LSC - Hanford, WA 19–22 August 2002 The View from NSF GP Funding FY 2002 NSF Funding Prospects FY 2003 Funding Opportunities for GWP Some Areas of Special.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Advertisements

Restructuring of the Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC) Program Creating New Opportunities for Collaborations and Partnerships in.
Ed Seidel Assistant Director Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences National Science Foundation October 1, 2010.
EDD/581 Action Research Proposal
Peter Griffith and Megan McGroddy 4 th NACP All Investigators Meeting February 3, 2013 Expectations and Opportunities for NACP Investigators to Share and.
Dr. John E. Niederhuber Director, National Cancer Institute Board of Scientific Advisors June 22, 2009 NCI Director’s Update.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Construction Proposal Submission Gary Sanders LIGO Laboratory PAC 12 June 2002, Cambridge.
NSF Merit Review Criteria Revision Background. Established Spring 2010 Rationale: – More than 13 years since the last in-depth review and revision of.
LIGO- G W LIGO Update by Fred Raab Local Educators Network LIGO Hanford Observatory October 27, 2005.
Department of Energy Office of Science Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Dr. Robin Staffin Associate.
SDPI Competitive Grant Program Planning Meeting 1 IHS Diabetes Competitive Grant Program: Overview and Update Kelly Acton, MD, MPH, FACP Director, IHS.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Cost, Schedule and Management Gary H Sanders NSF Review of Advanced LIGO Caltech, June 11, 2003.
LIGO Outreach Award Livingston, Louisiana Observatory Request for authorization to commit funds in advance of receipt from NSF September 2005.
LIGO-G M Status of LIGO Barry Barish PAC Meeting Caltech 3-June-04 Upper limits on known pulsar ellipticities.
Overview of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program Office of Integrative Activities National Science.
NSF Office of Integrative Activities Major Research Instrumentation Program November 2007 Major Research Instrumentation EPSCoR PI Meeting November 6-9,
2012 ToolBox Grant Cycle. What is capacity building? “Capacity building is about strengthening management systems and governance in organizations.” Making.
Centers for International Business Education—Technical Assistance.
National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site Program.
Wetlands Reserve Program Case Study An Overview of the External Audit Process Helping People Help The Land.
LSC – Hanford, WA 11th November 2003 The View from NSF Funding: FY 03 (actual) & FY 04 (prospects) Funding Opportunities for GP Research Some Developments.
Interacting with Funding Agencies Whitaker Foundation August 15, 1998 Janie Fouke Case Western Reserve University.
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) Program Erica Brown, PhD Director, NIH AREA Program National Institutes of Health 1.
LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.
Fiscal Monitoring and Oversight Tecumseh Local School District January 8, 2013 Roger Hardin, Assistant Director Finance Program Services (614)
LSC – Hanford 16 th - 19 th August 2004 The View from NSF Changes in NSF leadership Funding Interagency Working Group response to Q2C Outreach - New $5M.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO MREFC (Construction) Proposal Submission Gary Sanders Caltech/LIGO November 2001.
Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF Key Issues Raised in Report Transparency of process (next slide) Involvement.
LSC/Virgo Meeting HannoverOctober 22, The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Officer +1 (703) Tom Carruthers LIGO.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
Introduction & NSF Overview NSF Tribal College Workshop November 14, 2008.
LIGO-G M Planning and Implementation Strategy for Advanced LIGO Gary Sanders LSC Meeting Hanford, August 14, 2001.
LIGO-G M Summary Remarks: Management of LIGO Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology NRC Committee on Organization and Management of Research.
LSC - Livingston, LA 20–23 Mar 2002 The View from NSF Funding prospects The LIGO/LSC Reviews MREFC for Advanced LIGO NSF Gravity Program Staff Source Simulations.
National Science Foundation Overview. Agenda Our Legacy: About NSF Our Work: Programs & The Merit Review Process Our Opportunities: Working at the NSF.
Congress created the NSF in 1950 as an independent federal agency. Budget ~$7.0 billion (2012) Funding for basic research.
Tom Carruthers The View from NSFLIGO-G Z November 11, LSC/Virgo March Meeting The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Director (703)
CARRUTHERS LSC 3/20/06 1 LIGO-G M The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Officer National Science Foundation (703)
Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Joseph F. Burt, Staff Associate Office of Integrative Activities National Science Foundation
Overview of NSF and the Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) Overview of NSF and the Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) Tom Brady Division.
1 Access to the World and Its Languages LRC Technical Assistance Workshop (Part 1) Access to the World and Its Languages I N T E R.
LIGO-G Z 8/14/2001LSF/Penn State Center for Gravitational Wave Physics Lee Samuel Finn Penn State University.
NOAA Cooperative Institutes John Cortinas, Ph.D. OAR Cooperative Institute Program, Program Manager NOAA Cooperative Institute Committee, Chairperson.
Funding Caroline Wardle Senior Science Advisor, CISE Directorate National Science Foundation
LIGO-G M Organization and Budget Gary Sanders NSF Operations Review Caltech, February 26, 2001.
LIGO-G Z LIGO at the start of continuous observation Prospects and Challenges Albert Lazzarini LIGO Scientific Collaboration Presentation at NSF.
1 GAO Reviews of Grants.gov The National Grants Partnership Webcast & Teleconference October 20, 2009 Jackie Nowicki, Assistant Director
LIGO-G M LIGO Status Gary Sanders GWIC Meeting Perth July 2001.
LIGO-G M Overview of LIGO R&D and Planning for Advanced LIGO Detectors Gary Sanders NSF R&D Review Caltech, January 29, 2001.
NSF Middleware Initiative Purpose To design, develop, deploy and support a set of reusable, expandable set of middleware functions and services that benefit.
National Science Foundation Congress and the National Science Foundation OLPA-1.
NASA Herschel Science Center - page 1 PACS NHSC Cycle 1 Open Time Proposal Planning Workshop 3-4 June 2010 ESA AO and NASA Funding Call Phil Appleton and.
LIGO-G M Overview of the LIGO Continuing Operations (FY FY2006) Proposal Gary Sanders LIGO PAC9 Meeting December 2000.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Construction Proposal Submission Gary Sanders LIGO Laboratory LSC Meeting August 2002, Hanford.
Communities of Practice & L ESSONS L EARNED Budget, Finance, and Award Management Large Facilities Office May 2016 Large Facilities Workshop 2016 S. Dillon.
LIGO-G M Managing LIGO: Lessons for a Collaboratory Gary Sanders LIGO/Caltech NEES Awardees Meeting NSF, December 19, 2001.
NSF Update October 2009 Jo Ann Smith, Ph.D. Research Development Office of Research & Commercialization.
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
LIGO at a Distance Dale Ingram on behalf of the LIGO Laboratory Public Outreach Team LIGO Hanford Observatory, Richland, WA
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
National Science Foundation Update
Template Guidelines Please use this template to create your LDRD presentation- we highly recommend that you address all aspects of the proposal as outlined.
Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund
C.E.G.O. China Einstein Gravitational wave Observatory
Stan Whitcomb LSC meeting Livingston 21 March 2005
LSC Council Meeting Peter Saulson.
National Quantum Initiative
Budget and Planning Update
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Presentation transcript:

