1 / 43

NSF Funding

NSF Funding. June 23, 2004 NCAR ESCA Peter Milne, NSF. Agenda. Federal support for research NSF beyond one discipline Commitment to Peer-review Disciplinarity/multidisciplinarity FY-04/05 budgets Single vs Multiple PIs Age vs success rates.

sopoline-madden
Télécharger la présentation

NSF Funding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NSF Funding June 23, 2004 NCAR ESCA Peter Milne, NSF

  2. Agenda • Federal support for research • NSF beyond one discipline • Commitment to Peer-review • Disciplinarity/multidisciplinarity • FY-04/05 budgets • Single vs Multiple PIs • Age vs success rates

  3. NSF engages in a diverse set of activities that support its complex mission NSF’S CORE ACTIVITIES Policy Recommendations & Support Research & Education Community Partnerships • Foster the interchange of scientific information • Evaluate status & needs of scientific and • engineering communities in the broader context of • Federal and non-Federal programs • Foster/support the development and use • of new technologies in research and • education in the sciences • Recommend and promote national policies to strengthen basic research, science, and education • Initiate and support broader scientific and • technological initiatives (e.g. national security, international cooperation) • Support initiatives to increase women, • minorities participation in science & • technology Mission To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense. Vision Enabling the Nation’s future through discovery, learning, and innovation Information Gathering, Analysis & Reporting Proposals & Awards Management • Generate reports on the amount of • federal funds invested in facilities • construction, basic and applied research • Provide central repository for scientific information • Appraise the impact of research upon industrial development and the general welfare • Conduct Merit Review and Award • Graduate fellowships in sciences & engineering • Initiate and support basic & applied research at academic and non-profit institutions and, at the direction of the President, support applied research at other organizations Source: NSF website http://www.nsf.gov/home/about/creation.htm

  4. NSF interacts within multiple stakeholders in a complex environment Societal Partners Broader Society Award Recipients & Program Beneficiaries Oversight Federal Government Congress Researchers & Educators Private Funding Groups OMB Academic Institutions Science Interest Groups OIG Research & Education Centers GAO Research & Education Fellows School Districts Policy and Advisory Nonprofit Organizations NSB State & Local Agents OSTP Collaborators Federal Research Agencies Small Businesses NSF Advisory Committees International Researchers Review Panels State & Local Agents International Science Organizations

  5. NSF currently evaluates selected performance goals in order to better meet the needs of the research community NSF’s Current Major GPRA Goals Dwell Time Award Size & Duration Criteria Considerations Broadening Participation • 70 percent of proposals decided within 6 months • Average annualized award size of $125K and 3.0 years of duration • 70 percent of reviewers address basic criteria; 80 percent of PDs • More diverse representation in merit review activities, establish a baseline FY2003 Goal • Achieved in FY2002, 74 percent decided within 6 months • Achieved award size, but not duration (2.9 years) in FY2002 • Achieved in FY2002, 84 percent commented and 78 respectively • Not achieved and not currently measured Progress Towards Goal in FY2002 • Management guidance and active monitoring • Management guidance • Management guidance and direction • Management guidance Strategy for Achieving Goal

  6. In FY2002, NSF received more than 35,000 proposals – an increase of 28 % over the past 5 years Total Proposals and Funding Rates From 1998-2002, number of proposals NSF receives has grown 28 percent Percentage Funded Competitive Proposals Funding rate relatively flat between 30-32 percent Source: Enterprise Information System, October 15, 2002

  7. Increase in volume of proposals is making recruiting and attracting reviewers more difficult • Research community “donates” an estimated $17-20M in time and effort to prepare for panel reviews and/or submit “ad hoc” reviews • Total number of reviews has increased by 15 percent during the past 4 years, reflecting the increase in the total number of proposals received • NSF has trended towards an increase in panel reviews as the percentage of mail reviews has declined • Contributing to the problem of panelist overuse is the fact that NSF continues to exceed the required number of reviews -- on average, a proposal receives more than 5 reviews • Mail reviews have been especially problematic in supporting NSF’s merit review process • Percentage of mail review declines has climbed 29 percent in the past 4 years • Mail review return rates have dropped by 6 percent during the past 4 years • Interviews of panelists indicate that the ‘community’ embraces the review process and has very positive experiences at NSF

