1. The Review Process o What happens to your proposal o Two Review Criteria

2. Research & Education Communities Proposal Preparation Time Institution submits via FastLane or Grants.gov NSFNSF Div PO Staff Prog. Off. Anal. &. Recom. DD Concur Via DGA Organization MERIT REVIEW DGA Review & Processing of Award Proposal Receipt to Division Director Concurrence of Program Officer Recommendation NSF Announces Opportunity Mail Panel Both Award NSF Proposal & Award Process & Timeline Decline Returned Without Review/Withdrawn 90 Days6 Months 30 Days Proposal Receipt at NSF DD ConcurAward

3. Merit Review Criteria Criterion 1: What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? Creativity and originality of ideas Creativity and originality of ideas Qualifications of investigators Qualifications of investigators Access to resources Access to resources Established expertise or expert collaborations Established expertise or expert collaborations Criterion 2: What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? Potential to advance field (transformative) Potential to advance field (transformative) Participation of underrepresented groups Participation of underrepresented groups Benefits to society Benefits to society

4. NSF Panel Review (most research divisions) ٭Advisory panel ~ 6-20 people ٭Proposals receive at least 3 reviews ٭Each reviewer describes his/her views of the proposal to the rest of the panel ٭The panel as a whole then discusses proposal ٭The proposal is placed in funding recommendation category (e.g. Fund, Fund if Possible, Do not fund)

5. Preparing Competitive Proposal o Helpful tips o What to do if declined o How funding decisions are made

6. Tip #1. Do your homework Read the Program announcement/solicitation Read the Program announcement/solicitation  Understand goals, eligibility, requirements  Research or teaching? Become familiar with program Become familiar with program  Serve as a reviewer (ad hoc or on a panel)  Examine prior NSF awards in similar areas  Read successful proposals Talk with people: Talk with people:  Program Officers  Current or former “rotators”

7. Tip #2. Write well Start early (write and rewrite) Start early (write and rewrite) Get critiques from: Get critiques from:  Mentors/colleagues  Previous members of review panels Be aware of the scope: Be aware of the scope:  “Too ambitious” vs. “Too narrow” Be honest and up-front: Be honest and up-front:  Address issues instead of trying to hide them  Acknowledge possible experimental problems and have alternatives

8. Tip #2. Write well... Convince reviewers that your proposal is THE one to support. Convince reviewers that your proposal is THE one to support. Comments you want to hear…. Comments you want to hear….  “I wish I could be as productive and as creative as this PI”  “If you can fund only one proposal in this area, this is it!”  “Wow!”

9. Tip #2. Write well... Comments you do not want to see…. “Reading this proposal was a sheer torture.” “Reading this proposal was a sheer torture.” “This one puts me to sleep every night!” “This one puts me to sleep every night!” “My freshman students know better.” “My freshman students know better.” “This PI wants to mow an old lawn, without a problem, originality, or track record of winning races.” “This PI wants to mow an old lawn, without a problem, originality, or track record of winning races.” ”No way!” ”No way!”

10. Tip #3. Anticipate reviewer comments Do not assume reviewer knows what you are thinking Do not assume reviewer knows what you are thinking Simplify and streamline Simplify and streamline  Make sure you get your overall idea across! Pay attention to details: Pay attention to details:  Run “spell check” and proof-read  Prepare clear photos, graphs, etc.  Use allowed font size Be aware of reviewer fatigue Be aware of reviewer fatigue

11. If you have to resubmit... Stay calm! Stay calm!  Take ten… breaths, hours, days  Examine the criticisms carefully Contact your program director Contact your program director  Email, call, or visit  Find out how to improve proposal Include a ‘Response to Reviewer Comments’ section in the resubmission Include a ‘Response to Reviewer Comments’ section in the resubmission

12. How Funding Decisions are Made Program Director makes recommendations to the Division Director based on: ٭ Advice of the panel ٭ Budgetary constraints ٭ Other programmatic considerations – geographic distribution type of institution PI demographics potential high payoff

13. Some insights What determines funding chances? What determines funding chances?  Reviews  Panel discussion  NSF and Program Priorities Contact your program director Contact your program director  Cultures, practices, and funding priorities vary across NSF  e-mail, call, or visit  Volunteer to review proposals