- Attract the support of a billionaire or team of them.
- Host a summit to plan for PIOS.
- Obtain $150 million to plan for, construct and manage this offshore marine R&D site, with an operational date in 2030.
- Trigger the formation of a floating city to host that World Fair in 2050
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The NSF Convergence Accelerator program addresses national-scale societal challenges through use- inspired convergence research. Using a convergence approach and innovation processes like human- centered design, user discovery, and team science and integration of multidisciplinary research, the Convergence Accelerator program seeks to transition basic research and discovery into practice—to solve high-impact societal challenges aligned with specific research themes (tracks).
From NSF:
Submit an idea during the ideation process: Yearly the program releases a Dear Colleague Letter, Request for Information to gather ideas from the community-at-large.
Further an idea through a workshop: Workshops are developed and hosted to further an idea and to incorporate convergence research and various disciplines and expertise. Depending on the workshop topic, the program encourages researchers and innovators to engage in the workshop dialogue. Additionally, if your idea is chosen, the Convergence Accelerator may ask you to lead the development of the workshop.
Form a team and apply to a convergence research solicitation: Yearly, the program releases a solicitation funding opportunity featuring several focused research topics from the ideation process. Researchers and innovators are encouraged to apply, however, the submitted research project team must include a mix of disciplines, expertise and organizations from academia, industry, non-profit, government, and other community of practice and sectors.
Contribute to a current funded solution: Cross-cutting partnerships or NSF Catalyzed partnerships are vital to the Convergence Accelerator and the funded teams. Theses partners may provide needed expertise, represent end-users; or provide resources, services, and infrastructure to accelerate a specific funded solution.
Team Composition
Funded teams are comprised of researchers, innovators, and other partners working on the project. The team must be composed of personnel from a mix of disciplines, expertise, and organizations from academia, industry, non-profit, government, and other sectors; including underrepresented groups needed to accomplish the project goals of accelerated use-inspired research and transition to practice. There are no team size limits and teams are expected to evolve, adding and removing members, as the project advances.
Cross-Cutting Partnerships
Partnerships from academia, industry, non-profits, government, and other sectors are required on each funded research team. Each partnership is different and may provide needed expertise, represent end-users; or provide resources, services, and infrastructure to advance the solution forward. Not all partners need to be identified at the time of the phase one proposal submission.
Intellectual Property
By the end of the Convergence Research phase one, funded teams are required to identify the potential intellectual property (IP). IP includes relevant partner contributions and ownership and management of the IP. Relevant IP forms such as trade secrets, copyrights, patents, and patentable information must be included.
NSF Convergence Accelerator track themes are chosen in concordance with the themes identified during the program’s ideation process that aligns with topics that have the potential for significant national impact. The NSF Convergence Accelerator implements a two-phase program. Phase I awardees receive significant resources to further develop their convergence research ideas and to identify important partnerships and resources to accelerate their projects, leading to deliverable research prototypes in Phase II.
For those not familiar with what academicians do, I have deleted at least half of the total announcement. Here are "only" selected portions of the request for proposals.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) is to provide research opportunities to U.S. for- profit businesses, universities, and other institutions of higher education, and their partners, to conduct a variety of research projects that will support the strategic objectives of the National Science Foundation. The NSF Convergence Accelerator implements a two-phase program. Both phases are described in this BAA and are covered by this BAA and corresponding grant solicitation that can be found here: https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505795. The purpose of this parallel activity of a grant solicitation and a BAA is to provide increased opportunities for proposals that are led by non-academic entities. Proposals led by for profit or similar organizations should respond to this BAA. Proposals that are led by Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), non-profits, independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations should respond to the grant solicitation.
- Networked Blue Economy (Track E)
1.3 Components of the NSF Convergence Accelerator
Convergence ResearchResearch and development efforts proposed must represent the highest level of multidisciplinary expertise and convergent research needed to encompass the full scope of the topic selected. Since transition to practice is a core goal of the convergence accelerator, projects need to include personnel with expertise relevant to applications and use, as well as the technologies themselves. Teams must include the necessary expertise in appropriate areas of the physical sciences, math, engineering, data and computer sciences, biological sciences, geological sciences, social and behavioral sciences, and General education and science education, and other disciplines to ensure success.Partnerships
Convergence Accelerator projects should embody use-inspired research that seeks to accelerate research to practice in ways that benefit society at scale. The Convergence Accelerator program seeks to encourage cross-cutting partnerships with many types of organizations from academia, industry, government, non- profit, and other sectors, to ensure that research efforts are use-inspired and have a clear path to transition to practice. Therefore, stakeholders from multiple types of organizations and sectors must be involved in ways that allow the project to identify and work with end users.
Deliverables
Proposers must clearly identify the deliverables that will results from the proposed project and describe how those outputs will benefit society at scale. While deliverables may take many forms (e.g., hardware, software, data, services, processes, protocols, standards, and more) projects must clearly articulate how benefits to society would result from deliverables developed by the end of Phase II. Clearly, the design of the Pacific International Ocean Station would be ideal for our partnership.
Track Alignment
The proposed effort must clearly match the goals described in one of the track descriptions. Track alignment and contributions to track success must be clearly described. The proposer must clearly describe both the track relevance (fit within the overall track topic or specific subtopic as described for Track E or F) and, also, how the proposed work fits into the overall goals of that Track to enable the transition of convergence research into practice.
Broadening Participation in the NSF Convergence Accelerator
NSF is committed to broadening the participation in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields and research endeavors of members of underrepresented groups—including women, African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, Native Pacific Islanders, and persons with disabilities.