  8. NSF research community ‘donates’ an estimated $17-20 million worth of time and effort in preparing for panels and/or submitting ‘ad hoc’ reviews FY2002 No. of Panel and Mail Reviews 140000 124,989 120000 100000 80000 59,501 60000 No. of Reviews 40000 20000 0 No. of Panel No. of Mail Reviews Reviews Type of Review • Source: Enterprise Information System, February 17, 2003; Panelist Interviews • Note: Median salaries were calculated by using the median salaries for S&E master’s, doctorates, & professionals contained in the FY2002 S&E Indicators report; calculation does include reviewer overhead costs

  9. Total number of reviews has increased by 15 percent as the mail return rates have declined by 6 percent Mail (Ad Hoc) Return Rates No. of Panel and Mail Reviews From 1999 to 2002, the mail return rate has decreased by 6 percent 68% 140,000 66% 66% 120,000 65% 64% 64% 64% 64% 100,000 62% 80,000 61% From 1999 to 2002, the number of reviews has increased by 15 percent 60% Total No. of Panel and Mail Reviews 60% 60,000 58% 58% 40,000 56% 20,000 54% 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Total No. of Panel Reviews Mail Review Return Rates Total No. of Mail Reviews Source: Enterprise Information System, January 31, 2003; Booz Allen Hamilton Analysis

  10. Relative to other agencies, the research community believes that NSF is performing better in Merit Review and Award Management NSF Comparison by Process to Other Federal Institutions 60% 55% 49% 50% 43% 42% 40% 35% 33% % of Responses 30% 22% 20% 12% 8% 10% 0% Award Application Proposal Review Post-Award Management Better Same Worse Source: 2003 Applicant Survey Data, Booz Allen Hamilton Analysis

  11. Budgets • NSF Budget for FY 04 (appropriation) • $5,578 an increase of 5.0% over FY 03 • $267.9 million increase for FY 2004 • Research and Related up $220.1 million or 4.8% • MREFC up 4.3% • EHR up 4.0%

  12. NSF Proposal Statistics • FY 2004 estimates: • Competitive proposal actions: ~ 40,000 • Awards likely made: ~ 11,000 • ~28% proposal success rate • Mean annual research grant: ~$120,000 • Mean grant duration: ~2.9 years • (Success rate and $ amount generally higher for ATM) • FY 2004 Funding:$5.58B

  13. $ Chg % Chg % Chg Req. NSF C.P. C.P. 04 to 05 ACCT FY03 FY04 03 to 04 FY 05 4.7% R&RA $4,056 $4,277 4.8% $4,452 $201 EHR $903 $945 4.0% $771 -$168 -17.9% MRE $149 $156 4.3% $213 $58 37.6% S&E $189 $220 16.4% $294 $75 34.4% 1.7% OIG $9 $10 11.1% $10 $0.17 NSB $3.5 $3.9 11.4% $4 $0.07 1.8% $5,745 $167 3.0% TOTAL $5,310 $5,578 5.0% FY Budget for FY 2004 by Account

  14. NSF Budget Requestby Directorate/Major Activity FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 PlanPlanRequestFY 05 Req/FY 04 Amount Amount Amount % Change Biological Sciences 570.7 592.0 599.9 13.02.2% CISE 581.9 609.6 618.1 13.0 2.2% Engineering 540.5 561.0 575.9 10.8 1.9% Geosciences692.2719.0*728.515.42.2% Math & Physical 1041.0 1100.0 1115.5 24.0 2.2% Sciences Social, Behavioral & 167.52 205.0 224.7 20.9 10.3% Economic Sciences OISE 26.8 30.0 34.0 5.9 21.1% Office of U.S. 319.1 345.0 349.7 7.7 22.0%Polar Research Integrative Activities 116.7 145.0 240.0 95.9 66.5% Total, Research & 4,056.5 4,276.0 4,306.4 206.9 4.9% Related Activities * All increased funding will be applied towards increased funding targets in priority areas

