As researchers we strive to be honest, accurate, efficient, ethical, objective, and accountable in conducting and reporting our research efforts. Where applicable, we aim to publish in outlets accessible to other professionals in the field for the greatest possible dissemination of creative scholarly research.
However, it is difficult to write an abstractuntil you know your most important results. Sometimes, it is possibleto write the introduction first. Most often the introduction shouldbe written next to last.
The Project Description must contain, as a separate section within the narrative, a section labeled "Broader Impacts". his section should provide a discussion of the broader impacts of the proposed activities. Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to the achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
Plans for data management and sharing of the products of research, including preservation, documentation, and sharing of data, samples, physical collections, curriculum materials and other related research and education products should be described in the Special Information and Supplementary Documentation section of the proposal (see for additional instructions for preparation of this section).
The Project Description should provide a clear statement of the work to be undertaken and must include the objectives for the period of the proposed work and expected significance; the relationship of this work to the present state of knowledge in the field, as well as to work in progress by the PI under other support.
The report concerns a problem or series of problems in your area of research and it should describe what was known about it previously, what you did towards solving it, what you think your results mean, and where or how further progress in the field can be made.
For projects that support research infrastructure and tools, such as vessels, facilities, and telescopes, the project/performance site should correspond to the physical location of the research asset. For research assets or projects that are geographically distributed, the proposer should report information for the primary site, as defined by the proposer. For example, proposals for the operations and maintenance of research vessels may list the project/performance site as the vessels home port.
The purpose of this section is to assist reviewers in assessing the quality of prior work conducted with current or prior NSF funding. If any PI or co-PI identified on the proposal has received NSF support with a start date in the past five years (including any current funding and no cost extensions), information on the award is required for each PI and co-PI, regardless of whether the support was directly related to the proposal or not. In cases where the PI or any co-PI has received more than one award (excluding amendments to existing awards), they need only report on the one award that is most closely related to the proposal. Support includes not just salary support, but any funding awarded by NSF. NSF awards such as standard or continuing grants, Graduate Research Fellowship, Major Research Instrumentation, conference, equipment, travel, and center awards, etc., are subject to this requirement.
Within 10 days after the date of the dismissal for reasons other than cumulative grade point average, unsatisfactory degree progress, or academic dishonesty, a student may appeal the decision by submitting a letter of appeal to the dean of the Graduate School. The dean of the Graduate School will decide whether to hear the appeal alone or to convene a meeting of a subcommittee of the University Board of Graduate Studies (UBGS) to weigh the appeal materials and to obtain testimony delivered live to the subcommittee by the student and academic unit representatives. Situations dealing only with substandard academic performance will typically be considered by the dean, whereas issues dealing with an alleged violation of rights or procedures may be referred to a subcommittee of the UBGS. If referred to a subcommittee of the UBGS, the recommendation of the subcommittee as well as all materials provided to the subcommittee by the student and the academic unit will be considered by the dean of the Graduate School, whose decision on the appeal is final.
NSF encourages submission of proposals by groups of investigators; often these are submitted to carry out interdisciplinary projects. Unless stipulated in a specific program solicitation, however, such proposals will be subject to the 15-page Project Description limitation established in Section (ii) above. PIs who wish to exceed the established page limitations for the Project Description must request and receive a deviation in advance of proposal submission. ( contains information on deviations.)
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
•Given an information requirement related to project risk management, determine the nature and extent of information needed to effectively address the topic; efficiently locate, determine the validity, and critically evaluate the resources; and apply the information to accomplish the specific purpose (report, case analysis, factual requirement, problem solving, and planning).
Reference information is required. Each reference must include the names of all authors (in the same sequence in which they appear in the publication), the article and journal title, book title, volume number, page numbers, and year of publication. (See also ) If the proposer has a website address readily available, that information should be included in the citation. It is not NSF's intent, however, to place an undue burden on proposers to search for the URL of every referenced publication. Therefore, inclusion of a website address is optional. A proposal that includes reference citation(s) that do not specify a URL is not considered to be in violation of NSF proposal preparation guidelines and the proposal will still be reviewed.