Designing Materials to Revolutionize and Engineer our Future (DMREF)

Program Solicitation
NSF 19-516

Replaces Document(s):
NSF 16-613

National Science Foundation

Directorate for Mathematical & Physical Sciences
     Division of Materials Research
     Division of Mathematical Sciences

Directorate for Engineering
     Division of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation
     Division of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems
     Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental and Transport Systems

Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering
     Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure
     Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
     Division of Computer and Network Systems
     Division of Information & Intelligent Systems

Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     January 28, 2019 - February 04, 2019

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES

This document replaces Program solicitation NSF 16-613.

Revisions from NSF 16-613 include:

The submission window (January 28 - February 4) ends nineteen days later than in 2017.

The list of Cognizant Program National Science Foundation (NSF)Officers was updated.

Four strategic potential application areas have been prioritized for this competition.

In order to be consistent with DMREF's new biennial competition, all awards will be four years in duration. Award s are expected to range from $1,000,000 to $1,750,000, as compared to $750,000 to $1,600,000 in recent years.

Options (new or renewal proposals) for PIs with existing DMREF projects were clarified.

The Division of Chemistry is not participating in the 2019 DMREF competition.

Information regarding collaborators and other affiliations must be provided as a Single Copy Document for each individual identified as senior project personnel according to the instructions detailed in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide.

Opportunity for PIs to engage with Google Cloud resources was added. Google credits, ranging from $8,000 to $20,000, will be made available to PIs through Google Cloud services by virtue of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NSF and Google.

Emphasis has been placed on the necessity of a comprehensive Data Management Plan (DMP).

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 18-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 29, 2018.

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

General Information

Program Title:

Designing Materials to Revolutionize and Engineer our Future (DMREF)

Synopsis of Program:

DMREF is the primary program by which NSF participates in the Materials Genome Initiative (MGI) for Global Competitiveness. MGI recognizes the importance of materials science and engineering to the well-being and advancement of society and aims to "deploy advanced materials at least twice as fast as possible today, at a fraction of the cost." MGI integrates materials discovery, development, property optimization, and systems design with a shared computational framework. This framework facilitates collaboration and coordination of research activities, analytical tools, experimental results, and critical evaluation in pursuit of the MGI goals. Consistent with the MGI Strategic Plan, DMREF highlights four sets of goals:

Leading a culture shift in materials science and engineering research to encourage and facilitate an integrated team approach;

Integrating experimentation, computation, and theory and equipping the materials science and engineering communities with advanced tools and techniques;

Making digital data accessible, findable, and useful to the community; and

Creating a world-class materials science and engineering workforce that is trained for careers in academia or industry.

Accordingly, DMREF will support activities that significantly accelerate materials discovery and/or development by building the fundamental knowledge base needed to design and make materials and/or devices with specific and desired functions or properties. This will be accomplished through forming interdisciplinary teams of researchers working synergistically in a "closed loop" fashion, building a vibrant research community, leveraging data science, providing ready access to materials data, and educating the future MGI workforce. Specifically, achieving this goal will involve modeling, analysis, and computational simulations, validated and verified through sample preparation, characterization, and/or device demonstration.

Computational efforts will begin at the smallest appropriate length scale, such as electronic, atomic, molecular, nano-, micro-, and meso-scale, appropriately informed by data or models to provide predictive or fundamental insight that will work effectively in concert with data-centric, experimental, and theoretical efforts to discover new materials, new states of matter, or advance understanding of materials properties and phenomena and their control through structure, applied fields, or other means. Computational efforts may include models that apply across or at multiple scales of length or time, and may include different chemistry or physics models to capture specific processes or phenomena. Creativity and innovation are encouraged to obtain the maximum predictive power or insight through computation, data-centric methods, and theory to achieve the goals of DMREF.

DMREF will enable the development of new data analytic tools and statistical algorithms; advanced simulations of material properties in conjunction with new device functionality; advances in predictive modeling that leverage machine learning, artificial intelligence, data mining, and sparse approximation; data infrastructure that is accessible, extensible, scalable, and sustainable; the development, maintenance, and deployment of reliable, interoperable, and reusable software for the next-generation design of materials; and new collaborative capabilities for managing large, complex, heterogeneous, distributed data supporting materials design, synthesis, and longitudinal study. Incorporation of cyberinfrastructure developed through NSF investments including the OpenKIM Knowledge-base of Inter-atomic Models, Software Infrastructure for Sustained Innovation (SI2), Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBs), and Cyberinfrastructure for Sustained Scientific Innovation (CSSI), is encouraged where appropriate.

