only within the proposal itself) must be included. See the format for collaboration statements below.
Encouraged:
a. Include relevant, itemized vendor quotes.
b. Include a letter (one-page maximum) documenting the organization’s commitment for operation and maintenance.
c. Statements from individuals confirming substantive collaboration efforts and/or usage of the instrument should be submitted, but
they must follow only the format indicated below.
_______________________________________________________________________
To: NSF MRI Coordinator
By signing below I acknowledge that I am listed as a collaborator and/or instrument user on this MRI proposal, entitled
“_____ proposal title_______”, with _______PI name______ as the Principal Investigator. I agree to perform the tasks assigned to
me, as described in the proposal, and I commit to provide or make available the resources therein designated to me.
Signed: _______________________
Date: _________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
The proposal body itself should document the nature and need for a collaboration, and/or describe the users and their need for the
instrument. Statements of collaboration beyond that specified below, including letters of support/endorsement, are not allowed. Each
statement must be signed by the designated collaborator/user. Any letters of collaboration that deviate from this phrasing will be
removed from the proposal. Requests to collaborators for statements should be made by the PI well in advance of the proposal
submission deadline, since they must be included at the time of the proposal submission.
Not Allowed:
a. Statements of collaboration beyond that specified above, including letters of support/endorsement, are not allowed.
b. Impact Statements and Eligibility Statements from the NSF “Research in Undergraduate Institutions” (RUI) program are not
allowed (the certification statement indicating the type of performing organization, as defined by the MRI program, is instead required
for the MRI Program).
c. Documentation that refers to other proposals being submitted by an organization (e.g., letters indicating which projects were
selected through an internal competition) are not allowed.
d. All other documentation not specifically required or encouraged above.
___10. List of Suggested Reviewers (optional). Proposers are encouraged to submit a list of suggested reviewers (including
affiliation) whom they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal as a "Single-Copy Document" - this is especially
encouraged for multi/inter/trans-disciplinary proposals. Proposers may also list persons they would prefer not review the proposal,
indicating why.
NOTES:
1. Proposals containing items other than those required (or encouraged) above, and/or by the Grant Proposal Guide, may
be returned without review.
2. The following information applies only for those MRI proposals that will be reviewed in the Office of Polar Programs:
The Office of Polar Programs (OPP) strongly encourages MRI proposals related to all aspects of polar research supported by the
Foundation. For any proposals requiring access to the polar regions, investigators must contact appropriate OPP Science Program
Officers (http://www.nsf.gov/staff/staff_list.jsp?org=OPP&from_org=OPP) for guidance about submitting information needed to
assess logistical support requirements (if any); this (in coordination with the cognizant MRI program officer to ensure MRI
compliance) should be done during the proposal development. Before submitting proposals requiring field support in the Arctic
contact Patrick Haggerty (703-292-9082; phaggert@nsf.gov); for the Antarctic - Alexandra Isern (703-292-9080; aisern@nsf.gov).
Proposers are reminded to identify the MRI Program Solicitation Number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet.
Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing and review guidelines. Failure to submit
this information may delay processing.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program solicitation number (NSF 09-502) in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover
Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant
proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: The proposed cost sharing must be shown on Line M on the proposal budget. Documentation of the availability of
cost sharing must be included in the proposal. Only items which would be allowable under the applicable cost principles, if charged
to the project, may be included as the awardee's contribution to cost sharing. Contributions may be made from any non-Federal
source, including non-Federal grants or contracts, and may be cash or in-kind (see OMB Circular A-110, Section 23). It should be
noted that contributions counted as cost-sharing toward projects of another Federal agency may not be counted towards meeting
the specific cost-sharing requirements of the NSF award. All cost-sharing amounts are subject to audit. Failure to provide the level
of cost-sharing reflected in the approved award budget may result in termination of the NSF award, disallowance of award costs
and/or refund of award funds to NSF.
a. General Information: Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education and non-degree granting organizations are required to
provide 30 percent cost-sharing. No exceptions will be made. Cost-sharing is not required on proposals from non-Ph.D. granting
institutions of higher education.
10
b. Calculating Cost-share Amounts
The following sections explain how to calculate the cost-sharing requirements for your MRI proposal, how to enter your cost-sharing
amount and requested amount in the proposal budget, and what costs may be included in your cost-sharing.