Phase I: Learning + Applying the Convergence Accelerator Fundamentals, Convergence Research Planning
Phase I efforts will focus on research plan development and team formation leading to a proof-of-concept and will include NSF-organized convenings for training and cross-cohort collaboration. The Phase I innovation curriculum is a significant time investment with frequent participation of all partners under the guidance of coaches. A link to a sample curriculum can be found here.
Phase II: Continued Application of the Convergence Accelerator Fundamentals, Prototyping and Sustainability Planning
Selected teams from Phase I will proceed to Phase II, with potential funding up to $5 Million as a cooperative agreement for 24 months. Phase II teams will continue to apply Convergence Accelerator fundamentals, including identifying new team members and end-user partnerships to further develop solution prototypes and to build a sustainability model to continue impact beyond NSF support. At the 12- month mark, the Convergence Accelerator will review the team projects to ensure each is working towards the expected deliverables. By the end of Phase II, teams are to provide high-impact solutions for societal needs at scale.
2. Research Areas
Networked Blue Economy (Track E)
Networked Blue Economy. Collectively, this cohort will produce products, processes, and resources that will allow the US to develop avenues for a more sustainable engagement with the ocean both as an environment and as a resource. The cohort of synergistic projects funded through this track will help our nation and our citizens effectively combat challenges in the ocean while simultaneously unleashing the power of the Networked Blue Economy.
Ocean-related industries and resources have always been important for humanity; and they are expected to play a central role over the next decades in addressing challenges related to climate, sustainability, food, energy, pollution, and the economy. Recognizing this opportunity, Track E of the NSF Convergence Accelerator seeks proposals to create use-inspired, integrative solutions to enable a Networked Blue Economy. The goal of this undertaking is to facilitate making connections between ocean resources, data, technologies, training, and impacted communities. In developing a sustainable Networked Blue Economy that provides societal impact, there are presently many obstacles and challenges to overcome. Addressing these requires deep integration and collaboration among many disciplines as well as transformative and innovative partnerships across academia, industry, the public, local/regional communities, non-profit organizations, and federal, state, and local government agencies. Successful projects in this track should incorporate expertise, insights, methods, facilities, and tools from multiple disciplines as well as direct participation from impacted communities.
Building upon the strength of the United States in ocean sciences, with its extensive offshore economic zone and sea and seabed assets (~12 million km2) and marking the start of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, this track seeks to fulfill its promise by accelerating the development of bold, new, interconnected projects that tackle the obstacles imposed by the disconnected and fragmented nature of the many ocean-related sectors, technologies, and communities. These challenges have been noted by recent national and international reports, including those from the National Academy of Engineering (2018, Ocean Exploration and its Engineering Challenges), the White House Ocean Policy Committee (2020 National Strategy for Mapping, Exploring, and Characterizing the US Exclusive Economic Zone), the US Department of Energy (2019, Powering the Blue Economy), the UN Decade of Ocean Science (https://en.unesco.org/ocean-decade), and the Smart Oceans 2020 workshop sponsored by NSF (https://www.media.mit.edu/events/smart-oceans-2020/,http://www.mit.edu/~fadel/papers/Executive_Summary_Ocean_IoT.pdf).
Acceleration of a Networked Blue Economy, one that advances both ocean-related economic interests and environmental preservation and sustainability, is a challenge that requires effort and collaboration among disparate disciplines. Achieving this vision requires an accelerated and concentrated effort focused on creativity; innovative ideas and technologies; the ability to collect, aggregate, process, and interpret data and information such that stakeholders from across the spectrum of users can readily obtain the information they need; and improved means to measure and monitor all aspects (chemical, physical, and biological) of the ocean and their interconnections. This track is intended to serve as a platform that offers an opportunity to the community to bring in expertise, insights, methods, and tools from multiple areas including, but not limited to, observational oceanography, biology, health sciences, cultural issues, engineering, computer/data science, social sciences, behavioral sciences, ethics, public policy, and economics. The resulting collaborative projects must be directed toward ensuring more sustainable use of ocean resources.
Convergence Research, Deliverables, and Diversity and Inclusion. The Networked Blue Economy track focuses on use-inspired, translational research. Projects must embrace and display a culture of convergence among disciplinary approaches, and must include partners from multiple sectors. Projects must articulate one or more clear deliverables that will help transition research into practice with measurable impacts and benefits to society within the less than 3-year effort of a Convergence Accelerator track—9 months of Phase I and 24 months of Phase II. Deliverables must address challenges in sustainable ocean utilization while providing significant benefits to society. Each project should incorporate community engagement and strive to include an education or training component that connects user communities. Such connections could include, but are not limited to, citizen science, co-designing projects so they provide benefits to local communities or provide user-friendly data products and services, or creating workforce training programs. Projects should consider potential benefits to local communities from the data and insights produced by project efforts and by enabling communities to participate in project evaluation activities. Projects that focus specifically on community engagement and education are also encouraged. Proposals should be explicit in how diversity, equity, and inclusion will be incorporated into the overall project.
Outcomes and sample topics of a Networked Blue Economy might include, but are not limited to:
Sustainable Utilization: In industries such as aquaculture, fisheries, energy, mapping, tourism & recreation, shipping & maritime transportation and commerce, preservation efforts (plastics, marine debris, & unexploded ordnance)
Climate & Ecology: Leverage, reuse, and network existing data and modeling capabilities and resources to develop monitoring and forecasting processes for weather, air-sea interaction, corals, marine ecosystems, marine animals and plants, carbon/acidification, currents & waves, aerosols, and sea ice.