DMREF aligns with national priorities for advanced manufacturing and future industries, national defense and homeland security, information technologies and high performance computing, human health and welfare, clean energy, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). While this solicitation is not restricted to any particular materials research topic, those of particular interest in this FY2019 solicitation include: 1) Synthetic materials biology, 2) Structural materials under extreme conditions, 3) Recyclable plastics and alternative materials for sustainable development, and 4) Robotic materials. By facilitating interdisciplinary integrative materials research, DMREF is supportive of the NSF long-range transformative agenda, "Big Ideas for Future NSF Investments".

The multidisciplinary character of this effort dictates the involvement of programs in the NSF Directorates of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Computer and Information Science and Engineering. Awards are expected to range from $1,000,000 – $1,750,000 over four years. To cover the breadth of this endeavor, it is expected that proposed projects will be directed by a team of at least two Senior Personnel with complementary expertise.

Assuming that sufficient funding is provided in the NSF budget, it is anticipated that the DMREF program will continue with competitions biennially in odd-numbered years.

In FY 2019, the DMREF program pilots a cloud option in partnership with Google.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

John A. Schlueter, Team Lead,MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-7766, email: jschluet@nsf.gov

Micah Beck,CISE/OAC, telephone: (703) 292-2932, email: mbeck@nsf.gov

Marian Bocea,MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-2595, email: mbocea@nsf.gov

Eva Campo,MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-7010, email: ecampo@nsf.gov

Almadena Chtchelkanova,CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: achtchel@nsf.gov

Yuliya Gorb,MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-2113, email: ygorb@nsf.gov

Alexis Lewis,ENG/CMMI, telephone: (703) 292-2624, email: alewis@nsf.gov

Robert McCabe,ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-4826, email: rmccabe@nsf.gov

Paul Lane,ENG/ECCS, telephone: (703) 292-2453, email: plane@nsf.gov

Sylvia Spengler,CISE/IIS, telephone: (703) 292-8930, email: sspengle@nsf.gov

Shahab Shojaei-Zadeh,ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-8045, email: sshojaei@nsf.gov

Ralph Wachter,CISE/CNS, telephone: (703) 292-8950, email: rwachter@nsf.gov

Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):

47.041 --- Engineering

47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences

47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 20 to 25

The number of awards will depend on the availability of funds and the quality of the proposals.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $36,000,000

Anticipated funding amount is pending availability of funds.

These funds will be partitioned among the participating Divisions (funds are not pooled), each of which will support proposals of scientific interest to that Division. Proposals on topics situated at the boundaries between two or more Divisions may be co-reviewed by those Divisions. Such proposals, if highly ranked, will be eligible for co-funding by those Divisions.

An additional $100,000 worth of Google credits will be made available to PIs through Google Cloud services by virtue of an MOU between NSF and Google. Once activated, Google credits will remain available through 4 years.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Who May Serve as PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1

No individual may appear as Senior Personnel (PI, Co-PI, Faculty or Other Senior Personnel) on more than one DMREF proposal submitted in response to this solicitation. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, any DMREF proposal submitted to this solicitation with this individual listed as Senior Personnel after the first DMREF proposal is received at NSF will be returned without review. No exceptions will be made.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Letters of Intent: Not required

Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

Full Proposals:

Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide).

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

Not Applicable

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Not Applicable

C. Due Dates

Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     January 28, 2019 - February 04, 2019

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Reporting Requirements:

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Summary of Program Requirements

Introduction
 

Program Description
 

Award Information
 

Eligibility Information
 

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

Proposal Preparation Instructions

Budgetary Information

Due Dates

FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
 

NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures

Merit Review Principles and Criteria

Review and Selection Process
 

Award Administration Information

Notification of the Award

Award Conditions

Reporting Requirements
 

Agency Contacts
 

Other Information

I. INTRODUCTION

DMREF is the primary program by which NSF participates in the Materials Genome Initiative (MGI) for Global Competitiveness. MGI recognizes the importance of materials science and engineering to the well-being and advancement of society and aims to "deploy advanced materials at least twice as fast as possible today, at a fraction of the cost." MGI integrates materials discovery, development, property optimization, and systems design with a shared computational framework. This framework facilitates collaboration and coordination of research activities, analytical tools, experimental results, and critical evaluation in pursuit of the MGI goals. Consistent with the MGI Strategic Plan, DMREF highlights four sets of goals:

Leading a culture shift in materials science and engineering research to encourage and facilitate an integrated team approach;

Integrating experimentation, computation, and theory and equipping the materials science and engineering communities with advanced tools and techniques;

Making digital data accessible, findable, and useful to the community; and

Creating a world-class materials science and engineering workforce that is trained for careers in academia or industry.

