Should I include the optional List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not to Include form in my application?
A list of suggested reviewers (along with their contact information) is optional but important and helpful, especially for multidisciplinary proposals. Consider including a list of eight or more eligible suggested reviewers. Be sure that none of them have conflicts of interest with your proposal (e.g., spouse or relative, collaborators and co-editors, thesis advisor, institutional conflicts). Think about including newer faculty members and experienced post-doctoral scholars who have a deep and current understanding of the topic; Program Directors probably know the “household names” in the field, but may not be aware of those individuals. And don’t put this task off to the end of proposal preparation when you may be pushing to meet the submission deadline. Think of suggesting reviewers as part of the process of preparing the best proposal you can. If you take advantage of this opportunity to help yourself you will also assist NSF Program Directors in their role of providing the highest quality merit review of your proposal.
...
The Broader Impacts section in your Project Description should thoroughly address the merit review criteria. It should not be a cut-and-paste from the Project Summary. Note that successful proposals often combine several different Broader Impacts approaches and approaches and target several different outcomes. For example, a researcher might describe the potential impact of the research itself on a particular industry but also involve undergraduates from underrepresented backgrounds in the research through an REU a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) program and run educational workshops on their research topic for high-school women. However, if in doubt, focus on one or two areas to do well rather than trying to touch on all or multiple areas.
...
Generally, proposals may be submitted to other agencies for simultaneous review. However,; however, there are exceptions (e.g., research proposals to the Biological Science Directorate).
Can I include Letters of Collaboration in my proposal? What about Letters of Support? What’s the difference?
Letters Letters of Collaboration : Letters should use template language (see NSF Application Toolkit) and must not recommend or endorse the PI or project. All relevant collaborative activities should be described in the Project Description , or in the Facilities statement , such as: (1) (e.g., intellectual contributions to the project, (2) permission to access a site , use instrumentation or facility, (3) or use an instrument, offer to furnish samples/materials for research, (4) Logistical logistical support, (5) mentoring U.S. students at a foreign site).
A Letter of Support is endorsement and is not allowed. Follow-up Q: Can you elaborate? A: In the letter, the spirit of the guidance is the one sentence only (though watch for "must" v "should" in solicitation and PAPPG). The level and nature of collaboration should be described in the Project Description, etc.
...
- Describe release time in Facilities and Other Resources (versus in Other Support)
- Committed and other committed cost share and how that relates to the Facilities and Other Resources statement: Only 5 programs with mandatory committed cost share, mandated through legislation or approval of the National Science Board or Director. In Facilities statement, everything else you can tap into that you are not asking NSF for—should not be quantifiable.
References
NSF Grants Conference Fall 2019
NSF PAPPG 2020
- "International collaboration is alive and well at the NSF." Fundamental guideline: When you propose international activities, there needs to be a clear reason that you are doing the work where you are doing it.
- Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan: Including an assessment/evaluation plan is not required but definitely a good idea if you have those mechanism in place
...