Networked, Cost-Effective, and Interoperable Ocean Systems & Technologies: Networked infrastructures (e.g., communications, power, localization), novel instrumentation, distributed and interoperable sensors (e.g., ultra-low- power or self-powered sensor networks, low-cost underwater GPS, reliable sensors for aquaculture, waste, carbon, optical, chemical), instrumentation (e.g., imaging, remote sensing, autonomous robotics).
Data aggregation techniques for Ocean Big Data: Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence for deployment, inference, and decision-making, high resolution/largescale observation & prediction tools – for disaster risk reduction, pollution mitigation, sensors and robotics tools & technology, and IoT (Internet of Things) integration into ocean environments.
Empowerment and Engagement: Scalable efforts at the community level in topics such as sustainability, resiliency, increasing awareness and public participation in science, engagement at the policy level, scalable efforts in literacy, and workforce education and training.
Interconnected People, Communities, and Curricula: Projects to empower communities to deal with local/regional issues including disaster risk reduction, coastal resilience, and coastal restoration. These efforts may develop and implement a variety of approaches, including place-based strategies, accessible tools for engaging public participation in ocean STEM, hubs for engaging with local communities, Networked Blue Economy curricula that address, for example, policy, mentorship, technology translation, and social engagement.
Trust & Authenticity in Communications Systems (Track F)
The overarching goal of Track F is to develop prototype(s) of novel research platforms forming integrated collection(s) of tools, techniques, and educational materials and programs to support increased citizen trust in public information of all sorts (health, climate, news, etc.), through more effectively preventing, mitigating, and adapting to critical threats in our communications systems. The cohort of projects supported through this track will catalyze innovative partnerships involving the full range of information consumers and a diverse set of organizations focused on engendering trust and authenticity in communications systems. Collectively, the cohort of projects will produce products, processes, and resources to enable a more trustworthy communications ecosystem by focusing on the range of content platforms, new and enhanced services to improve the fidelity of communications between platforms and information consumers, and education and training materials to create better informed consumers.
3.5 Project Selection Process
This BAA selection process is structured as a three-step process.
3.5.1 Letter of Intent to Propose
The first step of the process is the submission of a letter of intent to propose. As detailed in section 4, the letter of intent is a non-binding letter of intent to submit a phase I proposal.
3.5.2 Phase I Full Proposal
After submitting a letter of intent, offerors may submit a Phase I full proposal. Proposals shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 5. Submissions that are incomplete, materially lacking, or not responsive to the technical requirements of this BAA, may be returned unevaluated, or evaluated as is, with out further opportunity for revision, at the discretion of the NSF’s evaluation process. Phase I awards are limited to $750,000 for a one-year period of performance.
3.5.3 Phase II Full Proposal
Phase I awardees will be invited to submit a Phase II full proposal in accordance with Section 6. Proposals shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 5. Submissions that are incomplete, materially lacking, or not responsive to the technical requirements of this BAA, may be returned unevaluated,orevaluatedasis,withoutfurther opportunityforrevision,atthediscretionoftheNSF’s evaluation process. Phase II awards are limited $3M for year one and up to $5,000,000 for the full two-year period of performance.
3.6 Intellectual Property Rights
Awards will generally contain detailed provisions concerning patent rights, rights in technical data and computer software, data reporting requirements, and other terms and conditions which may be negotiated as part of the award process.
Offerors must describe any limitations on any intellectual property (patents, inventions, trade secrets, copyrights, or trademarks) that will impact the Offeror’s performance of the contract or impact the Government’s subsequent use of any deliverable under the contract. The Offeror must describe the intellectual property in sufficient detail to describe the limitations (Data assertions of the Offeror or any subcontractor, potential patent licenses required by the Government, etc.), and to describe why or how the Government can accomplish the stated objectives of this BAA with the limitations described or proposed by the Offeror.
3.7 Proprietary Data Restrictions
Offerors are advised that proposals for any or all phases may contain data the offeror does not want disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes. If the offeror wishes to restrict such data, the cover page of all submittal documents must be marked with the following legend, and relevant sheets marked as instructed.
This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed – in whole or in part – for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. However, if a contract is awarded to this offer or as a resultof–or in connection with– the submission of these data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent providedi nt he resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government’s right to use information contained in these data if they are obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in Sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets].
4. Letter of Intent to Propose
No project will be considered for an award without a letter of intent to propose. Letters are not evaluated, however, in order to submit a phase I proposal, each offeror must submit a letter of intent. Letters of intent shall not exceed one page and include the following:
partnerships, the same information should be provided for all sub-awardees to the extent it is
research and broad partnerships will lead to a deliverable that would be refined during Phase I and describe how the deliverable would impact society at a national scale.
When submitting a Letter of Intent in response to this BAA please note the conditions outlined below:
A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 4 Other Senior Project Personnel are permitted
A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 4 Other Participating Organizations are permitted
Letters of intent shall be emailed to Keith Boyea at kboyea@nsf.gov prior to the deadline in section 3.1.
5.0 Phase I Full Proposal
Phase I efforts will focus on research plan development and team formation leading to a proof-of-concept and will include NSF-organized convenings for training and cross-cohort collaboration. The Phase I innovation curriculum is a significant time investment with frequent participation of all partners under th guidance of coaches. A link to a sample curriculum can be found here. Phase I full proposals shall be emailed to Keith Boyea at kboyea@nsf.gov.