II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

DMREF will support activities that significantly accelerate materials discovery and/or development by building the fundamental knowledge base needed to design and make materials and/or devices with specific and desired functions or properties. This will be accomplished through forming interdisciplinary teams of researchers working synergistically in a "closed loop" fashion, building a vibrant research community, leveraging data science, providing ready access to materials data, and educating the future MGI workforce. Specifically, achieving this goal will involve modeling, analysis, and computational simulations, validated and verified through sample preparation, characterization, and/or device demonstration.

Computational efforts will begin at the smallest appropriate length scale, such as electronic, atomic, molecular, nano-, micro-, and meso-scale, appropriately informed by data or models to provide predictive or fundamental insight that will work effectively in concert with data-centric, experimental, and theoretical efforts to discover new materials, new states of matter, or advance understanding of materials properties and phenomena and their control through structure, applied fields, or other means. Computational efforts may include models that apply across or at multiple scales of length or time, and may include different chemistry or physics models to capture specific processes or phenomena. Creativity and innovation are encouraged to obtain the maximum predictive power or insight through computation, data-centric methods, and theory to achieve the goals of DMREF.

DMREF will enable the development of new data analytic tools and statistical algorithms; advanced simulations of material properties in conjunction with new device functionality; advances in predictive modeling that leverage machine learning, artificial intelligence, data mining, and sparse approximation; data infrastructure that is accessible, extensible, scalable, and sustainable; the development, maintenance, and deployment of reliable, interoperable, and reusable software for the next-generation design of materials; and new collaborative capabilities for managing large, complex, heterogeneous, distributed data supporting materials design, synthesis, and longitudinal study. Incorporation of cyberinfrastructure developed through NSF investments including the OpenKIM Knowledge-base of Inter-atomic Models, Software Infrastructure for Sustained Innovation (SI2), Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBs), and Cyberinfrastructure for Sustained Scientific Innovation (CSSI), is encouraged where appropriate.

DMREF aligns with national priorities for advanced manufacturing and future industries, national defense and homeland security, information technologies and high performance computing, human health and welfare, clean energy, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Proposals may address any materials class, provided that they describe transformative scientific or engineering advances enabled by the DMREF philosophy described above. DMREF encourages the submission of proposals that align with materials aspects of NSF's long-range transformative agenda, "Big Ideas for Future NSF Investments". In addition, the development of fundamental understandings related to materials and/or the engineering of their associated properties for four strategic potential application areas have been prioritized for this competition:

Synthetic Materials Biology: This effort will converge the SynBio research communities (Biologists and System Engineers) with materials researchers both to identify materials challenges hindering advancement of SynBio, as well as to generate new SynBio approaches to advanced material development.

Structural Materials under Extreme Conditions: This effort addresses fundamental challenges in ceramic, metallic, and polymeric materials and their composites for applications under extreme conditions.

Recyclable Plastics and Alternative Materials for Sustainable Development: This effort includes a) fundamental challenges in the development of intrinsically recyclable polymers, b) better understanding of mechanisms controlling the properties of recycled plastic products, c) strategies to understand and improve the properties of recycled plastics, and d) building the knowledge necessary for development of alternative materials in plastic applications.

Robotic Materials: This effort addresses fundamental challenges for the discovery, development, and engineering of materials and their associated properties that will be necessary to tightly integrate sensing, actuation, computation, and communication in order to ultimately harvest, metabolize, and store energy to power computers that interact with sensors and actuators affecting the physical properties of a system.

The DMREF program will support, but is not limited to, efforts that span research in materials, chemistry, physics, mathematics, biology, computer science, and engineering, thereby bridging Program and Divisional interests. Proposal review will be coordinated and funded among the participating NSF Programs and Divisions, as appropriate. The complexity and challenge of activities addressed by this initiative require a transformative interdisciplinary approach to discovering and developing new materials, predicting and optimizing properties of materials, and informing the design of material systems. Accordingly, the proposed research must involve a collaborative and iterative 'closed-loop' process wherein theory guides computational simulation, computational simulation guides experiments, and experimental observation further guide theory. Strategies must be included in the proposed research to advance knowledge related to materials design through synthesis / growth / processing techniques, characterization / testing methodology, theory / mathematics, data science, and computation / simulation approaches needed to develop reliable predictive computational and/or data models or to assist in simplifying the analysis of multidimensional input data.