Effective FY 2009, for both acquisition and development proposals, Ph.D. granting institutions of higher education and non-degree
granting organizations are required to cost share at a level of 30% of the total proposal project cost. Non-Ph.D. granting institutions
of higher education are not required to cost-share. To calculate cost sharing:
Add all eligible project costs (see Section V.B above) reflected in your proposal to determine the total proposal project
cost. This total includes the amount requested of NSF and any proposed cost-sharing, if applicable.
Calculate 30 percent of your total proposal project cost. This is the cost-share amount. This is the amount to be shown on
Line M of the proposal budget in Fastlane.
For Fastlane, all proposal budget entries in the column titled "Funds Requested by Proposer", and summed on Line L, will
account for 70 percent of the total proposal project cost, reflecting only those costs that are requested from NSF.
The total proposal project cost is reflected in the sum of Line L and Line M on FastLane budget.
Note: Manufacturers' discounts are strongly encouraged for reducing project cost but they may not be designated as cost sharing.
Other Budgetary Limitations:
Eligible Project Costs
The amount of the NSF request should be based on the net price of the instrumentation, including all academic discounts and other
special purchase arrangements.
a. Acquisition proposals: Eligible project costs are limited to instrument purchase, installation, commissioning, and calibration, and
the direct and indirect costs of operation, maintenance, and other appropriate technical support during the award period. Salary
support, including fringe benefits and indirect costs, is allowed only for personnel directly involved in the operation and maintenance
of the instrument. Any proposal requesting direct student support in operations and maintenance must justify the involvement in
terms of both instrument needs and training the next generation of instrumentalists – reviewers will be asked to evaluate the
appropriateness of this type of involvement. Training costs that are directly related to proper operations and maintenance are
eligible, but expenses associated with the training of users are not allowed. Support for research to be conducted with the
instrument, outreach, and publication costs are not allowed, nor is travel associated with conferences and/or collaborations.
b. Development proposals: Eligible project costs are limited to parts and materials needed for the construction of the instrument,
commissioning costs (including relevant operations and maintenance expenses), as well as the direct and indirect costs associated
with support of personnel engaged strictly in the instrument development effort. Requests for personnel support must include a
description of the responsibilities of the project co-workers and explain why a given position is necessary for the completion of the
design, construction and commissioning of the new instrument. Any proposal requesting direct student support in development
efforts must justify the involvement in terms of both project needs and training the next generation of instrumentalists – reviewers will
be asked to evaluate the appropriateness of this type of involvement. Sufficient detail should be given to allow reviewers to analyze
the cost of the new technology. Support for research to be conducted using the instrument after development, along with operations
and maintenance, is not allowed. Travel costs that are integral to the development work are eligible expenses, but travel associated
with conferences and training is not allowed.
Checklist
____ Is the subject matter appropriate for the MRI program? Refer to Section II.A for General Information on the MRI Program.
____ Is the subject matter appropriate for NSF? Refer to Section II.B: Eligible Fields of Science and Engineering.
____ Is the performing organization adhering to the three proposal limit? If the organization participates as a lead or
subawardee/subcontractor on three proposals, is at least one a development proposal? Refer to Section IV.
____ Are font sizes and margins consistent with the Grant Proposal Guide?
____ Cover Sheet: Is the proposal properly identified as “MRI:Acquisition”, “MRI:Development”, “MRI-Consortium:Acquisition”, or
“MRI-Consortium:Development” on the Cover Sheet? If the instrument is to be placed at a facility of another Federal agency or
one of their FFRDCs, has the proposal been properly structured and identified as a Consortium proposal? Refer to Section V.A:
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions.
____ Project Summary. Is the Project Summary 1 page or less in length, and does it separately address both Intellectual Merit and
Broader Impacts? Refer to Section V.A: Full Proposal Preparation Instructions.
____ Project Description: Is the Project Description 15 pages or less in length, and does it also address both Intellectual Merit and
Broader Impacts? Are Results from Prior MRI Support, if applicable, properly addressed? Has the location of the instrument been
identified and explained? Has an adequate management plan been included in a separate section? Refer to Section V.A: Full
Proposal Preparation Instructions.
____ Budget: Are all of the items in the budget eligible costs (Refer to Section V.B on Budgetary Information)? Is the magnitude of
the budget request consistent with the solicitation and the proposed project? If the budget is greater than $2 million (and less than
or equal to $4 million) is this a request for the acquisition of a single instrument? Is a subaward/subcontract included as part of the
proposal? If yes, has the amount of the subaward/subcontract been included in the Budget Pages, and has a separate
subaward/subcontract budget been included? Is there a statement from the subawardee/subcontractor sponsored research office
certifying that this proposal is included in the organization’s proposal limit?