5.1.2 Project Description. Limited to 15 pages.
Objectives and Significance of the Proposed Activity
Convergence Research: Explain how the work conducted in Phase I represents research at the
highest level of integration and interdisciplinarity. Explain how your project uses a convergent research approach, including discussing the intellectually distinct disciplines and areas of expertise needed. Discuss how you will identify additional areas of expertise that may be needed.Proposing teams MUST be comprised of researchers and stakeholders from different disciplines that can help catalyze the proposed scientific discovery and accelerate the transition of that innovation into practical use. Phase I teams can involve different partners than were mentioned in the letter of intent. However, at least one of the PI or co-PIs in the Phase I proposal must have served as a PI or co-PI for the letter of intent. Any exception to this must be discussed with NSF in advance of proposal submission.Partnerships including a Roles and Responsibilities Table: Describe how stakeholders from multiple kinds of organizations, including academic and non-academic partners, are poised to form deep and diverse partnerships in support of the proposed use-inspired research. Every team is expected to include at least two types of organizations (e.g., industry, government, academia). Describe the roles of different partners and team members in developing deliverables. The Roles and Responsibilities Table should also clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of all individuals and major groups and entities included in the project. The inclusion of a qualified project manager for effective oversight is strongly encouraged for Phase I proposals.
Coordination Plan: Describe a mechanism for how collaboration and team effectiveness will be promoted.
Deliverables: Describe potential future deliverables should the project continue beyond Phase I and describe the timeline for those deliverables. Phase II will end ~April 2024 and your deliverables are expected at that time. You should also discuss preliminary deliverables that will be developed in Phase I. Explain why there is a high probability that this plan will be achieved.
Track Alignment: Explain fully the alignment to one of the tracks in this BAA (E or F) and how the proposed work in Phase I will assist in the success of the entire track.
Broader Impacts that includes a Broadening Participation Plan: As broadening participation is an important aspect of the Convergence Accelerator program (see section II) Broader Impacts MUST include a separate sub-section outlining a specific plan for broadening participation.
5.1.3 Letters of Collaboration:
Letters of support or endorsement for the project are not acceptable and will be cause for return without review. Statements from individuals whose role is discussed in the Project Description as providing assistance or collaboration to the project and must be substantive in nature and must verify their participation and role with a document in the following format.
There is no limit on the number of letters of collaboration.
Priority will be placed on the quality and significance of the collaboration and the role and involvement of the collaborator must be evident from relevant sections of the project description.
5.1.4 Data Management Plan. Limited to two pages. Proposals shall address within the Data Management Plan their plans for data-sharing across their team, across the track with other teams, and with the general public, during the project and after its completion as well.
5.1.5 Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan. Limited to one page. Each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must submit a “Mentoring Plan.” A mentoring plan describes the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Note that the Convergence Accelerator program differs in duration and goals from traditional academic research efforts. The Postdoctoral Research Mentoring Plan should reflect how mentoring will be appropriate for the specific roles of postdoctoral researchers in this project effort.
5.1.6 Personnel List Spreadsheet. The spreadsheet template is found in attachment 1. Please read the instructions carefully. Using the Excel file template, compile information for all persons identified in the proposal as: "PI or co-PI" (i.e., those listed on the cover page); "Other Senior Personnel/Subawardee"; or "Other Personnel" who have a biosketch included in the proposal; "Collaborator (Letters of Collaboration or Expressions of Interest)" for individuals who formally submitted a Letters of Collaboration. Only one spreadsheet should be submitted per proposal. The purpose of this document is to assist the program in identifying potential conflicts during review. If you are unsure of whether to include someone in the Personnel List Spreadsheet, err on the side of including the person.
5.1.7 Cost/Price: Note: Phase I awards may not exceed $750,000. The Phase I proposal shall include a spreadsheet of all costs as described below. In addition, the offeror shall include a not to exceed two-page cost/price narrative. The general requirements for cost or pricing are described below.
The cost or pricing portion of the project proposal should contain a cost estimate for the proposed effort to allow for meaningful evaluation and determination of price reasonableness and cost realism. The cost estimate shall account for the entire cost of Phase I. The cost estimate shall be broken down as follows:
Labor - A breakdown of direct labor and hourly rate, identifying the labor categories and individuals and projected hours, and their associated subtotals.
Overhead and/or fringe - Labor overhead and/or fringe rate(s) and base(s), and cumulative effect on labor costs.
Materials, supplies, and equipment - Description and cost of materials, supplies, and equipment, to include the basis of the cost estimate (e.g., historical data, competitive market quotes, and in-house transfers). Specific mention should be made of any highly specialized or costly test equipment or supplies needed to accomplish the project.
Travel and transportation - Breakdown of travel and transportation costs.
Subcontracts - Breakdown of individual subcontracts. State the amounts of time of subcontractor/consulting services to be devoted to the project, including the cost to be charged to the proposed contract/agreement.
ODC - Breakdown of other direct costs (reproduction, computer time, and consultants).
Misc. - Identification of any other direct or indirect cost elements not identified elsewhere. For each indirect rate (identified here or elsewhere), indicate if the proposed indirect rate and allocation base have been approved by a government audit or cognizant agency for use in proposals and when the rate(s) was approved and the name of and telephone number of the cognizant auditor or approving official.
General and Administrative - G&A rate and base.
Profit or fee - Profit or fee may be proposed, and if proposed, is subject to negotiations and applicable statutory limits.
