Department of Defense (DOD)

Roughly 70% of AFOSR’s total budget is spent on funding basic research grants with academia. At a high level this is how an interested researcher would approach obtaining funding from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

  1. Review BAAs & Scope Ideas
  2. Draft Idea Statement & Contact Program Officer
  3. Apply for Grant Funding

Details can be found at How Academics Can Work with AFOSR – Doing Business with AFOSR – AFOSR – APAN Community

Effective 1 November 2024, all proposals submitted to fundamental research solicitations for R&D will use the Common Disclosure Forms to replace the SF-424, biosketch, and current/pending support forms. Forms can be found here: Common Form for Biographical Sketch (nsf.gov) and here Common Form for Current and Pending (Other) Support (nsf.gov)

Effective 1 April 2025, DoD will use Digital Persistent Identifiers (DPIs) for persistent identifiers required on the OSTP Common Disclosure Forms, and DARPA will require proposers to include the ORCID (https://orcid.org/) number for each covered person listed in a proposal for an assistance award for R&D. ORCID numbers will be used since ORCID is currently the only DPI provider that meets the requirements for DPI common or core standards in the NSTC NSPM-33 implementation guidance.

Department of Energy (DOE)

Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science funding solicitations require applicants to submit a Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research (PIER) Plan as an appendix to their proposal narrative.

The PIER plan should describe the activities and strategies of the applicant to promote equity and inclusion as an integral element to advancing scientific excellence in the research project within the context of the proposing institution and any associated research group(s)1. Plans may include, but are not limited to: strategies for enhanced recruitment of undergraduate students, graduate students, and early-stage investigators (postdoctoral researchers, and others), including individuals from diverse backgrounds and groups historically underrepresented in the research community; strategies for creating and sustaining a positive, inclusive, safe, and professional research and training environment that fosters a sense of belonging among all research personnel; and/or training, mentoring, and professional development opportunities2PIER Plans should be tailored to the research project.

Applicants are strongly encouraged to incorporate into their PIER Plans specific actionable tasks that are tailored to the proposed research project; PIER Plans with actionable tasks and milestones tend to be rated higher in the merit review process than plans with generic statements or plans that only reference institutional policies and plans.

Cost share is calculated as a percentage of the Total Project Cost.

The following is an example of how to calculate cost sharing amounts for a project with $1,000,000 in federal funds with a minimum 50% non-federal cost sharing requirement:

Formula: Federal share ($) divided by federal share (%) = Total Project Cost Example: $1,000,000 divided by 50% = $2,000,000

Formula: Total Project Cost ($) minus federal share ($) = Non-federal share ($) Example: $2,000,000 minus $1,000,000 = $1,000,000

Formula: Non-federal share ($) divided by Total Project Cost ($) = Non-federal share (%) Example: $1,000,000 divided by $2,000,000 = 50%

Generally, Federal Share and Non-Federal Cost share are calculated with the following formulas:

Federal Share = Total Project Cost x Federal Cost Share in decimal form

Non-Federal Cost Share = Total Project x Non-Federal Cost Share in decimal form

The following is an example of calculating Federal and Non-Federal Cost Share for a project with a Total Project Cost of $2,000,000 and 50% Federal and 50% Non-Federal Cost Share:

Federal Share = $2,000,000 x .5 = $1,000,000

Non-Federal Cost Share = $2,000,000 x .5 = $1,000,000

NASA

The NASA Solicitation and Proposal Integrated Review and Evaluation System (NSPIRES) is NASA’s pre-award management system. Applicants, Principal Investigators (PI), and proposed team members are required to register in NSPIRES prior to the proposal due date. NSPIRES is the preferred system for proposal submissions. Grants.gov can be utilized for proposal submission for certain opportunities, provided that the NOFO specifies this. NOFOs are posted within NSPIRES as well so potential applicants can find agency announcements through this system. Proposers should familiarize themselves with NSPIRES and the system’s tutorials and user guides well in advance of the proposal due date.