____ Is cost-sharing required? If yes, is there a letter (one-page maximum) of commitment from the organization, included in the
supplemental documentation, confirming the source and availability of funds? Is the amount of the cost-sharing listed on the Budget
Pages in FastLane?
____ Supplemental Documents: Is the format of any supplemental documentation followed? Has all required supplemental
documentation been included? Is there a statement indicating the type of performing organization (Ph.D.-granting institution of
higher education, non Ph.D.-granting institution of higher education, or non degree-granting organization)? Have all
subawardees/subcontractors (if applicable) included statements acknowledging that this proposal is included in their submission
limit? Has any unallowed documentation been included? Refer to Section V.A: Proposal Preparation Instructions.
C. Due Dates
11
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
January 22, 2009
Fourth Thursday in January, Annually Thereafter
D. FastLane Requirements
Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this program solicitation through use of the NSF FastLane system.
Detailed instructions regarding the technical aspects of proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at:
http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail
fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific
questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this
funding opportunity.
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. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at:
https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal
preparation requirements. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program
Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal.
These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to
suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not
review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's
discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with
the proposal.
A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual
merit and the broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to
highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below. 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 the
reviewer is qualified to make judgements.
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, original, or potentially transformative 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?
Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are available electronically on the NSF website at:
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf.
NSF staff also 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 addition to the evaluation criteria stated above, MRI Program reviewers will assess the following:
12
Instrument Acquisition Proposals.
The extent of shared use of the instrumentation for research and/or research training.
Whether the management plan includes sufficient infrastructure and technical expertise to allow effective usage of
the instrument; and provides the organization’s commitments for operations and maintenance.
Whether the request for operations and maintenance is justified and reasonable in magnitude. If direct support for
student involvement in operations and maintenance is requested, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the
involvement in terms of both instrument needs and training the next generation of instrumentalists.
Plans for using the new or enhanced research capability in teaching, training or learning.
In addition, for mid-scale instrument acquisition proposals: the impact of the instrumentation at the state or national
level, and the detailed plans for funding of operation and maintenance.
Instrument Development Proposals:
The adequacy of the management plan. Does the plan have a realistic, detailed schedule? Are mechanisms in
place to deal with potential risks?
The availability of appropriate technical expertise to design and construct the instrument. If direct support for
student involvement in development efforts is requested, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the involvement in
terms of both project needs and training the next generation of instrumentalists.
The appropriateness of the cost of the new technology.
The need for development of a new instrument. Will the proposed instrument enable enhanced performance over
existing instruments, or new types of measurement or information gathering? Is there a strong need for the new
instrument in the larger user community?
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or 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.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to
the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell
applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on
the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program
Officer's 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 Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or
decline funding.
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 administering
the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal
Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)
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 (GC-1); * or Research Terms and Conditions *
and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative
agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and
Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF
Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications
Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is
contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
13
C. Reporting Requirements
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project
report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards
require more frequent project reports). Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project
report.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments
as well as any pending proposals for that PI. 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. Such reports provide information on activities and findings, project participants (individual and
organizational) 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. Submission of the report via FastLane constitutes
certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete.
The following topics should be addressed in all MRI annual and final project reports:
For Instrument Acquisition Proposals
Status of order, delivery, and installation;
Brief description of research projects that were enabled by the instrument;
Number of students with hands-on experience, to include demographic information (indicate undergraduate or graduate,
gender, ethnicity/race, disability, major). Note: provide percentages for demographic data; do NOT identify specific students
by ethnicity, race or disability status;
A list of the research groups granted access and the titles of the research and institutional affiliation, to include both on-
campus and outside users;
Data on usage and downtime;
A short description of the management plan, noting deviations from the plan as described in the proposal;
Changes in sources and/or scheduling of cost-sharing;
Description of setbacks and resulting change of plans; and
Information on broader impacts activities to date.
