- Research Offices
- Research Development
- RD Resources and Services
- NSF CAREER Toolkit
- Home
- Writing the Proposal
Writing the Proposal
This section provides resources to help you with each section of the NSF CAREER Proposal.
If you have not already done so, download the NSF CAREER Checklist and the CAREER Proposal Timeline before continuing.
Description:
The project summary is a one page document that consists of separate overview, intellectual merits, and broader impacts sections. Each of these three sections is required to be present and must be clearly defined. All NSF proposals must have project summaries.
The project summary is one of the most important parts of the proposal. It is likely the first thing a reviewer will read, and is your best chance to grab their interest, and convince them of the importance, and quality, of your research before they even read the proposal.
Though it is the first proposal element in order, many applicants prefer to write the project summary last, after writing the project description. This allows the writer to better avoid any inconsistencies between the two.
Resources:
Project Description
Applicants have considerable freedom in developing the format Project Descriptions. NSF requires that CAREER Project Descriptions contain" a well-argued and specific proposal for activities that will, over a 5-year period, build a firm foundation for a lifetime of contributions to research and education in the context of the PI's organization".
Project Descriptions must include:
- A description of the proposed research project, including preliminary supporting data where appropriate, specific objectives, methods, and procedures to be used, and expected significance of the results
- A description of the proposed educational activities, including plans to evaluate their impact on students and other participants
- A description of how the research and education activities are integrated with one another
- results of prior NSF support if applicable
Successful applicants will propose creative, effective, integrated research and education plans, and indicate how they will assess these components.
While excellence in both research and education is expected, activity of an intensity that would lead to an unreasonable workload is not. In other words, make sure that what you propose to do is reasonable given your time and resources, and make sure that the proposal convinces the reviewers of this.
To assist applicants in developing and framing their project descriptions, ORD has developed the Suggested Project Description Outline. This outline provides a suggested format for the project description, and has key questions for the applicant to consider when writing each section.
Broader Impacts and Education Resources
The education and broader impacts sections are critical to the success of the CAREER proposal. Both are considered during the merit review process.
References in support of both the research and education aspects are required. There is no stylistic requirement for references, though they must follow the instructions in the GPG.
Each reference must include: the name of all authors (in the sequence they appear on the publication, no use of et al) article/journal title, book title, volume number, page number, and year of publication. If available electronically, a web address must be provided.
The biosketch should be prepared according to the requirements of the GPG, and should include both research and education activities and accomplishments.
New for 2016: Collaborators and Conflicts of Interest are no longer a part of the biosketch, and are a separate "single copy document".
The best resource for assistance with budget development and budget justification is the FSU Sponsored Research Administration. ORD recommends contacting your department's sponsored research officer early in the proposal process.
This section of the proposal calls for required information on all current and pending support for ongoing projects and proposals, including this project, and any subsequent funding in the case of continuing grants. All current project support from whatever source (e.g., Federal, State, local or foreign government agencies, public or private foundations, industrial or other commercial organizations, or internal funds allocated toward specific projects) must be listed.
The proposed project and all other projects or activities requiring a portion of time of the PI and other senior personnel must be included, even if they receive no salary support from the project(s). The total award amount for the entire award period covered (including indirect costs) must be shown as well as the number of person-months per year to be devoted to the project, regardless of source of support. Similar information must be provided for all proposals already submitted or submitted concurrently to other possible sponsors, including NSF.
Proposers should include an aggregated description of the internal and external resources (both physical and personnel) that the organization and its collaborators will provide to the project, should it be funded.
Such information must be provided in this section, in lieu of other parts of the proposal (e.g., budget justification, project description). The description should be narrative in nature and must not include any quantifiable financial information. Reviewers will evaluate the information during the merit review process and the cognizant NSF Program Officer will review it for programmatic and technical sufficiency. Proposers should describe only those resources that are directly applicable to the project.
ORD recommends asking colleagues and department staff for assistance with this section, as it is likely someone has already compiled a relevant Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources list for your department.
Departmental Letter
Letters of Collaboration
Letter of Collaboration Template
Note: DO NOT deviate from the letter of collaboration template. NSF has strict guidelines about letters and they must only have the one sentence that is on the template.
Data Management Plan
ORD highly recommends contacting the Office of Digital Research and Scholarship in Strozier Library for assistance with Data Management Plans. Their experts will essentially write a DMP for you, based on your proposal.
FSU Libraries Data Management Site
OSTP Directive on Data Management: FSU's response
Collaborators and Other Affiliations
NSF is initiating a new pilot on submission of Collaborators and Other Affiliations (COA) information. Effective April 24th 2017, NSF will require the use of the spreadsheet linked below as a template for identifying COA information.
NSF Collaborators and Other Affiliations Information
Post-Doc Mentoring Plan (if applicable)
Postdoctoral mentoring plans are required for all proposals requesting funding to support post-docs. These are to be described in a one page supplementary document and will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts review criterion.
Post-Doc Mentoring Plan Guidance
Post-Doc Mentoring Plan Example
These elements are generated automatically by grants.gov or FastLane (depending on which is used to submit). Discuss these elements with your Sponsored Research Officer when submitting.