  15. $ (%) change 99/04 • People $22.74 M (165.1%) • Tools $52.92 (27.1%) • Core $65.60 (24.5%) • Priority $62.08 (n/a) areas • TOTAL $203.34 (42.7%)Growth Priority Areas: BE, ITR, NANO, Math, HSD

  16. Funding Rates for NSF/GEO Priority AreasFY 2003 • Biocomplexity • 258 Proposals, 47 Awards, 18% • Info. Tech. Research • 1590 Proposals, 324 Awards, 23% • Water Cycle (2003 Competition) • 91 Proposals, 16 Awards, 18% • BioGeosciences • 97 Proposals, 10 Awards, 10% • Mathematical Geosciences • 95 Proposals, 17 Awards, 18%

  17. Geosciences Atmospheric Sciences Earth Sciences Ocean Sciences Lower Atmosphere UCAR & Facilities Upper Atmosphere • Atmospheric Chemistry Program (ATC) • Climate Dynamics Program (CDP) • Physical Meteorology Program (PMP) • Large Scale Dynamics Program (LDP) • Mesoscale Meteorology Program (MDM) • Paleoclimate Program (PCP) • Other NSF programs: OPP, CHE, INT, MRI, ICCR, BE, Nano; RUI, REU

  18. Geosciences Atmospheric Sciences Earth Sciences Ocean Sciences Lower Atmosphere UCAR & Facilities Upper Atmosphere • Magnetospheric Physics • Aeronomy • Solar Terrestrial Program • Upper Atmospheric Facilities • Other NSF programs: OPP, CHE, INT, MRI, ICCR, BE, Nano; RUI, REU

  19. NSF Request in FY 2005: Better Than Some Total Federal Outlay is + $5.5bn – increases to weapon systems and homeland security

  20. Future Opportunities and Challenges for ATM

  21. Single vs. Multiple PI Awards Changing NSF award demographics

  22. Success Rates of Young PI Awards Changing NSF award demographics

  23. PIs with Competitive NSF Research Grants by Professional Age, 1994-2003 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 88 64 46 55 35 43 26 11 7 10 Unknown 2,502 2,538 2,518 2,783 2,741 2,844 3,004 3,014 3,178 3,226 14 Years or More 1,550 1,596 1,557 1,763 1,722 1,813 1,941 1,758 1,959 1,981 7 - 14 Years 1,137 978 888 1,018 966 962 1,113 1,070 1,128 1,193 Less than 7 Years

  24. PIs with Competitive Research Grants by Gender 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 28 43 41 41 32 37 46 66 78 128 U 4,520 4,426 4,271 4,687 4,475 4,656 4,909 4,837 5,117 5,129 M 729 707 697 891 957 969 1,129 950 1,077 1,153 F

  25. Funding Rates for Proposers by Professional Age Years Since PI Degree Funding Rate Fiscal Year

  26. Funding Rates for Proposers by Professional Age Years Since PI Degree Funding Rate Fiscal Year 55% of young proposers (<7 years since degree) are also new (never had a NSF award)

  27. Proposer Status and Funding Rate • 55% of young proposers (<7 years since degree) are also new (never had a NSF award) • A bias exists in favor of proposers with prior support • Have experience in grant writing • Have established a track record

  28. HIAPER MREFC Instrumentation • Solicitation released November 2003 • Proposals received on or before February 15, 2004 • 46 proposals representing 39 projects • Mail reviews nearly completed • Panel met at NSF May 10-11, 2004 • Panel “Highly Recommended” 15 proposals (3 collaborative proposals) with a total funding $12.5M • Includes:Trace Gas Analysis for Organics and Inorganics; Ozone; Lidar systems; GPS; Cloud Physics; Aerosols; Radiation and Spectroscopy, and Radar systems

  29. ATM Program % to NCAR 60.00 50.00 40.00 % of ATM oper. Funds 30.00 20.00 10.00 FY72 FY75 FY78 FY81 FY84 FY87 FY90 FY93 FY96 FY99 FY02 Year

More Related