For Instrument Development Proposals
Status of development effort to date;
Number of student participants, to include demographic information (indicate undergraduate or graduate, gender,
ethnicity/race, disability, major). Note: provide percentages for demographic data; do NOT identify specific students by
ethnicity, race or disability status;
Information on broader impacts activities to date;
New industrial partnerships;
Technology transfer (e.g., design and/or instrument);
A short description of the management plan, noting deviations from the plan as described in the proposal;
Changes in sources and/or scheduling of cost-sharing;
Description of setbacks and resulting change of plans; and
Modifications in timeline.
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
Randy Phelps, Staff Associate, telephone: (703) 292-8040, email: rphelps@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail: fastlane@nsf.gov.
Additional contact information for NSF's Major Research Instrumentation Program is as follows:
Office of Integrative Activities
Major Research Instrumentation Program
National Science Foundation, Room 1270
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
(703) 292-8040
E-Mail: mri@nsf.gov
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information),
programs and funding opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, MyNSF (formerly
the Custom News Service) is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties
apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and
upcoming NSF Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new
publications are issued that match their identified interests. MyNSF also is available on NSF's Website at http://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/.
14
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding
opportunities may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at
http://www.grants.gov.
RELATED NSF PROGRAMS FOR RESEARCH INSTRUMENTATION
Program Title
Brochure
BIO: Improvements in Facilities, Communications, and
Equipment at Biological Field Stations and Marine
NSF 05-550
Laboratories (FSML)
BIO: Instrument Development for Biological Research
(IDBR)
NSF 08-566
CISE/CNS: Computing Research Infrastructure (CRI)
NSF 08-570
ENG: Small Business Innovation Research and Small
Business Technology Transfer Programs Phase I
NSF 08-548
(SBIR/STTR)
GEO/ATM: Atmospheric Sciences Mid-Size Infrastructure
Opportunity
NSF 07-602
GEO/ATM: Graduate Student and Optical Instrumentation
Support Related to the Advanced Modular Incoherent
NSF 05-564
Scatter Radar (AMISR)
GEO/EAR: Earth Sciences: Instrumentation and Facilities
(EAR/IF)
NSF 07-553
GEO/OCE: Oceanographic Centers and Facilities:
Oceanographic Instrumentation
NSF PD 98-5410
GEO/OCE: Oceanographic Technology and
Interdisciplinary Coordination Program (OTIC)
NSF PD 98-1680
MPS/AST: Advanced Technologies and Instrumentation No Publication
(ATI)
Number
MPS/CHE: Chemistry Research Instrumentation and
Facilities: Departmental Multi-User Instrumentation
NSF 08-539
(CRIF:MU)
MPS/CHE: Chemistry Research Instrumentation and
Facilities: Instrumentation Development (CRIF:ID)
NSF 04-534
MPS/CHE: Chemistry Research Instrumentation and
Facilities: Cyberinfrastructure and Research Facilities
NSF 08-504
(CRIF:CRF)
MPS/DMR: Instrumentation for Materials Research
NSF 07-600
MPS/DMR: Instrumentation for Materials Research -
Major Instrumentation Projects (IMR-MIP)
NSF 05-513
MPS/DMS: Scientific Computing Research Environment
for the Mathematical Sciences (SCREMS)
NSF 07-502
Crosscutting: Cyberinfrastructure for Environmental
Observatories: Prototype Systems to Address Cross-
NSF 06-505
Cutting Needs (CEO:P)
Crosscutting: High Performance Computing System
Acquisition: Towards a Petascale Computing
NSF 08-573
Environment for Science and Engineering
ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950,
as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the
national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements
to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research
organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic
research.
NSF receives approximately 40,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately
11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The
agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels
and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US
participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable
persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions
regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS)
capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment
or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
15
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.
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;
and 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 proposer 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 or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a
joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; 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," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and
NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records, " 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). 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 Office of Management and Budget (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 the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
Policies and Important Links
|
Privacy
|
FOIA
|
Help
|
Contact NSF
|
Contact Web Master
|
SiteMap
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA
Last Updated:
Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 | TDD: (800) 281-8749
11/07/06
Text Only
16
Document Outline
- Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI)
- I. Introduction
- II. Program Description
- III. Award Information
- IV. Eligibility Information
- V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
- A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
- B. Budgetary Information
- C. Due Dates
- D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
- VI. NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
- A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
- B. Review and Selection Process
- VII. Award Administration Information
- A. Notification of the Award
- B. Award Conditions
- C. Reporting Requirements
- VIII.Agency Contacts
- IX. Other Information
