Jump to:
Starting your NSF Proposal
The National Science Foundation (NSF) uses Research.gov, a web-based system used for information exchange and business transactions between NSF and its client community. All NSF principal investigators and administrators must use Research.gov to prepare and submit proposals.
If you have questions about how to register with NSF, look up your existing NSF ID, or retrieve a forgotten password, or if you would like assistance starting a proposal, please reach out to Quinn Arnold in the Grants Office.
Proposal preparation
PAPPG (NSF 23-1) went into effect in January 2023 and provides detailed instructions for each proposal requirement. If any specifics given in an individual program solicitation differ from the PAPPG, always defer to the program solicitation instructions.
To start a proposal, navigate to Research.gov and access the About Proposal Preparation and Submission page, which provides written instructions for initiating a new proposal. Research.gov also includes a Proposal Preparation Demo Site (see Demo Site FAQs in the sidebar menu for more information).
Formatting particulars
See Proposal Font, Spacing and Margin Requirements.
- Approved fonts
- Arial (not Arial Narrow), Courier New, or Palatino Linotype at a font size of 10 points or larger;
- Times New Roman at a font size of 11 points or larger;
- Computer Modern family of fonts at a font size of 11 points or larger.
- Exception: a font size of less than 10 points may be used for mathematical formulas or equations, figures, tables, diagram captions, or special characters. Other fonts, such as Cambria Math, may be used for mathematical formulas, equations, or when inserting Greek letters or special characters. The key is to keep all text easily readable.
- Margins
- Must be at least one inch in all directions. No information should be included in headers or footers of the page.
- Line Spacing
- No more than six lines of text may appear within one vertical inch.
Components of an NSF proposal
Required pieces
A full research proposal must contain the following:
- Cover Sheet
- A form within Research.gov where you will indicate the program announcement/solicitation number, project title and duration, and PI/co-PI information. See more at PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.a. Cover Sheet.
- Project Summary
- A 1-page summary, outlining the Overview, Intellectual Merit, and Broader Impacts of the proposed project. Each of these three section headings, with no other text, must have its own line in the summary. See details in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.b. Project Summary.
- Project Description
- The project narrative (usually limited to 15 pages), should provide a clear statement of the proposed work and addresses the program announcement specifications. Describe what you want to do, why you want to do it, how you plan to do it, how you will know if you succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. Note that URLs and hyperlinks are not permitted, and that this document must include a “Broader Impacts” section as well as a “Results from Prior NSF Support” section when applicable. Tables, figures, charts, and the like are encouraged but must fit within the page limit. See details in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d. Project Description.
- References Cited
- There is no page limit for the list of bibliographic citations in the project description. Each reference should provide the name of all authors (do NOT use et al), the publication title, publication information such as publication year and site and/or periodical volume number and page numbers, and website address if the publication is available electronically. See details in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.e. References Cited.
- Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources
- An aggregated narrative (with no page limit) describing internal and external resources (both physical and personnel) that Carleton and its collaborators will provide to the project. This must not include any quantifiable financial information. See details in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.g. Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources.
- Budget and Budget Justification
- The budget includes specific sections (refer to PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.f. Budget and Budget Justification). Amounts for each requested line item must be documented in the budget justification (limited to 5 pages); items and amounts need to be considered necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable.
- PSC refers to direct costs (such as stipends, or subsistence or travel allowances, registration fees) paid to or on behalf of participants or trainees (but not employees) in connection with NSF-sponsored conferences or training projects. Indirect costs are NOT allowed on participant support costs. Participant support costs will be accounted for separately should an award be made. Catering, room rental, and speaker costs are NOT to be included as participant support costs.
- Each subaward must provide a separate budget justification (also limited to 5 pages).
- For current figures to use in budget preparation – such as Carleton College faculty and student compensation guidelines, benefit percentages, indirect cost rate, and more – contact the Grants Office.
- Biographical Sketch(es)
- A “biosketch” is required for each individual identified as senior personnel. Use of SciENcv is now mandatory for Biographical Sketch(es). Follow this how-go guide and consult this SciENcv FAQ to develop your biosketch with SciENcv. This format differs significantly from a regular CV; see the specifics in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h.i. Biographical Sketch. The four sections required are:
- Professional Preparation
- Appointments
- Products
- Synergistic Activities
- There is allowance for additional biographical information to be included, such as for auxiliary users of instrumentation in Equipment Proposals, or for “Other Personnel” that merit consideration in the evaluation of the proposal. For more, see Other Personnel.
