Important Information for Proposers
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 17-1), is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 30, 2017. Please be advised that, depending on the specified due date, the guidelines contained in NSF 17-1 may apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity.
Full Proposal Deadline Date
Internal ORD Letter of Intent Deadline: Tuesday, September 5, 2017
Agency Due Date: October 25, 2017
Institutional Limit: 2
The Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) program is designed to encourage the development and implementation of bold, new, and potentially transformative approaches to STEM graduate education training. The program seeks proposals that explore ways for graduate students in research-based master’s and doctoral degree programs to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers.
IGE focuses on projects aimed at piloting, testing, and validating innovative and potentially transformative approaches to graduate education. IGE projects are intended to generate the knowledge required for their customization, implementation, and broader adoption. The program supports testing of novel models or activities with high potential to enrich and extend the knowledge base on effective graduate education approaches.
The program addresses both workforce development, emphasizing broad participation, and institutional capacity building needs in graduate education. Strategic collaborations with the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, national laboratories, field stations, teaching and learning centers, informal science centers, and academic partners are encouraged.
This program provides educational opportunities for Graduate Students . This program provides indirect funding for students at this level or focuses on educational developments for this group such as curricula development, training or retention. To inquire about possible funding opportunities not directly from NSF, please look at the active awards for this program.
General guidance for preparation of letters of intent to the Research Office: email to email@example.com
COVER SHEET (1 page)
Solicitation Name and Descriptive Title
Project Summary: 3 or 4 sentences or bullet points that provide an overview of the objective of your proposed research, how you plan to do it, and the expected outcome.
Unique Aspects: 3 or 4 sentences or bullet points that highlight how your research/approach is different/better.
Key PI/co-PIs: 5 or 6 sentences or bullet points that highlight team expertise as it relates to the project.
Budget: Example: The total cost of the project is anticipated to be $ X, with $ Y being requested from the NSF. NSF funds will be used for: $ A for personnel; $ B for operations, and $ C for broader impacts/subcontracts etc.
Justification for NSF support: One paragraph explaining why this research fits with the RFP and strategic goals of NSF.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (1 - 4 pages)
Please note if this project is a resubmit or is brand new.
Problem statement : Clear and concise statement of 1) research question(s) and how the project will address the research question(s); 2) what technical barriers need to be overcome to perform the research; and 3) how the proposed research can lead to the advancement of research/knowledge in this area.
Conceptual framework: Conceptual framework describing, for example, how the synthesis of various project components, approaches, and participant expertise are linked together to address the problem of interest. Graphics may be used.
Proposed activities: Describe the project to be undertaken and provide the technical specifications of the research activities and timelines that will be undertaken.
Expected results: Describe the outcome you anticipate from the research. (Remember your initial motivation for wanting to do this!)
Peer Groups: Who else is doing something similar, why their discoveries are useful for you, and what discriminates you.
Broader Impact/Metrics for Success: What metrics are the most appropriate for evaluating the success of the proposed project (e.g., peer-reviewed papers, policy-directed efforts, databases, models, development of new resources, etc.)? If successful, who would most likely use the knowledge or tools developed?
Suggested Reviewers: (1 page) Optional – but as you write envision who might be a reviewer of your proposal or the Program Officer.
Reviewer 1: Area of expertise