This collaborative and iterative process will require a team of PIs with the requisite expertise. Accordingly, it is expected that proposed projects will be directed by a team of at least two Senior Personnel with complementary expertise. The proposal must provide a plan for comprehensive data management that ensures transparency, data sharing, and open source software, including an explicit statement of which open source license(s) and repositories, if applicable, will be used. Chapter II, Section C.2.j of the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) details expectations of the required Data Management Plan, which will be thoroughly evaluated for DMREF proposals. While not required, ties with industry, national laboratories, and/or other federal MGI-partners are encouraged. If there are strong collaborations with industry, Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) (PAPPG Chapter II, Section E.4) can be used in conjunction with this effort. Collaborative Proposals involving two or more academic institutions may also be appropriate (PAPPG Chapter II, Section D.3). In light of DMREF's emphasis on an integrated approach to materials science and engineering research, cross-disciplinary educational and public outreach activities are encouraged. As such, proposals are strongly encouraged to describe substantial efforts to enhance the development of a next-generation workforce that is prepared to advance materials science and engineering research with an integrated approach consistent with the aims of the MGI.

NSF will support DMREF through well-coordinated activities involving the Directorates of Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS), Engineering (ENG), and Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE). Within MPS, the Divisions of Materials Research (DMR) and Mathematical Sciences (DMS) will participate. The Divisions of Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing Innovation (CMMI), Electrical, Communication and Cyber Systems (ECCS), and Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental and Transport Systems (CBET) in ENG will participate. Within CISE the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC), Computing and Communication Foundations (CCF), Computer and Network Systems (CNS), and Information and Intelligent Systems (IIS) will participate. PIs should select as the primary Unit of Consideration the participating Division with which the topic of the proposal is most closely aligned. Awards are expected to range from $1,000,000 – $1,750,000 over a duration of four years.

Subject to the availability of funds, it is anticipated that the DMREF program will continue with competitions biennially in odd-numbered years.

Opportunity for PIs to Engage with Google Resources

In FY 2019, the program features support for a cloud option. Google Cloud is participating in the program to provide cloud credits/resources to projects that require significant storage and computational resources. The objective is to encourage projects that focus on large-scale experimentation and scalability studies. If additional cloud providers join the program, resources/credits from those providers will be available under the same terms and conditions as described in this solicitation.

While the technical description and justification for use of cloud resources would be expected to be part of the Project Description, details of the cloud resource costing and annual cloud resource usage must be included in the Supplementary Documents section. See Section V.A., Cloud Costing and Annual Usage Plan, for details on how to provide this information.

The minimum cloud resource request for a project is $8,000, regardless of the NSF budget request. This is because the objective is to support either large-scale or data-complex experimentation through use of cloud resources, and not "routine" use. The cloud credit/resource request, typically in the range $8,000 to $10,000, but up to a maximum of $20,000, should not appear in the NSF Budget pages nor in the NSF Budget Justification section, but rather under Supplementary Documents as described in Section V.A of the solicitation.

The technical justification for use of cloud resources that is included in the Project Description, coupled with the cost computation used to arrive at the requested amount of credits/resources as well as the detailed annual plan for usage of these credits/resources over the duration of the project included in the Supplementary Documents, will be carefully reviewed as part of the proposal review process.

Proposers must use the tools available at https://cloud.google.com/products/calculator/ in order to develop the total cost of cloud resources and to develop an annual usage plan over the duration of the projects. Once activated, Google credits will remain available through 4 years.

The Google Cloud technical point of contact is: Sepi Hejazi Moghadam (shmoghadam@google.com).

In addition, a follow up email must be sent to dmref@nsf.gov with a breakdown of Google credits, as detailed in Section V.A. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions.

Special Instructions for Proposals Selecting the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC) as the Primary Unit of Consideration

DMREF topics of special interest to OAC include, but are not limited to, software and data components with the potential to:

Become part of a comprehensive, integrated, sustainable, and secure research cyberinfrastructure (CI) at the national or international scale;

Extend benefits across multiple science disciplines;

Enhance existing research CI investments; and

Transition from prototypes to robust, usable, reusable components applicable to effective practice.

DMREF-OAC awardees will be encouraged to address and report on a set of cyberinfrastructure-specific requirements as a condition of the award. Such awardees will also be invited to participate in the principal investigators' meeting for the Cyberinfrastructure for Sustained Scientific Innovation (CSSI) program.

Participants interested in selecting OAC as the primary Unit of Consideration are strongly encouraged to confer with the cognizant OAC Program Officer listed above.