National Science Foundation (NSF)

NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 24-1) has been issued.  The new PAPPG will be effective for proposals submitted or due on or after May 20, 2024.   The PAPPG provide guidance on the preparation and submission of NSF proposals.   NSF 24-1 will be in effect until the effective date of the next revision 25-1.

===============================

Documents Required for Senior/Key Personnel

You must include the four documents outlined below for each of the senior/key personnel involved in your proposal to the U.S. National Science Foundation.

Biographical Sketch

Refer to PAPPG II.D.2.h(i) for the full biographical sketch requirements. A brief outline of the information you will need to include is provided below.

  1. Identifying information.
  2. Organization and location.
  3. Professional preparation.
  4. Appointments and positions.
  5. Products.

Proposers must use SciENcv to prepare their biographical sketches for proposals to NSF.

SciENcv will produce an NSF-compliant PDF version of the biographical sketch. Proposers must save this document and submit it as part of their proposal via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

Current and Pending (Other) Support

This document contains a list of an individual’s proposed and active projects and sources of support. It is used by NSF to assess:

  • The capacity of the individual to carry out the proposed research.
  • Any potential scientific and budgetary overlap or duplication across projects.
  • The potential the individual is overcommitting themselves with the proposed project.

Refer to PAPPG II.D.2.h(ii) for the full Current and Pending (Other) Support requirements. 

Proposers must use SciENcv to prepare their Current and Pending (Other) Support information for proposals to NSF.

SciENcv will produce NSF-compliant PDF versions of the current and pending support format. Proposers must save this document and submit it as part of their proposal via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

Collaborators and Other Affiliations

This document contains a table of an individual’s collaborators, such as their advisors, co-authors and students. NSF requires the use of the Collaborators and Other Affiliations Excel Template for identifying this information. NSF uses Collaborators and Other Affiliations information during the merit review process to help manage reviewer selection. To expedite identification of potential reviewers, having a standard, searchable format for this information is essential.

Refer to PAPPG II.D.2.h(iii)for the full Collaborators and Other Affiliations information requirements. A brief outline of the information you will need to include is provided below.

  1. Your name and organizational affiliation.
  2. The names of anyone whose relationship to you precludes their service as a reviewer — including personal, family or business relationships — and what type of relationship you have with them.
  3. Names and organizational affiliations of your Ph.D. advisor and Ph.D. thesis advisees.
  4. Names and organizational affiliations of any co-authors or project collaborators in the last 48 months.
  5. Names of editorial boards, editors-in-chief and co-editors you have interacted with in the last 24 monthsDo not list editors or reviewers you have interacted with because of a paper submission.

You must use NSF’s Collaborators and Other Affiliations Excel Template to prepare your information. The template has been developed to be fillable, however, the content and format requirements must not be altered as this will create printing and viewing errors.

Additional information:

Synergistic Activities

A list of up to five distinct examples that demonstrate the broader impact of your professional and scholarly activities, focusing on the creation, integration and transfer of knowledge.

Once you have prepared your Synergistic Activities information, save it as a PDF and submit it as part of your proposal via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

Refer to PAPPG II.D.2.h(iv) for additional information.

The postdoctoral mentoring plan has been an NSF requirement since 2009, recognizing the important role that mentorship plays in the postdoctoral experience and their future career paths. As of 2024, the mentoring plan has been expanded to include postdoctoral researchers and graduate students. While you will find many templates online, NSF does not endorse a prescriptive format and encourages researchers to lead the way in creating unique strategies for supporting their mentees.

Examples of mentoring activities include, but are not limited to, career counseling; training in preparation of grant proposals, publications and presentations; guidance on ways to improve teaching and mentoring skills; guidance on how to effectively collaborate with researchers from diverse backgrounds and disciplinary areas; and training in responsible professional practices.”