5.1.7.1 Requested Procurement Instrument and Pricing Arrangement.
The offeror shall include, in the cost/price narrative, a summary of the recommended procurement instrument (e.g. contract or “other arrangement”). Note, only contracts or other arrangements will be awarded as a result of this BAA. The offeror shall also specify the requested pricing arrangement (e.g. fixed-price, cost, cost-plus-fixed-fee, etc.) and the rationale for its use. If the offeror requests a cost reimbursement type pricing arrangement, the offeror must have an approved accounting system.
If the offeror is seeking an “other arrangement,” (similar in nature to an “Other Transaction”) it must explain to NSF the basis for seeking the other arrangement and the areas of regulatory relief requested by the offeror. The NSF will consider awarding an other arrangement only if it is in the best interests of NSF.
6.0 Phase II Full Proposals
Phase II full proposals shall be emailed to Keith Boyea at kboyea@nsf.gov.
6.1. Cover Sheet and Project Summary: The cover sheet shall contain the title of the project and the relevant Convergence Accelerator track. The cover sheet shall also include the PI and any co-PIs name and the DUNS number of the submitting lead organization. The project summary shall provide a succinct statement of the aim of the project. In most cases, the project summary will be two or three sentences.
6.2 Project Description. Limited to 20 pages. Proposals should clearly describe the specific role and 13 contribution of each team member or group. Proposals should describe how the proposer will organize collaboration among project members to promote team effectiveness, taking into account lessons learned from Phase I activities, such as human-centered design, user interviews, team science techniques, as well as domain-specific activities.
Proposing teams MUST be comprised of researchers and stakeholders from different disciplines that can help catalyze the proposed scientific discovery and accelerate the transition of that innovation into practical use. Phase II teams can involve different partners than were part of the Phase I proposal. However, at least one of the PI or Co-PIs in the Phase II proposal must have served as a PI or Co-PI for that project in Phase I. Any exception to this must be discussed with NSF in advance of proposal submission.
The proposal must also include the following sections in the following order (a through k)
Objectives and Significance of the Proposed Activity
Convergence Research: Explain how the work conducted in Phase I and the work proposed in
Phase II represent research at the highest level of integration and interdisciplinarity.
Partnerships including a Roles and Responsibilities Table: Describe how stakeholders from multiple kinds of organizations, including academic and non-academic partners, form deep and
diverse partnerships in support of the proposed use-inspired research. Proposers should include a
qualified project manager for effective oversight in Phase II projects.
Coordination Plan: (up to two pages) Each proposal must contain a Convergence Coordination and
Management Plan that describes how the project will be managed across disciplines, institutions, and stakeholder entities over time. This plan should identify specific convergence activities that will enable cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral integration of teams, such as mentoring and/or professional development/training to support convergent outcomes, and the plan should provide a timeline showing principal tasks and associated interactions. The plan must address the specific roles and responsibilities of the collaborating PI, Co-PIs, other Senior Personnel, paid consultants, partners, any other stakeholder participants, and describe the timing and how tasks will be integrated over the course of the project.
Phase I Portfolio: (up to two pages) Each proposal should provide discussion of the participation of the project team in the Phase I curriculum, meetings and webinars, discussion of how Phase I efforts may have modified the project path, and documentation of any creative products or preliminary results developed during Phase I and how they will be incorporated into the Phase II work plan.
Timeline of Milestones and Deliverables: (one page) Along with the Convergence Coordination and Management Plan, each proposal must provide a visual representation (e.g., Gantt chart or alternative) of key milestones during the two-year award period, including creation of specific deliverables.
Deliverables: In alignment with the timeline above state clearly what are the planned, tangible deliverables, along with milestones, during the two-year award period as well as after two years of funding. Explain why there is a high probability that this plan will be achieved.
Track Alignment: Explain the close match to one of the tracks in this BAA (E or F) and how the proposed work in Phase II will assist in the success of the entire track. Each proposal should include a description of how the proposed project will contribute to an integrated overall effort that will deliver useful outputs. This section should describe the types of activities that are proposed to be undertaken to promote track integration.
Intellectual Property Management Plan: (up to three pages) Partnerships that facilitate the research effort and transition to practice of research results are a key element of the Convergence Accelerator program and a clear Intellectual Property Management Plan is essential for current and future partnerships. Both ownership and management of IP should be addressed in the Intellectual Property Management Plan. The plan should include (1) IP contributed by partners included in this proposal, (2) IP that may be developed during the project, and (3) a plan for access to IP from (1) and (2) by potential future partners. Current and future partners may include, but are not limited to, institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations such as foundations or community organizations, for-profit organizations such as companies or investment groups, local/state/federal government, and others. The Intellectual Property Management Plan must articulate how potential future partners will access intellectual property within the project. Appropriate agreements must be in place before an award is made. Similarly, commitments from partner organizations for sharing of resources (such as data, research instrumentation, or any other required elements for carrying out the proposed work) should be described and formal agreements must be in place before an award is made. The Intellectual Property Management Plan is protected by the Privacy Act (as is the full proposal) and is the type of non-public information that NSF typically will not release beyond the closed, confidential review process, even under FOIA or other request. The Intellectual Property Management Plan will NOT be shared with organizations attending the Expo, but appropriate information that can be shared should be included in the Public Executive Summary document.
Broader Impacts that includes a Broadening Participation Plan: (up to two pages) This BAA requests that each project include as part of Broader Impacts a Broadening Participation Plan that describes activities that will be undertaken to increase the participation of underrepresented groups in the project’s research and development efforts. Examples of ways to engage groups and/or individuals that are underrepresented could include: through the expertise of personnel, via partnerships, through work with users and user groups, via engagement with stakeholders, through use of datasets that represent information about underrepresented groups, etc. The Broadening Participation Plans should include: (1) the context of the proposed broadening participation activity(ies), (2) the intended participants for the activity(ies), (3) the plan of activities over the project duration, (4) prior experience (if any) with broadening participation, and/or intended plan for preparation/training of project members in broadening participation, and (5) plans for the measurement and dissemination of outcomes in broadening participation.