Co-funding from OAC may be available to teams that, in their Data Management Plan: 1) state the specific open-source or other license(s) under which developed code will be released, 2) describe plans to transition the software to sustainability after NSF funds have ended, and 3) define community usage metrics for each year of the award. These simple, but well thought out metrics should demonstrate what will be accomplished each year and should show the impact of the software on the breadth of the user/developer community. Potential metrics include the number of individuals or research groups using the software, the number of citations, and the number of contributors.

III. AWARD INFORMATION

Awards are expected to range from $1,000,000 - $1,750,000 for a duration of four years. The budget must be commensurate with the scope of the project and thoroughly justified in the proposal. In addition, Google credits may be requested by cloud-intensive proposals in the range of $8,000-$10,000, up to a maximum of $20,000.

Anticipated funding amount is pending availability of funds.

IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Who May Serve as PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1

No individual may appear as Senior Personnel (PI, Co-PI, Faculty or Other Senior Personnel) on more than one DMREF proposal submitted in response to this solicitation. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, any DMREF proposal submitted to this solicitation with this individual listed as Senior Personnel after the first DMREF proposal is received at NSF will be returned without review. No exceptions will be made.

Additional Eligibility Info:

All DMREF proposals must involve at least two Senior Personnel (PI, Co-PI, Faculty or Other Senior Personnel) to ensure that all aspects of the project (synthesis / growth / processing, characterization / testing, theory / data / computation / simulation) are adequately covered by relevant expertise. These partnerships may occur through either a proposal from a single institution or one involving multiple institutions.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation may not duplicate or be substantially similar to other proposals funded or concurrently under consideration by NSF or to proposals previously declined by NSF and not substantially revised. Proposals not satisfying this condition will be returned without review.

PIs with Existing DMREF Projects / Renewals:

An individual may appear as Senior Personnel (PI, Co-PI, Faculty, or Other Senior Personnel) on only one DMREF proposal submitted in response to this solicitation.

Personnel with continuing DMREF projects: Personnel involved with DMREF projects that continue beyond 2019 are eligible to participate in a single proposal on an unrelated topic in response to this solicitation.

Personnel with DMREF projects that expire in 2019: Personnel of active DMREF projects that expire in 2019 may submit a proposal to this solicitation under one of the following two scenarios: 1) A DMREF team may submit a Renewal proposal. The team of PIs may either be identical to the current project or altered to address new challenges. For Renewal proposals, the Results from Prior NSF Support section must substantially address progress made under the current DMREF award with respect to Intellectual Merit, Broader Impacts, and DMREF Solicitation Specific Review Criteria. Furthermore, a clear explanation of how MGI principles are being applied to accelerate materials discovery and development, and a detailed vision for advancement along the Materials Development Continuum (as described in the MGI Strategic Plan) toward eventual deployment, must be provided. 2) Members of a DMREF team may submit a New proposal. The new topic could either be unrelated to the existing project or represent a significant change in technical direction, perhaps resulting from insights gained from the current project. The team for the new proposal may either be identical to the existing team or altered to address the new goals. For New proposals, the Results of Prior NSF Support section should still address progress made under the existing DMREF project with respect to Intellectual Merit, Broader Impacts, and DMREF Solicitation Specific Review Criteria.

V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.

Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. PAPPG Chapter II.D.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.C.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may supplement or deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

Cover Sheet:

Unit of Consideration. At least one participating NSF Division from the drop-down list in FastLane must be selected as the Unit of Consideration. The first Unit of Consideration selected must be the participating NSF Division aligned most closely with the topic of the proposal. Additional Units of Consideration aligned with the topic of the proposal may also be selected. Grants.gov users should refer to Section VI.1.2. of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide for specific instructions on how to designate the NSF Unit of Consideration.

Adherence to these requirements will guide NSF Program Officers in establishing an appropriate review for the proposal. This information will be used for guidance in the review process, but will not necessarily reflect the Division that will ultimately process the proposal. It is anticipated that proposals on topics situated at the boundaries between two or more Divisions may be co-reviewed by those Divisions.

Proposal Title. The title of the proposal must begin with 'DMREF:' followed by the project title. Proposals submitted by different institutions as a collaborative group must have the identical title that begins with the designation 'DMREF: Collaborative Research:'. Titles of proposals involving GOALI, must begin with 'DMREF: GOALI:', or 'DMREF: Collaborative Research: GOALI:'.

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. All proposals in a collaborative group must select the same Units of Consideration in the same sequence. Chapter II, Section D.3 of the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) provides additional information on Collaborative Proposals.