Proposals will require a mentoring plan for postdoctoral researchers or graduate students supported on the project. This page limitation for the Mentoring Plan remains one page.

For each NSF award that provides substantial support to postdoctoral scholars and graduate students, each individual must have an Individual Development Plan, which is updated annually, that maps the educational goals, career exploration, and professional development of the individual. NSF defines “substantial support” as an individual that has received one person month or more during the annual reporting period under the NSF award.

If you as a TAMU researcher will submit a NSF proposal that will be conducting research on Tribal Land and/or your proposal may impact Tribal resources or Interests you must take the following required actions:

a. Seek guidance from the potentially impacted Tribal Nation(s) regarding which activity/activities require(s) review and prior approval from an authorized designee(s) of the Tribal Nation(s); and

b. Based on the guidance received, submit a written request to the relevant Tribal Nation(s), for approval to carry out the proposed activity(ies) that require(s) Tribal Nation review and approval.

c. Check the box on the Cover Sheet entitled “Potential Impacts on Tribal Nations.

d. Include at least one of the following:

(i) a copy of the written request to the relevant Tribe(s) to carry out any proposed activity/activities that may require prior approval from the Tribal Nation(s);

(ii) written confirmation from the Tribal Nation(s) that review and approval is not required; or

(iii) a copy of a document from the relevant Tribal Nation(s) that provides the requisite approval.

All such documentation must be uploaded into “Other supplementary documents” in Research.gov. If only (i) is provided, the proposer will still be required to submit either (ii) or (iii) before NSF will make an award decision.

See NSF PAPPG for more information:  Chapter II: Proposal Preparation Instructions – Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 24-1) | NSF – National Science Foundation

The two-page data management and sharing plan is a required part of a proposal to the U.S. National Science Foundation. It describes how a proposal will follow NSF policy on managing, disseminating and sharing research results.

General guidelines for data management and sharing plans are explained in PAPPG II.D.2(ii).

Content that may be included under the general guidelines is as follows:

  • The types of data, samples, physical collections, software, curriculum materials and other materials to be produced in the course of the project.
  • The standards to be used for data and metadata format and content. In cases where existing standards are absent or deemed inadequate, this should be documented along with any proposed solutions or remedies.
  • Policies for data access and sharing, including provisions for appropriate protection of privacy, confidentiality, security, intellectual property or other rights or requirements.
  • Policies and provisions for data reuse, redistribution and the production of derivatives.
  • Plans for archiving data, samples and other research products, and for preserving access to them.

If your proposed project will not produce data, you must include a document justifying this in place of the data management and sharing plan.

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

NIH NOT-OD-24-057, released January 29, 2024.  The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 restricts the amount of direct salary to Executive Level II of the Federal Executive pay scale. The Office of Personnel Management recently released new salary levels for the Executive Pay Scale. Effective January 1, 2024, the salary limitation for Executive Level II is $221,900. 

NIH policy on Data Management and Sharing was effective for applications submitted on January 25, 2023 and after.  Beginning on this date NIH will require researchers to submit a data management plan as part of their application.  The plan will be part of the budget justification section of the proposal and will be limited to two pages or less.

The plan elements are as follows:  

  • Element 1 Data Type
  • Element 2 Related Tools, Software and /or Code
  • Element 3 standards
  • Element 4 Data Preservation, Access and Associated Timelines
  • Element 5 Access, distribution, or Reuse Considerations
  • Element 6 Oversight of Data Management and Sharing

Describe how compliance with this Plan will be monitored and managed, frequency of oversight, and by whom at your institution (e.g., titles, roles).

Resources:   The TAMU Libraries offers help in creating your data management plan.  Go to Research Data Management Services (tamu.edu)  Use the DMPTool wizard to create a data management plan.

Effective for applications submitted on or after May 25, 2025, NIH will require the use of Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae (SciENcv) to complete Common Forms (i.e., Biographical Sketch, Current and Pending (Other) Support) and the NIH Biographical Sketch Supplement to produce digitally certified PDF(s) for use in application submission.

