The Division of Environmental Biology (DEB) held its fourth Virtual Office Hour on March 9^th, 2020. We’ll be hosting these office hours 1-2pm EST on the 2^nd Monday of every month. There will be a designated theme each time, but attendees are welcome to ask about other NSF-related topics. Program Officers from each of DEB’s clusters will be present at every Virtual Office Hour.

This month’s topic was Rapid Response Research (RAPID), EArly-concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER), and Conference proposals, all of which are described in the PAPPG (NSF 19-1).

The presentation and other documents are available here:

• Slides (PDF)
• PAPPG 20-1

If you were unable to attend, here are some of the questions asked during the Q & A section:

Q: What should be included within the initial email to the Program Officer?

A: The PI should include what type of proposal mechanism you are submitting to (RAPID, EAGER, etc.) as well as a paragraph defining the research idea. This should include the larger question you want to address, a rationale and motivation for the question, a brief outline of the methods, and why it should be submitted as this type of proposal instead of a traditional proposal. There should be enough information for a Program Officer to assess whether this might be a good candidate for a proposal and an invitation for a 2-page prospectus (see below). You can also feel free to make an appointment to talk to a Program Officer of your choice on the phone.

Q: Where should I submit my initial email?

A: You should submit your initial email to the specific cluster that you think your research fits into and include any other programs you think it may be appropriate. We will circulate the initial email among other clusters if it doesn’t fit within the specified cluster’s research priorities.

Q: If I’m invited to submit a 2-page prospectus, what should be included?

A: The prospectus should include information about your expertise, the motivation for your research question, the overall approach or methods you will employ, and what outcomes are expected. You are encouraged to submit a budget at this point as well. References are not required in the prospectus.

Q: If an EAGER is declined, can it be resubmitted with edits?

A: Prior to submission of an EAGER proposal, there is a lot of communication between the Program Officer and the PI. Therefore, the PI should have a good sense of whether the EAGER proposal will be awarded or not. If you want to resubmit a declined EAGER, you are highly encouraged to discuss this with a Program Officer.

If the EAGER proposal is declined because it is not considered ‘high risk,’ please consider submitting your idea as a full proposal to our core solicitation (NSF 20-502).

Q: EAGER proposals under the Idea Machine have a deadline, but it seems that other EAGERs do not. Are EAGERs generally accepted year-round?

A: Yes, EAGERs are generally accepted year-round. However, be sure you contact a Program Officer with your proposed idea before submitting the proposal. Program Officers will discuss the merits of the idea, and then may invite you to submit a full proposal. Please do not submit an EAGER proposal to DEB without getting approval from a Program Officer.

For submissions to the Idea Machine EAGER competition, please see DCL 20-401. A 2-page Research Concept Outline (RCO) must have been submitted to this program to be considered for EAGER funding. This deadline has passed, so RCOs are no longer being accepted. These RCOs are now being reviewed for invitation for full proposals. PIs will be contacted within a few weeks regarding these decisions.

Q: Is there a budget cap for conferences?

A: There isn’t a budget cap for conferences. As described in the PAPPG, the review mechanisms change based on how much money is requested for a conference. A conference requesting $50,000 or less is reviewed by the cluster; a conference requesting $100,000 or less can be reviewed within the division; and a conference requesting more than $100,000 must be externally reviewed.

Q: Is it okay to apply for conference funding for a growing regional meeting hosted at our institutions?

A: Generally we do not fund pre-established conferences. However, if the conference is trying to reach a new group of attendees, we may. You are encouraged to reach out to a Program Officer to discuss this prior to submitting a conference proposal.

The Division of Environmental Biology (DEB) held its third Virtual Office Hour on February 10^th , 2020. We’ll be hosting these office hours monthly on 2nd Mondays at 1-2pm EST. There will be a different theme each time, but visitors are welcome to ask about other NSF-related topics. Program Officers from each of DEB’s clusters will be present at every Virtual Office Hour.

This month’s topic was NSF BIO’s Rules of Life (NSF 20-502) track and the NSF-wide Understanding the Rules of Life ( NSF 20-513) opportunities. Rules of Life is a track within BIO’s core solicitations that encourages projects that integrate approaches across biological scales. The topic of this track is entirely up to the PI. Alternatively, Understanding the Rules of Life is one of NSF’s Ten Big Ideas that encourages projects that integrate approaches from more than one discipline. These topics are solicitation-specific. For more information on what specific topics are encouraged, please visit the link above.