Senior Personnel. All DMREF proposals must involve at least two Senior Personnel (PI, Co-PI, Faculty, or Other Senior Personnel) to ensure that all aspects of the project (synthesis / growth / processing, characterization / testing, theory / data / computation / simulation) are adequately covered by relevant expertise. These partnerships may occur through either a proposal from a single institution or one involving multiple institutions.

Compliance with these Cover Sheet specifications is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing or result in the proposal being returned without review.

Project Summary: The final line of the Overview portion of the Project Summary must be a list of no more than five key words preceded by the phrase or heading Key Words.

Project Description: The Project Description must include a brief description of the management plan for the collaboration preceded by the phrase or heading Management Plan.

Budget: Develop a realistic project budget that is consistent with the proposed activities. Proposed budgets should include funds for travel by one PI or co-PI to attend a biennial MGI Principal Investigator Meeting held in even-numbered years.

Single Copy Documents:

Required: Information regarding collaborators and other affiliations (COA) must be provided for each individual identified as senior project personnel according to the instructions provided in Chapter II.C.1.e of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG).

Optional: suggested Reviewers and Reviewers Not to Include.

Single Copy Documents above are used by NSF staff, but are not available to reviewers.

Supplementary Documents:

Letters of Collaboration: For proposals involving collaborations with researchers not listed as co-PIs, proposers should include letters confirming the collaborations. The letters must be very brief and contain no statements of support or reference. Details about collaborative work to be done under this project should be included within the 15 pages of the Project Description, not in the letter(s) of collaboration.

Cloud Costing and Annual Usage Plan - Required of proposals requesting the cloud option (2 page limit): Projects that intend to request Google cloud resources must include a detailed costing, showing a credit usage/resource consumption plan with the amount and type of storage, compute, and network resources (and any other necessary cloud resources that incur costs) to be used during each year of the project. These costs will not be reflected in the proposal';s budget. As part of their proposal development process, a PI may contact Google to ensure that the planned request for Google cloud resources is technically feasible and can be satisfied by Google. The two essential items of the costing plan are: 1) The total cost of cloud resources-showing the distribution across storage, compute, and network, etc., resources and 2) the annual usage plan, i.e., how much of these credits/resources will be used each year.

Separately, in addition to the 2-page Cloud Costing and Annual Usage Plan that is included in the Supplementary Documents, potential users of Google cloud resources must compile and submit an Excel Workbook using the tabular format found at https://www.nsf.gov/cise/iis/cloudrequestform.xlsx, which contains a single-tab template. The completed workbook must be submitted via email to dmref@nsf.gov within five business days of the last day of the solicitation submission window. The completed workbook must include the FastLane proposal ID (which is assigned after the proposal is submitted to NSF).

Data Management Plan (DMP): The Office of Budget Finance and Award Management (BFA) at NSF provides direction on the Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results. The NSF Data Sharing Policy(PAPPG Chapter XI.D.4) and NSF Data Management Plan Requirements (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.j) provide the basis for an effective Data Management Plan. PIs are encouraged to carefully examine both NSF Data Sharing Policy and NSF Data Management Plan Requirements in the PAPPG. DMPs are of particular relevance to DMREF; consistent with the pivotal role of data in the Materials Genome Initiative (MGI), which has inspired this program. DMPs will be an important component of the proposals considered in this competition throughout the Merit Review process.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Budget Preparation Instructions:

The NSF DMREF Management Team will schedule biennial meetings of DMREF PIs in the Washington, DC area. Proposal budgets should include funds to support the attendance of one PI or co-PI every other (even-numbered) year.

C. Due Dates

Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     January 28, 2019 - February 04, 2019

D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.

Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to use FastLane to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Building the Future: Investing in Discovery and Innovation - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2018 – 2022. These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.

NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.

Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and

Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

What is the potential for the proposed activity to

Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and

Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?

How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?

Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out 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 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 United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

The following additional criteria will be used to evaluate all DMREF proposals:

How effectively does the proposed work help accelerate materials discovery, understanding, and/or development by building the fundamental knowledge base needed to progress toward designing and making materials with specific, desired functions or properties?

How effectively does the proposed research use collaborative processes with iterative feedback among tasks? The materials synthesis / growth / processing techniques, characterization / testing methodology, theory / mathematics, data science, and computation / simulation aspects of the project must all strongly interact with each other to promote significant advances in each of these components and advance materials design.

How effectively does the proposed work provide training for the next generation of scientists and engineers, educated in a multidisciplinary, integrated experimental and computational approach to materials research? Has adequate data-related training been provided for students and postdoctoral researchers, as needed?