  • NIH will require all Senior/Key Personnel to enter their ORCID ID into SciENcv in the Persistent Identifier (PID) section of the Common Forms.
  • NIH will require all Senior/Key Personnel to link their ORCID ID to their eRA Commons Personal Profile.

NIH currently plans to continue collecting three required agency specific data elements (i.e., Personal Statement, Contributions to Science, and Honors) to assess qualifications. These data elements will be collected separately from the Common Forms on a new NIH Biographical Sketch Supplement.

If the application due date is on or before May 24, 2025, you must continue using the current NIH Biosketch and Other Support format pages for applications, Just-in-Time (JIT) and RPPRs.

State of Texas Agencies

CPRIT offers several funding opportunities for promising cancer research, product development, and prevention programs. All funding opportunities are announced through formal Requests for Applications (RFAs) and applications must be submitted through the online application receipt system.

Learn more about the grants process.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

For many USDA* NIFA* awards, indirect costs are limited by federal legislation. Because of this federal mandate, NIFA applicants must follow all indirect cost limitations listed in the NIFA Request for Applications (RFAs).  For indirect rates by USDA program, see: https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/indirect-cost-chart.

The most common NIFA indirect cost limitation is a maximum indirect cost cap of 30% of Total Federal Funds Awarded (TFFA). NIFA can only accept the lesser of an institution’s negotiated rate or 30% of TFFA awarded.

The following calculation should be used to determine the correct indirect rate for total direct cost only (excluding indirects on indirects): 100-30% =70, 30/70 = 42.857% for total cost. Verification is necessary to ensure that the rate does not exceed Modified Total Direct Cost (MTDC) at our normal rate.

In some cases, determining the lower of the two rates (the institution’s negotiated rate or 30% TFFA) is relatively simple.

Total Direct Costs including $30,000 in capital equipment$200,000
52% F&A On-Campus Research MTDC (base: $170,000) $88,400
30% TFFA (∼42.857% TDC) $85,714

In the above example, 30% TFFA ($85,714) must be used because it is less than the institution’s calculated indirect cost rate ($88,400).

More challenging situations occur when there are subawards and cost-sharing involved. In both of these cases, the prime awardee is responsible for ensuring that the maximum indirect cost allowable is not exceeded when combining the Federal portion (prime and subawardees) and any applicable cost-sharing.

Because the calculation of 30% TFFA can be confusing when subawards and cost-sharing are involved, NIFA has published a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) which includes budget scenarios and guidance for calculating indirect costs under each scenario. Below is an example of determining which indirect cost amount to use when a subaward is involved.

Total Direct Costs including a single subaward of $120,000$200,000
Prime awardee: 52% F&A On-Campus Research MTDC (base: $105,000)$88,400
30% TFFA $85,714

In this example, the amount of the institution’s negotiated indirect cost rate is less than 30% of TFFA. However, we must also account for the amount of F&A the subrecipient is requesting. If the combined amount requested by the prime awardee and subrecipient puts the request over 30% TFFA, then only 30% TFFA can be requested. Add to that, the subrecipient is subject to the same 30% TFFA cap as the prime awardee.

When we take the subrecipient’s F&A into account, we find that combined we are over the 30% TFFA.

Total Direct Costs including a single subaward of $120,000$200,000
Prime awardee 52% F&A ($54,000) + Subawardee 30% TFFA ($51,428) $88,400
30% TFFA $85,714

In this updated example, the combined amount of prime awardee and subrecipient F&A is greater than the TFFA.

In situations where the combined prime and subawardee indirect costs amounts are greater than 30% TFFA, the prime and subrecipient must agree on an allocation of indirect costs that makes sense. In these situations, communicating NIFA’s limitation on indirect costs is vitally important. Also, subawardess, just like prime awardees, must apply the lower of their negotiated rate or the 30% TFFA.