The presentation and other documents are available here:

• Slides (PDF)
• PAPPG 20-1

If you were unable to attend, here are some of the questions asked during the Q & A section:

Q: Are there any details that should be considered when developing a CAREER grant for the BIO Rules of Life track?

A: There is no Rules of Life track in the CAREER solicitation (NSF 20-525). CAREERs are submitted under a separate solicitation independent from the other BIO divisions’ solicitations. CAREER proposals will be the topic of an upcoming office hours.

Q: Does the Rules of Life track call ask for broader interdisciplinarity? E.g., engineering, math, …

A: Rules of Life (RoL) proposals involve collaboration that integrates across biological disciplines, and specifically crosses at least two divisions within BIO (e.g., DEB and IOS). Understanding the Rules of Life (URoL) targets cross-directorate research (e.g., BIO and GEO, BIO and ENG). For more information see the slides that differentiate between the BIO Rules of Life track and Understanding the Rules of Life.

Q: Should we identify the two Divisions of interest in a BIO Rules of Life proposal or wait for feedback from the program prior to submission?

A: It’s never a bad idea to send a one-page description of your hypotheses and research plans to a program officer for feedback. The program officer can then advise you about which programs may be appropriate to target. You can always suggest that particular programs review your proposals, but program officers will ultimately decide how proposals are reviewed, with the goal of giving each proposal the greatest opportunity to be considered for funding.

Q: Would the BIO Rules of Life track support large scale interdisciplinary projects involving many PIs, and if so, are there upper funding limits?

A: BIO Rules of Life can support up to five PIs, as well as additional senior personnel. If a project calls for a large collaboration and is expensive, contact your Program Officer and discuss your idea. Budget limits apply to Understanding the Rules of Life solicitations, not BIO Rules of Life.

Q: In the Understanding the Rules of Life program, to what extent should the other discipline(s) be connected to BIO?

A: The other discipline(s) should be tightly integrated with the biological questions.

Q: Does the BIO Rules of Life track or the Understanding the Rules of Life program support funding for international collaborations with labs outside the U.S.?

A: Programs will fund projects for PIs from U.S. institutions to conduct research internationally, but international institutions are expected to cover costs for their scientists. Rare exceptions have been made in the past and you should contact a Program Officer if you have additional questions.

Q: Can you submit to the BIO Rules of Life track as well as under the special category NERC? The solicitation says the special categories are included in the core track.

A: NSFDEB-NERC proposals cannot be submitted to the BIO RoL Track.

Please reach out to a Program Officer if you have any questions about the proposal submission and review process in DEB programs.

Our next virtual office hours will be held on March 9^th, 2020 from 1-2pm EST and will address EAGERs, RAPIDs, and Conferences. Be sure to check back here or follow the BIO Twitter (@NSF_BIO) for information on how to register.

The Division of Environmental Biology (DEB) held its second Virtual Office Hour on January 13^th, 2020. Below is a recap of some of the questions asked during this past session which focused on the Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) (NSF 20-502) track, as well as the co-review process used within the Division.

Join us for the next Virtual Office Hour on February 10^th, 2020 from 1-2pm EST where we will talk about the Rules of Life (RoL) track in the BIO core solicitation and the NSF-wide Understanding Rules of Life (URoL) solicitation.

The presentation and other documents are available here:

• Presentation Slides
• Draft PAPPG 20-1

If you were unable to attend, here are a some of the questions asked during the Q & A section:

Q: For the Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) category, is it necessary for the proposal to be split equally between ecology and evolution? If not, what fraction would you expect to see?

A: There is no set fraction of ecology and evolution required in a BEE proposal. You are encouraged to form a team consisting of the right people based on the expertise needed and the questions you want to answer.

Q: What is the average budget for a BEE proposal? Is there a maximum amount allowed?

A: There is no budget cap for BEE proposals. The amount requested is entirely up to the PI. This is the same for all proposals submitted to the core solicitation, with the exception of Small Grants, which are capped at $200,000. As is always the case, a PI should request what is necessary to complete the project.

Q: Should Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) supplements be included within the budget of BEE proposals at time of submission?

A: Yes. DEB has been emphasizing that education and broadening participation requests should be included in the budget of the proposal at time of submission. To learn more about these types of requests, please check out this blog post.