How effectively does the proposed work and corresponding data management plan provide open access to outputs, including data, software, codes, samples, and publications?

If Google credits are requested, reviewers will also evaluate how effectively will they be used. Specifically:

The appropriateness of the request.

Whether use of the Google resources has been adequately justified.

Whether the estimate of the amount of resources needed and the corresponding resource request budget (in dollars) have been properly calculated.

Whether the request is consistent with a sound Data Management Plan where data will be adequately curated and shared.

In the case of renewal proposals, reviewers will also evaluate:

Progress made during the previous award (as described in the Results from Prior NSF Support section of the proposal); and

The plan for advancing materials discovery and development along the Materials Development Continuum (as described in the MGI Strategic Plan).

In addition to being evaluated according to the previously described criteria, proposals submitted to the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) as the Primary Unit of Consideration will be evaluated with respect to whether they seek new mathematical or statistical results that will advance the DMREF agenda. These proposals will be co-evaluated by other divisions in the areas of science and engineering where impacts of the projects are expected.

Proposals submitted to the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC) as the Primary Unit of Consideration will be co-evaluated by other divisions in the areas of science and engineering where impacts of the projects are expected. These proposals will be further evaluated based on the extent to which they:

Become part of a comprehensive, integrated, sustainable, and secure research cyberinfrastructure (CI) at the national or international scale;

Extend benefits across multiple science disciplines;

Enhance existing research CI investments; and

Transition from prototypes to robust, usable, reusable components applicable to effective practice.

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Notification of the Award

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

Special Award Conditions:

NSF awardees receiving Google Cloud Platform credits will be required to accept Google Cloud Platform Terms of Service located at https://cloud.google.com/terms/ prior to using any Google Cloud Platform resources. These projects will be required to include appropriate acknowledgment of both NSF and Google support in reports and/or publications on work performed under the awards. An example of such an acknowledgement would be: "This material is based upon work supported by the NSF under Award No. [Recipient enters awards number(s)], through use of resources provided by Google in partnership with the NSF [participating program name] program."

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

Annual Reports from projects that benefit from Google Cloud Platform credits must provide a detailed accounting of the project's use of Google resources.

VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

John A. Schlueter, Team Lead, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-7766, email: jschluet@nsf.gov

Micah Beck, CISE/OAC, telephone: (703) 292-2932, email: mbeck@nsf.gov

Marian Bocea, MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-2595, email: mbocea@nsf.gov

Eva Campo, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-7010, email: ecampo@nsf.gov

Almadena Chtchelkanova, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: achtchel@nsf.gov

Yuliya Gorb, MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-2113, email: ygorb@nsf.gov

Alexis Lewis, ENG/CMMI, telephone: (703) 292-2624, email: alewis@nsf.gov

Robert McCabe, ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-4826, email: rmccabe@nsf.gov

Paul Lane, ENG/ECCS, telephone: (703) 292-2453, email: plane@nsf.gov

Sylvia Spengler, CISE/IIS, telephone: (703) 292-8930, email: sspengle@nsf.gov

Shahab Shojaei-Zadeh, ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-8045, email: sshojaei@nsf.gov

Ralph Wachter, CISE/CNS, telephone: (703) 292-8950, email: rwachter@nsf.gov

For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail: fastlane@nsf.gov.

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: support@grants.gov.

IX. OTHER INFORMATION

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website.

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.

ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.E.6 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.

To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov

Location:

2415 Eisenhower Avenue,
Alexandria, VA 22314

For General Information
(NSF Information Center):

(703) 292-5111

TDD (for the hearing-impaired):

(703) 292-5090

To Order Publications or Forms:

Send an e-mail to:

nsfpubs@nsf.gov

or telephone:

(703) 292-7827

To Locate NSF Employees:

(703) 292-5111

PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS

The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:

Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Office of the General Counsel
National Science Foundation
Alexandria, VA 22314

Dear Colleagues,

Please see below the Call for Papers for ACM SafeThings 2017. We enthusiastically look forward to your submissions on advancements in the safety of the Internet of Things ecosystem.  

1st ACM Workshop on the Internet of Safe Things (SafeThings 2017)
https://www.safethings.info/
November 5, 2017 at TU Delft, The Netherlands
Co-located with ACM SenSys 2017

As the traditionally segregated systems are brought online for next generation connected applications, we have an opportunity to significantly improve the safety of legacy systems. For instance, insights from data across systems can be exploited to reduce accidents, improve air quality and support disaster events. Cyber-physical systems (CPS) also bring new risks that arise due to the unexpected interaction between systems. These safety risks arise because of information that distracts users while driving, software errors in medical devices, corner cases in data-driven control, compromised sensors in drones or conflicts in societal policies.