LSC - Hanford, WA 19–22 August 2002 The View from NSF GP Funding FY 2002 NSF Funding Prospects FY 2003 Funding Opportunities for GWP Some Areas of Special Interest Beverly K. Berger and Tom Lucatorto LIGO-G M

NSFMPSPHYGP FY FY  8.4% 4.5%19% Funding 2002 Gravity Program fared much better than most PHY Programs Gravitational waves are predicted by Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. To date there has been no direct observation of gravitational waves. LIGO is designed to accomplish this and then to use gravitational waves to explore the most exotic structures in the universe. The technique used by LIGO to achieve this goal will be described by the LIGO Deputy Director and Construction Project Manager, Dr. Gary Sanders in the following talk. A $300M construction project requiring development of new technologies to meet a design sensitivity several orders of magnitude better than any yet achieved. MRE account created to protect single and few investigator research programs from being squeezed out of existence by the requirements of the much larger LIGO program. Budget ($M)

GP Detailed Distribution I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Most of the 11% initial Core base reduction, reported at March LSC Meeting, was restored to the GP base from PHY reserves Additional NSF Gravitational Research Funding in FY02: - Center for GW Physics (PFC) - Two GW source simulation projects (ITR) - LIGO participation in two ongoing Grid projects (ITR) PHY GPLIGO (Facility) LSC + Other (Core) FY2001$32.5M$21.8M$10.69M FY  $6.1M$6.2M$- 0.12M

FY in Process I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. President’s request submitted to Congress in January President’s budget has small increase for LIGO House Budget Authorization bill passed 397 to 25 NSFR&RAMPSPHY FY Presidential Request 5036 (5%) 3783 (5%) 942 (2%) (-2%) Senate (Markup) 5353 (12%) 4132 (15%) 1057 (15%) _

Funding Opportunities: 2003 Gravity Program I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Submission to “PHY Support for LIGO Research”* –Target date: September 25, 2002 –Proposals to LIGO Lab for review (with PI permission) –Presentation by PI or team to LIGO PAC –Independent NSF Review * Note on commissioning activities in proposals– Stress importance to LIGO success and creative aspects.

I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Information Technology Research (ITR) Program – Announcement due very soon Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program –Special opportunities for undergraduate and (possibly) minority serving institutions –PHY share depends on total amount requested in submissions to PHY Undergraduate institutions: RUI and ROA Programs Additional Funding Opportunities: Other Programs

Areas of Special Interest I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Anticipating Advanced LIGO LIGO Outreach development Identifying GWP opportunities in the ITR, MRI, and RUI Programs Encouraging National interest in NASA/NSF/DoE coordination in gravity research: - Joint NSF/NASA Task Group on GW Computation - Turner Report “From Quarks to the Cosmos”

NASA/NSF Cooperation on GW Computation I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Task group report has been made available to both agencies ( GW source simulations are regarded by both NASA and NSF as an important area for cooperation. Time scales and formats for actual cooperative programs are under consideration.

Turner Report Observes that: -“More that ever before, astronomical discoveries are driving the frontiers of physics, and more than ever before our knowledge of physics is driving the understanding of the universe and its contents. ” and recommends: - “the agencies [DoE, NASA & NSF] proceed with an advanced technology program to develop instruments capable of detecting GWs from the early universe”

Present Outlook NSF awaits proposal for Advanced LIGO President’s budget requests a decrease for PHY, but Congressional sentiment strongly supportive of large increases for NSF and for MPS LIGO Lab support will increase but amount depends on final budget.