Q: Can BEE proposals cross DEB and other Divisions in NSF?

A: Yes, as long as the proposal meets the BEE criteria of integrating questions that span the ecological (ES, PCE) and evolutionary (EP, SBS) clusters. If the proposal topic also spans multiple Divisions in the Biology Directorate, we encourage you to think about whether your proposal might be a better fit for the Rules of Life track. Tune in for the Rules of Life and Understanding the Rules of Life virtual office hours on February 10, 2020 for more information or contact a Program Officer with specific questions. Please note that proposals seeking to bridge evolution and ecology in the marine biome should be submitted to the more appropriate choice of either EP or SBS; these will be co-reviewed with GEO’s Biological Oceanography program.

Q: Are panelists/reviewers told that they are reviewing a co-reviewed proposal?

A: This information is not shared with ad hoc reviewers. Panelists will not know ahead of time; however, this information may be shared with them during the panel as Program Officers from other programs tend to visit the panel to listen to the discussion.

Q: When will the new Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending Support requirements as outlined in the new Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 20-1) go into effect?

A: Any new requirements become effective 90 days after the PAPPG’s release. For more, please check out this link from the NSF Policy Office.

Please reach out to a Program Officer if you have any questions about the proposal submission and review process in DEB programs.

The DEB monthly Virtual Office Hour takes place the 2nd Monday of every month from 1-2pm EST. The topics rotate, but listeners are welcome to ask about any NSF-related topics. Program Officers from each of DEB’s core programs will be present.Be sure to check back here or follow the BIO Twitter (@NSF_BIO) for information on how to register.

Check out this great post from our friends over at the Office of the Assistant Director;

“The BIO Directorate considers integrative approaches to understanding life’s key innovations as essential for understanding the full diversity of mechanisms regulating fundamental biological processes.

The Reintegrating Biology series of workshops (https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1940791&HistoricalAwards=false) included a combination of virtual and in-person events and provided a venue for the broader biological community to discuss the opportunities and challenges for integrating across the biological sub-disciplines. As part of this series of workshops, a total of 318 researchers participated in four concurrent jumpstart meetings in Atlanta, Austin, San Diego and virtually during December 4-6, 2019.  Participants collaborated on a series of vision papers describing what could be accomplished by reintegrating across the subdisciplines of biology, and some of the obstacles preventing such a reintegration from happening. So far, 60 vision papers have been received and can be viewed at: https://reintegratingbiology.org/vision-papers/. Other vision papers have already been submitted for publication. The next Reintegrating Biology event will be a virtual Microlab on January 16 where participants from the four jumpstart meetings will discuss similar themes that emerged during the different events.

NSF would like to thank the participants of the four jumpstart meetings and the broader biological research community for helping make the series of reintegrating biology workshops such a success. These discussions will inform both current integrative biology funding opportunities such as the Rules of Life track in each of the divisional solicitations and the Biology Integration Institutes program (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505684&org=BIO&from=home), as well as future activities.”

Join us January 13^th from 1pm-2pm EST for DEB’s next Virtual Office Hour. Program Officers will provide an introduction to the Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) special category (NSF 20-502) and describe the co-review process. Representatives from each of the four core DEB programs will be available for questions. Questions can be on any DEB topic.

Please use the registration link below to participate. Upcoming DEB Virtual Office Hours are listed here and below, so sign up for blog notifications for reminders. Also, follow us on the NSF Biology Twitter account (@NSF_BIO) for same day alerts about the DEB Virtual Office Hours.

REGISTER HERE

If you can’t make it to this or any future office hours, don’t worry! Come back here, as we will be posting a recap and presentation slides to our blog. As always, our Virtual Office Hours will happen on the second Monday of every month from 1pm-2pm EST. Below is a list of upcoming dates and topics, so be sure to add them to your calendars!

Upcoming Office Hours and Topics

January 13: Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) and Co-review

February 10: Rules of Life vs. Understanding Rules of Life

March 9: RAPID/EAGER/Workshops

April 13: Opportunities for Promoting Understanding through Synthesis (OPUS)

May 11: CAREERs

June 8: BIO Postdoc Program

The Division of Environmental Biology (DEB) held its first Virtual Office Hour on December 9th, 2019. We’ll be hosting these office hours monthly on 2nd Mondays at 1-2pm EST. There will be a different theme each time, but visitors are welcome to ask about other NSF-related topics. Program Officers from each of DEB’s clusters will be present at every Virtual Office Hour.