- A “biosketch” is required for each individual identified as senior personnel. Use of SciENcv is now mandatory for Biographical Sketch(es). Follow this how-go guide and consult this SciENcv FAQ to develop your biosketch with SciENcv. This format differs significantly from a regular CV; see the specifics in PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h.i. Biographical Sketch. The four sections required are:
- Current and Pending Support
- Use of SciENcv is now mandatory for Current and Pending Support. A CPS document is required for each individual identified as senior personnel. This document should list all current and pending support from any source for ongoing projects and proposals, including the project being proposed, that require a portion of the individual’s time. Time commitment is expressed in person-months per year. See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h.ii. Current and Pending Support.
- Collaborators and Other Affiliations (COA)
- The COA fillable template consists of five tables and must be completed by each individual identified as senior personnel. See the COA FAQs and PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.h.iii. Collaborators & Other Affiliations Information.
- Special Information and Supplementary Documentation
- Data Management Plan: a supplementary document (limit of 2 pages), the “DMP” describes how investigators will gather, protect, and share the primary data, samples, physical collections, and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants.
- The PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.j. Special Information and Supplementary Documentation section outlines general guidelines for DMP form and content.
- In addition, some NSF directorates have specific requirements, posted in NSF’s Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results.
- Carleton applicants can obtain advice on developing DMPs on the Grants Office Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results page, and at the DMPTool website, a free service that helps researchers and institutions to create high-quality data management plans that meet funder requirements.
- A set of sample DMPs from successful NSF applications by Carleton faculty are available in this mini-archive.
- Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan: applicable only when requesting funds to support postdoctoral researchers (limited to 1 page).
- See Chapter II.C.2.j. Special Information and Supplementary Documentation section. One resource for developing a mentoring plan is the National Postdoctoral Association.
- Letters of Collaboration: provided when the project involves collaborative arrangements of significance; NSF strongly recommends the following format:
- If the proposal submitted by Dr. [insert the full name of the Principal Investigator] entitled [insert the proposal title] is selected for funding by NSF, it is my intent to collaborate and/or commit resources as detailed in the Project Description or the Facilities, Equipment or Other Resources section of the proposal.
- Departmental Letter: ONLY for CAREER proposals and select other solicitations: should demonstrate the department’s support of the career development plan of the PI, and an understanding of and commitment to the effective integration of research and education as a primary objective of the CAREER award. See program solicitation NSF 20-525 for the list of elements to include (2-page limit). Additional resources: Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER) page, CAREER program webinar slides, CAREER program webinar recording, and FAQs for CAREER 2020-2025.
- RUI Impact Statement and Certification of RUI/ROA Eligibility: needed IF submitting as an RUI (Research in Undergraduate Institutions) proposal (5-page limit). See also solicitation 14-579.
- Data Management Plan: a supplementary document (limit of 2 pages), the “DMP” describes how investigators will gather, protect, and share the primary data, samples, physical collections, and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants.
Optional
- List of Suggested Reviewers and List of Reviewers Not to Include
- Proposers are encouraged to include a list of suggested reviewers (indicate email address and organizational affiliation) who they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal. Proposers may also designate persons they would prefer not review the proposal, indicating why. Refer to List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not to Include.
Collaborative projects
Collaborative proposals are those in which investigators from two or more organizations wish to collaborate on a unified research project. A collaborative proposal may be submitted to NSF in one of two methods:
Single submission
- as a single proposal, in which a single award is being requested with subawards administered by the lead organization to the non-lead institutions or co-PIs.
If we are submitting a single proposal with subaward/s, we MUST document the determination of subaward versus contract using this “Determining Subrecipient versus Contractor Status” form.
Simultaneous submission
- as a simultaneous submission of proposals from two or more organizations, with each organization requesting a separate award. When involved with a separately submitted simultaneous Collaborative Research project, the lead institution provides all the pieces listed above (under Required Pieces), and each non-lead collaborator provides:
- Cover Sheet,
- Biographical Sketch(es),
- Budget,
- Budget Justification,
- Current and Pending Support,
- Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources, and
- Collaborators & Other Affiliations (COA) Information.
