If you are proposing supporting a conference, workshop, symposium or other similar meeting with an EPSCoR EOC award, please be advised that you will need to disclose within the project description and budget justification of your application:
(1) if there are any other pending or committed sources of financial support for the activity, and if so, identify and differentiate specifically what each source would pay for, and
(2) indicate if you anticipate collecting a registration fee.
The Education, Outreach and Communication (EOC) program provides up to $10,000 in funding to support STEM education, outreach and communication events and activities related to KY NSF EPSCoR Advanced Manufacturing research initiatives.
EOC funding can be used to support STEM-related events and activities such as workshops, after-school clubs, conferences, camps, and more. It is a prerequisite that proposing EOC projects align to KY NSF EPSCoR’s Advanced Manufacturing theme. If you have questions about what kinds of activities are eligible for this award, please contact Jeff Mossey at firstname.lastname@example.org.
All awardees and funded participants are obligated to provide reporting about the outcomes of their KY NSF EPSCoR-supported projects. Awardees may download the reporting documents here: Download Reporting Documents.
All awardees and funded participants are obligated to provide reporting about the outcomes of their KY NSF EPSCoR-supported projects. Awardees may download the reporting documents at http://kynsfepscor.org/reporting
Yes. The responsible and ethical conduct of research (RCR) is critical for excellence, as well as public trust, in science and engineering. Consequently, education in RCR is considered essential in the preparation of future scientists and engineers. More about NSF’s policy: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rcr.jsp
NSF Statutory Requirement
“The Director shall require that each institution that applies for financial assistance from the Foundation for science and engineering research or education describe in its grant proposal a plan to provide appropriate training and oversight in the responsible and ethical conduct of research to undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers participating in the proposed research project.”
Please be advised that if awarded, a certification of completion of RCR training for all of the aforementioned participants, consistent with the sub-awarded institution’s policies, will need to be provided to KY NSF EPSCoR (email@example.com) before a subcontracted award can be fully executed with the University of Kentucky. View UKY’s Policy for the Responsible Conduct of Research.
KY NSF EPSCoR Proposal Application Requirements:
(1) Provide a statement certifying that a RCR training plan for the applying organization is in place. If the applying organization does not have a RCR training plan in place, a statement certifying they will create and implement a RCR training plan in the event they are awarded should be provided. (Training plans are not required to be included in proposals but institutions are advised that they are subject to review, upon request.)
(2) An institution must designate one or more persons to oversee compliance with the RCR training requirement. Identify these designees by name and provide their contact information.
Yes. Applications must include a statement that justifies the proposed project’s alignment to one, or more, of the following research themes and initiatives:
KY NSF EPSCoR requires the use of standardized template forms for all sections of submitted proposals. Applications should be e-mailed as attachments to firstname.lastname@example.org. In addition to providing the individually attached files, also attach one PDF file that merges all the application documents within a single file.
KY NSF EPSCoR requires the use of standardized template forms for all sections of submitte proposals. You can download the templates from our dropbox folder. Applications should be e-mailed as attachments to email@example.com.
In addition to providing the following individually attached files, also attach one PDF file that merges all the application documents within a single file.
URM stands for under-represented minority. The Higher Education Act defines the term “minority” as an “American Indian, Alaskan Native, Black (not of Hispanic origin), Hispanic (including persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and Central or South American origin), Pacific Islander, or other ethnic group underrepresented in science and engineering.”
KY NSF EPSCoR acknowledges that the representation of certain groups of people in STEM education and employment also differs from their representation in the U.S. population. Women, persons with disabilities, Appalachian and Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds are also included in our working definition of underrepresented groups in STEM. View data from the NSF Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering 2019 Report here.
Broader Impacts is one of two merit review criteria, along with Intellectual Merit, that the NSF expects proposers to fully address in their proposals. The definitions of the two criteria, as noted in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (Ch. III Section A), are listed below:
In its Grant Proposal Guide (Ch. II Section C), the agency now only offers broad guidelines on how researchers can meet the BI requirement and potential social outcomes they can strive to achieve.
Intellectual merit is one of two merit review criteria, along with Broader Impacts, that NSF expects proposers to fully address in their proposals. The definitions of the two criteria, as noted in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (Ch. III Section A), are listed below:
The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge.
1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to:
a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
2. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
3. 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?
4. How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
5. Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?
For work supported under the KAMPERS project, please reference NSF Cooperative Agreement No. 1849213.
Suggested language for the acknowledgement is, “This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement No. 1849213. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.”