Public Executive Summary (public document, for open sharing): (up to two pages) Because the NSF is interested in partnering with industry, foundations, investment community, and others in Phase II, the proposal must include a Public Executive Summary that will be posted publicly and shared with potential NSF partners prior to the Expo. A Public Executive Summary is developed during Phase I with the help of your coaches. This supplementary document is the only element of the Phase II proposal that will be shared with attendees at the Expo and may also be posted publicly on the NSF Convergence Accelerator website. At a minimum, the Public Executive Summary should include the following: (1) Summary of the project’s objectives and deliverables; (2) Current status of the intellectual property associated with the project; (3) Summary of the Intellectual Property Management Plan (produced as one of the supplementary documents mentioned previously); (4) A description of the current industry partners and how they are participating in the current Phase I activities and their expected participation in Phase II; (5) A clear and concise description of how the proposed project is different from other research and a comparison to other similar work the team is aware of; and (6) A description of the timeline for proposed milestones and deliverables of the project. The Public Executive Summary may include other information to help potential NSF partners decide about possible co-funding or provision of resources to the project. Potential partners will not receive any additional documentation from NSF other than the Public Executive Summary, but additional information may be requested from the proposer. The Public Executive Summary should not include proprietary information.
6.3 Letters of Collaboration
Support or endorsement letters are not acceptable and will be cause for return without review.
Statements from individuals whose role is discussed in the Project Description as providing assistance or collaboration to the project and must be substantive in nature must verify their participation and role with a document in the following format.
There is no limit on the number of letters of collaboration.
Priority will be placed on the quality and significance of the collaboration and the role and involvement of the collaborator must be evident from relevant sections of the project description.
6.4 Data Management Plan: Up to two pages. Proposals shall address within the Data Management Plan their plans for data-sharing across their team, across the track with other teams, and with the general public, during the project and after its completion as well.
6.5 Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan: Up to one page. Each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must submit a “Mentoring Plan,” a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Note that the Convergence Accelerator program differs in duration and goals from traditional academic research efforts. The Postdoctoral Research Mentoring Plan is expected to reflect a mentoring plan that is will be appropriate for the specific roles of postdoctoral researchers in this project effort.
6.6 Personnel List Spreadsheet. The spreadsheet template is found in attachment 1. Please read the instructions carefully. Using the Excel file template, compile information for all persons identified in the proposal as: "PI or co-PI" (i.e., those listed on the cover page); "Other Senior Personnel/Subawardee"; or "Other Personnel" who have a biosketch included in the proposal; "Collaborator (Letters of Collaboration or Expressions of Interest)" for individuals who formally submitted a Letters of Collaboration. Only one spreadsheet should be submitted per proposal. The purpose of this document is to assist the program in identifying potential conflicts during review. If you are unsure of whether to include someone in the Personnel List Spreadsheet, err on the side of including the person.
6.7 Cost/Price: Note: Phase II awards may not exceed $5,000,000. The Phase II proposal shall include a spreadsheet of all costs as described below. In addition, the offeror shall include a not to exceed two-page cost/price narrative. The general requirements for cost or pricing are described below.
The cost or pricing portion of the project proposal should contain a cost estimate for the proposed effort to allow for meaningful evaluation and determination of price reasonableness and cost realism. The cost estimate shall account for the entire cost of Phase II. The cost estimate shall be broken down as follows:
Labor - A breakdown of direct labor and hourly rate, identifying the labor categories and individuals and projected hours, and their associated subtotals.
Overhead and/or fringe - Labor overhead and/or fringe rate(s) and base(s), and cumulative effect on labor costs.
Materials, supplies, and equipment - Description and cost of materials, supplies, and equipment, to include the basis of the cost estimate (e.g., historical data, competitive market quotes, and in-house transfers). Specific mention should be made of any highly specialized or costly test equipment or supplies needed to accomplish the project.
Travel and transportation - Breakdown of travel and transportation costs.
Subcontracts - Breakdown of individual subcontracts. State the amounts of time of subcontractor/consulting services to be devoted to the project, including the cost to be charged to the proposed contract/agreement.
ODC - Breakdown of other direct costs (reproduction, computer time, and consultants).
Misc. - Identification of any other direct or indirect cost elements not identified elsewhere. For each indirect rate (identified here or elsewhere), indicate if the proposed indirect rate and allocation base have been approved by a government audit or cognizant agency for use in proposals and when the rate(s) was approved and the name of and telephone number of the cognizant auditor or approving official.
General and Administrative - G&A rate and base.
Profit or fee - Profit or fee may be proposed, and if proposed, is subject to negotiations and applicable statutory limits.
6.7.1 Requested Procurement Instrument and Pricing Arrangement. The offeror shall include, in the cost/price narrative, a summary of the recommended procurement instrument (e.g. contract or “other arrangement”). Note, only contracts or other arrangements will be awarded as a result of this BAA. The offeror shall also specify the requested pricing arrangement (e.g. fixed-price, cost, cost-plus-fixed-fee, etc.) and the rationale for its use. If the offeror requests a cost reimbursement type pricing arrangement, the offeror must have an approved accounting system.