Simultaneous submission is the preferred method of submission for collaborative proposals due to less administrative burden for the lead organization, quicker access to funding for the non-lead organization, and cleaner reporting responsibilities for both. The exception is when the work of the non-lead organization is more contractual in scope rather than as a subaward.
To submit a simultaneous Collaborative Research proposal, each non-lead institution will start a proposal in Research.gov; the non-lead institution will provide the lead institutions with the temporary proposal ID generated by the system, which the lead will enter (via the Link/View Collaborative Proposals option in Research.gov) to link the proposals.
Conference Proposals
NSF supports conference that bring experts together to discuss recent research or education findings or to expose other researchers or students to new research and education techniques. Conference proposals in excess of $50,000 contain all the elements of most regular proposals; see Chapter II.F.9. Conference Proposals of the PAPPG for details.
- Timing of submission: Conference proposals should generally be submitted at least a year in advance of the scheduled date.
- Process for review: Some conference proposals can be reviewed internally. An example:
- if budget does not exceed $50,000, NSF policy allows for an internal review; with the following target dates in effect:
- For events that will take place between March and December, proposals should be submitted in October of the previous year.
- For events that will occur in January or February, proposals should be submitted in May of the preceding year.
- if budgets exceed $50,000, proposals should be submitted roughly seven months before the event is scheduled to take place.
- if budget does not exceed $50,000, NSF policy allows for an internal review; with the following target dates in effect:
- Requirements supporting harassment-free environments: Proposers are required to have
- a policy or code-of-conduct that addresses sexual harassment, other forms of harassment, and sexual assault, and that includes clear and accessible means of reporting violations of the policy or code-of-conduct;
- the policy or code-of-conduct must address the method for making a complaint as well as how any complaints received during the conference will be resolved; and
- a policy or code-of-conduct must be disseminated to conference participants prior to attendance at the conference as well as made available at the conference itself.
Significant or Recent Changes
Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research (RECR)
A second new certification regarding Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research (RECR) was added for proposals submitted on or after July 31, 2023. The certification replaces the existing RECR certification and expands the training requirement to faculty and other senior personnel and mandates that the training cover mentor training and mentorship
Plan for Safe and Inclusive Field/Vessel/Aircraft Research (PSI-FVAR).
Each proposal that proposes to conduct research in the field, including on vessels and aircraft, must upload this document under “PSI-FVAR” in the supplementary documentation section of Research.gov. There is a two-page limit.
- Details: Field research is a necessary component of many STEM fields. Fieldwork presents unique challenges that can increase the likelihood of harassment, including but not limited to, challenging physical conditions, social isolation, and limited communication methods. All research should be done in an environment free from harassment.
Reporting
Annual project reports should be submitted no later than 90 calendar days prior to the end of each annual budget period. NSF system sends automated report reminders starting 3 months before the end of annual budget period stating that the report is due. The report is not overdue until the day after the annual budget period.
Final project reports and project outcomes reports for the general public must be submitted no later than 120 days following expiration of the grant.
Public Access Policy
Policy at NSF intends to expand public access to the results of its funded research. You will need to deposit publications in the NSF Public Access Repository (NSF-PAR) (sign in to Research.gov and choose ‘Deposit Publication’ from My Desktop). Refer also to the following:
- About the Public Access Repository
- Public Access Home page
- Public Access Getting Started Guide
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) concerning public access to research results (NSF 17-060)
Sexual Harassment Policy
NSF has supplemented their NSF Policy on Sexual Harassment, Other Forms of Harassment, or Sexual Assault with coverage regarding harassment that implements Important Notice No. 144.
- NSF requires notification of any findings/determinations regarding the PI/PD or co-PI/co-PD that demonstrate a violation of awardee codes of conduct, policies, regulations or statutes relating to sexual harassment; or if the awardee places the PI/PD, or co-PI/co-PD on administrative leave or imposes an administrative action relating to a finding or investigation of a violation of awardee policies, codes of conduct, statutes or regulations relating to sexual harassment, other forms of harassment, or sexual assault. See also the NSF fact sheet.
- A notification mechanism, “Organizational Notification of Harassment Form,” is available on NSF’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion sexual harassment website.