 
We were pleased that 95 participants joined us last week. This month’s topic was introducing DEB and outlining the submission and review process under our current solicitation (NSF 20-502). We provided information on each cluster’s thematic focus, and explained which programs still have deadlines, given the NSF BIO Directorate’s transition to no-deadline solicitations.

The presentation is available here:
• Presentation Slides (PDF)

If you were unable to attend, here are a some of the questions that arose during the Q & A section:

Q: How many panels are being held per year with core programs now that there isn’t a deadline? When should I submit my proposal?
A: We are holding panels year-round. There is no “best” time of year to submit a proposal, so our advice is to submit when you feel your proposal is ready.

Q: How many proposals can an investigator submit as a PI and/or Co-PI? Can an investigator submit a proposal to one cluster and another proposal to a different cluster/program?
A: There are no limits to the number of proposals a PI and/or Co-PI can submit. However, the aims of the different proposed projects must not substantially overlap.

Q: What is the timeline for the review process of proposals under the no deadline solicitation?
A: We strive to notify PIs of our decisions within 6 months of receiving a proposal. For many years we’ve been successful in doing so for the vast majority of proposals.

Q: Do I need to include prior support from a project that ended more than 5 years ago?
A: No, the PAPPG requires that only prior support from any current funding or an award with an end date in the last 5 years should be included. If there was more than one award for a PI/co-PI, reporting should be on the one most closely related to the proposal. However, if you have an older project that was very productive, you are not penalized for including that information.

Q: What are the similarities and differences between Early-concept Grant for Exploratory Research (EAGER) and Research Advanced by Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering (RAISE) proposals?
A: EAGER is a type of proposal used to support exploratory work on potentially transformative ideas or approaches. This work is typically “high risk-high payoff” in the sense that it, for example, involves radically different approaches, applies new expertise, or engages novel disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives.

 
RAISE is a type of proposal that supports bold, interdisciplinary projects whose: 1. scientific advances lie in great part outside the scope of a single program or discipline, such that substantial funding support from more than one program or discipline is necessary; 2. lines of research promise transformational advances; and 3. prospective discoveries reside at the interfaces of disciplinary boundaries that may not be recognized through traditional review or co-review. All three criteria must be met to be considered a RAISE.

 
Both types of proposals are reviewed internally rather than by a panel and require Program Officer approval for submission. If you are thinking of submitting an EAGER or RAISE, please contact a Program Officer for more guidance, and review the PAPPG II.E for more information.

 
Q: Is there a list of programs that DEB co-reviews with? What does co-review mean and how does it work?
A: There is no list of programs with which DEB co-reviews proposals. Depending on the aims and proposed activities, we could co-review with any program in NSF. Because of synergies, however, most of our co-reviews are between clusters in DEB, with other divisions in the Biological Sciences (BIO) directorate, and with divisions in the Geosciences (GEO) Directorate. Check out our blog post for information on how co-reviews work, and attend our Jan. 13, 2020 office hours for more information.

Q: For the Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) category, is it necessary for the proposal to be split equally between ecology and evolution? If not, what fraction would you expect to see?
A: There is no set fraction of ecology and evolution required in a BEE proposal. Tune in for the BEE office hours on January 13, 2020 for more information or contact a Program Officer with specific questions.

Please reach out to a Program Officer if you have any questions about the proposal submission and review process in DEB.

Our next virtual office hours will be held on January 13, 2020 from 1-2pm EST and will discuss the BEE category and co-review. Please bring any questions on the topic or NSF/DEB at large. All questions are welcome. Be sure to check back here or follow the BIO Twitter (@NSF_BIO) for information on how to register.

Join us December 9^th from 1pm-2pm EST for the Division of Environmental Biology’s (DEB) first Virtual Office Hour. We will provide an introduction to DEB and the Core Program solicitation (NSF 20-502 ). Representatives from each of the four clusters will be available to introduce their program, followed by a brief discussion on the proposal submission and review process. There will then be an open question and answer period – questions can be on any NSF or DEB topic.

Join us remotely and bring your questions! Please use the registration link below to set up your participation in our Virtual Office Hour. Future DEB Virtual Office Hours will be communicated through DEBrief, so sign up for blog notifications for reminders. Also, follow us on the NSF Biology Twitter account (@NSF_BIO) for alerts about the DEB Virtual Office Hours.

