Research Office

NSF 19-513

Letter of Intent Due to Research Office: Information: Research.Development@oregonstate.edu

Agency Full Proposal Deadline Date:  January 24, 2019

Institutional Limit: 2

Information: Research.Development@oregonstate.edu

General guidance for preparation of letters of intent to the Research Office:

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)

• 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?
• Fundraising:  List any matching fund requests, industry commitments etc.  List any similar current proposals pending.

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
• Name
• Title
• Contact
• State why you think this person would be a good reviewer.

• Submit electronically as a PDF document to: Research.Development@oregonstate.edu

In FY 2017, NSF is continuing a program aligned with the Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) framework:REvolutionizing engineering and computer science Departments. This funding opportunity enables engineering and computer science departments to lead the nation by successfully achieving significant sustainable changes necessary to overcome longstanding issues in their undergraduate programs and educate inclusive communities of engineering and computer science students prepared to solve 21st-­century challenges.

Prospective PIs are strongly discouraged from submitting identical or substantially similar proposals to RED and IUSE: EHR.

RELATED URLS
FAQs for IUSE/Professional Formation of Engineers: REvolutionizing engineering and computer science Departments (RED)