If the offeror is seeking an “other arrangement,” (similar in nature to an “Other Transaction”) it must explain to NSF the basis for seeking the other arrangement and the areas of regulatory relief requested by the offeror. The NSF will consider awarding an other arrangement only if it is in the best interests of NSF.
6.7.2 Subcontracting Plan. Any offeror, other than small businesses, submitting a proposal for a phase II award anticipated in excess of $750,000, must submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.704(a) or if no subcontracting opportunities exist, a statement to that effect. This information, if applicable, must be included in the Phase II full proposal. The plan format is outlined in FAR 19.7. Pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. § 637(d)), it is the policy of the Government to enable small business and small disadvantaged business concerns to be considered fairly as subcontractors to contractors performing work or rendering services as prime contractors or subcontractors under Government contracts, and to assure that prime contractors and subcontractors carry out this policy.
A subcontracting plan identifies the offeror's approach to awarding subcontracts to small business, small disadvantaged business, women-owned small business, service-disabled veteran owned small business, and Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) small business concerns, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) on this effort. An approved master subcontracting plan may be submitted in lieu of an individual subcontracting plan. The offeror must demonstrate how small business concerns will be used in the performance of the contract. The plan must also specify how the offeror will identify small business concerns throughout contract performance that can be added to the contract team. The emphasis of the plan must be to maximize small business participation to the maximum extent practicable.
7.0 Evaluation and Award
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.
7.1 Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by Principal Investigators (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.
7.2 Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. All phases of the evaluation will be evaluated using NSF’s merit review criteria. In addition, NSF will employ additional criteria listed in sections 7.4 and 7.5 to highlight the specific objectives of the Convergence Accelerator.
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. These criteria are of equal importance and more important than the criteria listed in sections 7.4 and 7.5.
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 groups 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.
7.3 Additional Criteria for Letter of Intent. Letters of intent are not evaluated. However, in order to submit a Phase I Full Proposal, the offeror must submit a letter of intent.
7.4 Additional Criteria for Phase I Full Proposal. In addition to intellectual merit and broader impacts, phase I full proposals will be evaluated by asking the following questions:
7.5 Additional Criteria for Phase II Full Proposal. In addition to intellectual merit and broader impacts, phase II full proposals will be evaluated by asking the following questions:
a. Convergence Research
Do the Project Description, Convergence and Partnerships, Coordination Plan, and Phase I Portfolio represent research at the highest level of integration and interdisciplinarity, justifying this investment in supporting a convergence research team?
b. Partnership
Does the Project Description make a strong case that stakeholders from multiple kinds of organizations, including academic and non-academic partners are poised to form a deep and diverse partnership that supports the use-inspired research proposed?
c. Deliverables
Does the Project Description, Coordination Plan, and Timeline of Milestones and Deliverables indicate a high probability of deliverables within a two-year period that will ultimately benefit society?
d. Track Alignment
Is the proposed research appropriate, i.e., is there a close match to one of the tracks in this BAA (E or F)?
Do the proposed ideas differ markedly from research supported by other NSF programs, initiatives, Big Ideas or other NSF funding mechanisms?
Is there convincing evidence of how the effort in Phase II will contribute to the success of the entire track?
e. Reasonableness and realism of the estimated costs.
Are the estimated costs reasonable and realistic for the research proposed?
7.5.1 Oral Pitch Presentation and Pitch Panel Review
Following the NSF proposal review panels, the Convergence Accelerator will execute a virtual or in-person oral pitch review presentation as part of the evaluation process and will also hold a public Convergence Accelerator Expo 2021 (Expo). The pitch review will consist of review panels, one for each track, Track E and Track F.
The pitch review panels will be made up of members from academia, industry, and other sectors. The pitch review will include NSF reviewers, NSF staff, and competing teams only. The review criteria for the pitch session are the same as those applied to the written proposal and described above.
7.5.1.1 Schedule and Location for Pitch Presentations
The NSF Convergence Accelerator will notify all offerors of the schedule for the virtual or in-person oral pitch presentations and provide necessary details as they become available. Pitch presentations will either be virtual or in-person. If in-person the pitch presentation will likely be held in or near Washington, DC., at a location near the NSF. Pitch presentations must comply with these instructions and any additional instructions that the NSF may provide prior to the presentation. The date of the pitch review will be approximately 2-4 weeks after the full proposal due date.
7.5.1.2 Participation and Attendance in the Pitch Session
A proposer's oral pitch presentation team may include the presenter and up to four other team members. Representatives may be from any of the Convergence Accelerator team members. The presenter must be a person regularly engaged with the project, such as the PI, a Co-PI, or a Senior Personnel member. It is not required that the PI be the presenter, but the presenter cannot be a person engaged just to make the pitch.
7.5.1.3 Format of the Pitch Session
The Pitch Presentations will occur as follows: The presenter will have approximately 10 minutes to present their proposed Convergence Accelerator Phase II approach to the review panel. An additional amount of time will be allocated for the NSF pitch review panels to ask questions of the presenter following their 10- minute pitch. The question-and-answer period does not count against the oral Pitch Presentation time limit.
7.5.1.4 Expected Pitch Content
The oral pitch presentation should address the following:
1. Introduce the team number and name, names and titles of presenting personnel and their project roles and provide a brief (one sentence) description of the Phase II project.
3. Provide a brief summary of the proposed Convergence Accelerator Phase II project that includes: • A clear description of the innovation and problem it is solving.
The broader social impact of the project, including potential applications if the Phase II
effort is successful. The objectives for the project.
The key deliverables and expected outcomes (concrete and measurable).
The capacity and capabilities of the team to execute the project including management,
staffing and necessary technical and other skills.