REGISTER HERE

If you can’t make it to this or any future office hours, don’t worry! Simply revisit the DEB Blog as we will be posting a recap of our discussion and frequently asked questions. Below is a list of upcoming dates and topics, so be sure to add them to your calendars!

Upcoming Office Hours and Topics

December 9: Intro to DEB/Submission and Review process

January 13: Bridging Ecology and Evolution (BEE) and Co-Review

February 10: Rules of Life vs. Understanding Rules of Life

March 9: RAPID/EAGER/workshops

April 13: OPUS

May 11: CAREERs

June 8: BIO Postdoc Program

Co-review is a common practice in DEB (and across NSF), but questions from the community suggest that having a proposal co-reviewed makes some of you apprehensive. In fact, you may ask yourself whether co-review will decrease the likelihood of getting funded. Not to worry – here are the basics:

Which proposals are co-reviewed? Projects that stand to advance the science funded by multiple programs are most commonly co-reviewed. Almost always, these are integrative or interdisciplinary studies.

How does co-review work? Typically, the program to which the proposal was submitted (i.e., the primary program) determines that there is significant overlap with other program(s) and invites the relevant program(s) to participate in the review process. This participation may range from simply suggesting ad hoc reviewers to taking the proposal to their own panel.

Can I decide where my proposal gets co-reviewed? At submission, you are welcome (but not required) to suggest other programs you believe to be relevant for co-review; you do so in the Cover Sheet portion of the proposal. We encourage you to discuss your research idea prior to submission with a Program Officer from each program that you regard as relevant for a potential co-review. Often, they can provide explicit guidance as to whether co-review is warranted, and with which programs. After submission, the (primary) program then decides whether to request a co-review from the programs that you’ve suggested.

The only exception to this process is the Rules of Life track, which requires that you specify a co-reviewing program in a BIO Division other than DEB and that you explain how your proposed work bridges the two programs.

What happens after co-review? If the proposal is favorably reviewed by one or both programs, either or both programs may choose to fund the project. Thus, one of the advantages of co-review is that multiple programs might be willing to help fund the proposal. Funding contributions can vary, but co-funding often allows DEB to support more principal investigators and more individual projects.

But, isn’t it risky to expose my proposal to scrutiny by so many reviewers? As we all know, an important aspect of promoting the progress of science is getting fair, constructive feedback. For a subset of the proposals we receive this can really only be achieved by expert input and discussion reflecting the breadth of topics covered in the proposal (hence the co-review).

But, what about the funding rates of co-reviewed proposals? As part of our award recommendation process, we regularly monitor funding rates of co-reviews, and we have no indication that co-reviewed proposals fare less well than non-co-reviewed proposals.

If the science truly does straddle multiple programs, projects may be more likely to be completely and fairly evaluated if experts from multiple disciplines can offer feedback. Even if the proposal is not funded, the advice from a diverse array of reviewers should help you strengthen any resubmissions.

More questions about co-review? Contact a Program Officer! We’re happy to talk about your proposal.

Check out the latest NEON news from the Office of the Assistant Director’s blog here or below.

“One of BIO’s highlights from this current fiscal year is the movement of the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) from construction into full operations. 179 data products are now freely available to the scientific community and the public on the NEON Data Portal, and we are pleased to note that downloads of the data are rapidly increasing as is use of NEON data in publications. NEON data is also transforming ecological education at a diverse range of institutions.

NSF recently announced (NSF 19-080) its intent to launch an open competition for the management of NEON’s future operations and maintenance. NSF’s major facilities routinely undergo such a merit-based, peer-reviewed process, thus the announcement signals that NEON has matured into a fully-functioning Observatory.  The review process will take roughly two years, with the new award expected to commence in late 2021.  As always, NSF will be relying on community expertise in the merit review process, which will ensure that NEON is an effective resource for ecology for years to come.

We recognize that members of the scientific community may have questions and input for NSF as we embark on this process. We welcome community input, and to that end, we will host a NEON Information Session and Question and Answer Period on Monday, August 12, at the Ecological Society of America’s Annual meeting in Louisville, KY. For those who won’t be at ESA, questions and input can be directed to the cognizant program officer, Dr. Roland Roberts (neon-bot@nsf.gov).

We hope to see many of you at ESA.”