Other Pertinent Details
Indirect Costs
Indirects are a line item in nearly every proposal budget submitted to a federal agency. In contrast to straightforward project expenses of direct costs (such as salary, benefits, equipment, travel, supplies), indirect costs are “those costs which are not readily identifiable with a particular cost objective but nevertheless are necessary to the general operation of an organization.”
An Indirect Cost Rate (IDC) agreement is negotiated with a Federal agency every four years. Carleton’s IDC rate agreement, which is negotiated with the Department of Health & Human Services based on our Audited Financial Statements, has been approved at a rate of 60% (of salaries and wages) for federal grants with award dates of July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2023. The indirect cost rate in effect at the time of the initial awarding of a grant is applied throughout the life of the grant.
The Business Office government grant proposal page explains that the rate is “calculated on the total of all faculty or technician salaries/stipends and undergraduate student stipends.”
Effort
Amount of effort is recorded in all NSF budgets for senior personnel, and is expressed in person months; see the FAQ (below) “What are person months and how do I calculate them?”
Compliance specifics
What do I need to do to be compliant with federal requirements?
Each organization receiving funding from a federal agency needs to certify that the institution and individuals are following specified federal guidelines.
Carleton asks all primary investigators (PI and coPIs) involved in a proposal to a federal governmental agency (NSF, NIH, NEH, etc.) to read and sign a Compliance & Disclosure Form via this Link to OnBase Form (the link first requires OnBase login before routing to form). The form addresses college policies and provides a checklist with links addressing I) financial conflicts of interest, II) human or animal subject involvement, III) responsible conduct of research, and IV) environmental health and safety issues.
What is a “Data Management Plan”?
Any proposal submitted to the National Science Foundation must include a supplemental “Data Management Plan” (no more than two pages in length) which demonstrates how the principal investigator of the proposed project will comply with the NSF’s Data Sharing Policy, as published in the PAPPG Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results. (The requirement was formally enforced starting in January 2011.)
For more, see the Grants Office’s Sharing of Research Results web page and use the “Data Management Plan Template” to develop a statement which satisfies the requirements of the policy.
NSF applicants can also receive assistance in preparing Data Management Plans from Paula Lackie, Academic Technologist (Leighton Hall 225 or x5607) and Kristin Partlo, Reference & Instruction Librarian for Social Sciences & Data (Gould Library 466 or x7668). Paula and Kristin are well prepared to help with all phases of the development of a DMP.
What is RECR and how do I comply?
RECR stands for “responsible and ethical conduct of research” (previously referred to as RCR). The submitting organization must certify and the PI must “describe in its grant proposal a plan to provide appropriate training and oversight in the responsible and ethical conduct of research to undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers participating in the proposed research project.” For more, see NSF’s RECR page.
Go to the Grants Office page Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research to link to CITI online training modules and to obtain more specific information.
When do I need to obtain IRB approval for my proposed project?
The federal government requires that all research involving human subjects conducted by an institution that receives federal funding be reviewed in advance by an IRB (Institutional Research Board) at the institution. Carleton’s IRB web pages outline specifics on how to apply, and address FAQs (with helps such as IRB Quiz (Does My Project Require an IRB Application?).
For projects lacking definite plans for the use of human subjects (human subject persons, data, or their specimens), pursuant to 45 CFR 690.118, NSF will accept a determination notice (use this sample template that is to be signed by AOR/Provost) establishing a limited time period under which the Principal Investigator (PI) may conduct preliminary or conceptual work that does not involve human subjects. Certification of IRB approval needs to be provided by the institution to the funding agency before human subjects research begins.
When do I need to include a postdoc supplementary document?
If your proposal requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers, the Supplementary Documentation section must include “a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals.”
In no more than one page, the mentoring plan must describe the mentoring that will be provided to all postdoctoral researchers supported by the project, irrespective of whether they reside at the submitting organization, any subawardee organization, or at any organization participating in a simultaneously submitted collaborative project. The Special Information and Supplementary Documentation section includes specifics and examples of mentoring plan activities.
If the proposal is collaborative and includes support of a postdoc researcher at any of the collaborating institutions, the lead organization’s submission must include a supplemental mentoring plan not to exceed one page, addressing the mentoring activities to be provided for all postdoctoral researchers supported under the entire collaborative project.