The current and expected partners making firm commitments that will help the team
achieve the project goals. This may include collaborations with other teams.
Describe project elements and activities that will contribute to integrating efforts among or
across projects to achieve track success.
4. Any additional topics provided by the NSF prior to the oral Pitch Presentation.7.5.2. Convergence Accelerator Expo
The Convergence Accelerator Expo is a separate public event that provides the teams the opportunity to pitch and demonstrate their project and answer questions from an invited audience of potential partnership organizations. The Expo will be held as an in-person event, virtual, or a combination of the two depending on restrictions of in-person meetings. The Expo presentation format will be determined by the expo format (e.g., in-person, virtual or a combination of the two). The formats may be a timed pitch with Q&A or an exhibit booth, virtual or in person to be operated by the team, or some combination of these.
The date of the Expo will be held approximately 4-6 weeks after the full proposal due date and 2-4 weeks after the pitch panel review.
7.5.2.1 Expressions of Interest
The Expo will be presented to an invited audience of other potential funders and funding organizations from industry, foundations, other government agencies, and other members of the investment community, as well as the broader public (press, etc.). Expo attendees will have the opportunity to provide “Expressions of Interest” aligned to specific projects. Invitations to attend the Expo will focus on organizations interested in potentially contributing resources to the specific research and development areas identified in the Phase II projects. Other interested groups and individuals may also attend. Accordingly, only information that is publicly available can be included in Expo content, presentations, and products. The format of the Expressions of Interest will be determined when the Expo format is decided and will be made available online and at the Expo. Additional Expo information will be provided when the Public Executive Summaries are made available on the NSF Convergence Accelerator website.
Note: Teams are encouraged to prepare different presentations, one for the Pitch Review and another for the Expo.
7.5.3 Presentation Media
Proposers shall prepare all presentations using electronic presentation tools when making the oral pitch presentation. The proposer shall provide electronic copies of the oral pitch presentation one week in advance of the presentation.
7.6 Overall Evaluation for Phase II awards
NSF will assemble a list of recommended Phase II awards based on all review information available, including the written proposal reviews and the pitch presentation reviews. Expressions of Interest will be considered separately from the proposal and pitch panel reviews based on complementarity with NSF’s mission and the specific goals of the Convergence Accelerator. Proposing teams can choose if and how to engage with any organization that seeks to interact with them directly or via an Expression of Interest. An Expression of Interest is not required for a Phase II award recommendation, and the existence of an Expressions of Interest does not guarantee selection for a Phase II award. NSF will consider the extent to which Expressions of Interest complement NSF goals, seem likely to assist project success, are desired by the project team, and seem likely to increase the success of the overall track. These considerations may influence final award recommendations.
If Expressions of Interest lead to agreements to support projects between organizations and NSF, proposers potentially receiving support via those agreements will have a role in defining the list of materials that would be shared with any organizations providing support. Shared materials could include unattributed reviews (from proposal, pitch, or post- award site visits), progress reports, elements of the proposal itself, or other materials.
7.7 Award
Proposals for all phases of this BAA will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified through NSF’s merit review process. Multiple awards may be made and are dependent upon the technical merit of the submission(s), how well it fits within the Convergence Accelerator tracks, and the availability of funding.
7.8 Award Notification
NSF will provide notification of selection and non-selection. However, NSF will not provide debriefings as described in FAR 15.505 or 15.506.
7.9 Contract Conditions:
Phase I
The innovation curriculum requires a significant time investment and frequent participation of all partners under the guidance of coaches (a link to a sample curriculum can be found here). Projects must ensure that they have set aside the necessary time for these activities. There is also significant engagement and oversight by the NSF Convergence Accelerator Program Directors during Phase I activities.
Phase II
NSF Convergence Accelerator Phase II contracts will include Special Conditions relating to the period of performance, statement of work, awardee responsibilities, NSF responsibilities, joint NSF-awardee responsibilities, funding and funding schedule, reporting requirements, Senior Personnel, and other conditions. Within the first approximately 30 days of the contract, all Senior Personnel will be required to participate in an approximately two-day meeting at NSF or virtually. In addition, Senior Personnel will be required to attend an evaluation meeting for approximately two days at NSF or virtually near the end of year one. The purpose of the evaluation meeting is to assess progress the awardees have made towards advancing project goals via a well-functioning interdisciplinary and multi-organization team. Each awardee team will prepare briefing material (expected to be 10 pages or less) describing its accomplishments and make a short presentation which will be followed by questions and answers. The reviewers will evaluate the team’s progress towards its stated goals and, in particular, progress towards creating deliverables. Taking into account reviewers' input, NSF will decide whether the team will receive funding for the second year. Budgets for all projects must include funding for Senior Personnel to attend three meetings per year at NSF or virtually. At least one of these meetings each year is likely to focus on track integration.
Extensions are not permitted except under clearly documented exceptional circumstances. Grantees must first contact the cognizant Program Officer prior to submitting a request.
Awardees will be required to include appropriate acknowledgment of NSF support (and partners if appropriate) under the NSF Convergence Accelerator in any publication (including World Wide Web pages) of any material based on or developed under the project, in the following terms:
"This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Convergence Accelerator under Award No. (Grantee enters NSF award number.)"
Awardees also will be required to orally acknowledge NSF support using the language specified above during all news media interviews, including popular media such as radio, television and news magazines.
Reporting Requirements
The offeror must submit an annual project report to Keith Boyea at kboyea@nsf.gov 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 and site visits and/or reverse site visits). No later than 120 days following expiration of a contract, the offeror is also required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
-