Accordingly, the Internet of Safe Things workshop (or SafeThings, for brevity) seeks to bring researchers and practitioners that are actively exploring system design, modeling, verification, authentication approaches to provide safety guarantees in the Internet of Things (IoT). The workshop welcomes contributions that integrate hardware and software systems provided by disparate vendors, particularly those that have humans in the loop. As safety is inherently linked with the security and privacy, we also seek contributions in security and privacy that address safety concerns. With the SafeThings workshop, we seek to develop a community that systematically dissects the vulnerabilities and risks exposed by these emerging CPSes, and create tools, algorithms, frameworks and systems that help in the development of safe systems.

SafeThings workshop covers safety topics as it relates to an individual’s health (physical, mental), the society (air pollution, toxicity, disaster events), or the environment (species preservation, global warming, oil spills). The workshop considers safety from a human perspective, and thus, does not include topics such as thread safety or memory safety in its scope.

Our workshop will cover, but not limit itself to, the following subject categories:
- Verification of safety in IoT platforms
- Privacy preserving data sharing and analysis
- Compliance with legal, health and environmental policies
- Integration of hardware and software systems
- Conflict resolution between IoT applications
- Safety in human-in-the-loop systems
- Support for IoT development - debugging tools, emulators, testbeds
- Usable security and privacy for IoT platforms
- Resiliency against attacks and faults
- Secure connectivity in IoT

Our workshop will cover, but not limit itself to, the following domains: autonomous vehicles and transportation infrastructure; medical CPS and public health; smart buildings, smart grid and smart cities.

Submission Types:
We solicit two types of original submissions:
  * Regular papers for oral presentation (6 pages)
  * Technical posters and demos (1 page)

Important Dates:
Abstract Submission Deadline: July 23, 2017 (11.59 PM AoE)
Paper Submission Deadline: July 30, 2017 (11.59 PM AoE)
Poster and demo submission deadline: July 30, 2017 (11.59 PM AoE)
Acceptance Notification: August 21, 2017
Camera-ready versions: September 10, 2017

Organizing Committee:

General Chairs:
Patrick Tague (Carnegie Mellon University)
Bharathan Balaji (University of California, Los Angeles)

Program Chairs:
Mani Srivastava (University of California, Los Angeles)
Yuan Tian (Carnegie Mellon University)

Poster and Demo Chair:
Houssam Abbas (University of Pennsylvania)
Publication Chair:
Rasit Eskicioglu (University of Manitoba)

SenSys Workshop Chair:
Xiaofan (Fred) Jiang (Columbia University, USA)
Technical Program Committee:
Blase Ur (University of Chicago)
Xiao Feng Wang (Indiana Bloomington)
Xinyu Xing (Penn State)
Paulo Tabuada (University of California, Los Angeles)
Supriyo Chakraborty (IBM Research)
Muhammad Naveed (University of Southern California)
Yasser Shoukry (University of California, Berkeley)
Yuvraj Agarwal (Carnegie Mellon University)
Rajesh Gupta (University of California, San Diego)
Brad Campbell (University of Virginia)
John Stankovic (University of Virginia)
Madhur Behl (University of Virginia)
Houssam Abbas (University of Pennsylvania)
Insup Lee (University of Pennsylvania)
João Vilela (University of Coimbra)
Eric Wustrow (Colorado Boulder)
Richard Han (Colorado Boulder)
Lu Feng (University of Virginia)
Earlence Fernandes (University of Michigan)
Falko Dressler (Paderborn University)
Jie Liu (Microsoft Research)
Kay Roemer (TU Graz)
Nic Lane (University College London)
Fang-Jing Wu (NEC Lab)
Jyotrimoy Deshmukh (Toyota)
Saman Zonouz (Rutgers University)
Haixin Duan (Tsinghua University)
Yutaka Arakawa (Nara Institute of Science and Technology)
Ingrid Verbauwhede (KU Leuven)
Stefano Zanero (Politecnico di Milano)
Thorsten Holz (Ruhr University Bochum)
Amir Rahmati (University of Michigan)
Cong Zheng  (Palo Alto Networks)
Chenguang Shen (Facebook)
​Shaunak Mishra (Yahoo Research)

Steering Committee:
John Stankovic (University of Virginia)
Lorrie Faith Cranor (Carnegie Mellon University)
Srdjan Capkun (ETH Zurich)
Rupak Majumdar (Max Planck Institute for Software Systems)