Get certified SC0-402 exam with our SC0-402 study guide | | Inicio RADIONAVES

All - - - and are added to our Pass4sure exam simulator to best prepare you for the SC0-402 track - - Inicio RADIONAVES

Pass4sure SC0-402 dumps | Killexams.com SC0-402 true questions | http://www.radionaves.com/

SC0-402 Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)

Study steer Prepared by Killexams.com SCP Dumps Experts


Killexams.com SC0-402 Dumps and true Questions

100% true Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with tall Marks - Just Memorize the Answers



SC0-402 exam Dumps Source : Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)

Test Code : SC0-402
Test name : Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)
Vendor name : SCP
: 410 true Questions

nice to pay interest that contemporary-day dumps modern-day SC0-402 exam are to live had.
Hi all, gladden live knowledgeable that I actually own handed the SC0-402 examination with killexams.com, which was my essential training source, with a strong common rating. This is a totally valid examination fabric, which I exceptionally counsel to All people running closer to their IT certification. This is a dependable manner to set aside together and bypass your IT tests. In my IT employer, there isnt a person who has not used/visible/heard/ of the killexams.com substances. Not most efficacious achieve they assist you bypass, however they ensure which you learn and near up a a hit professional.


pleasant to hear that actual exam questions present day SC0-402 examination are to live had.
This is my first time that I took this service. I feel very confident in SC0-402 but. I prepare my SC0-402 using questions and answers with exam simulator softare by killexams.com team.


Updated and actual question bank of SC0-402.
I went loopy while my test changed into in every week and that i out of state my SC0-402 syllabus. I were given blank and wasnt able to discern out the way to cope up with the scenario. Manifestly, they All are privy to the consequence the syllabus at some point of the practise period. Its miles the excellent paper which directs the manner. At the selfsame time as i used to live almost mad, I were given to recognize about killexams. Cant thank my buddy for making me privy to the sort of blessing. Practise changed into a whole lot less difficult with the befriend of SC0-402 syllabus which I got via the web site.


Did you attempted this outstanding supply cutting-edge SC0-402 dumps.
I wanted to own certification in test SC0-402 and i gain it with killexams. consummate pattern of novel modules facilitate me to attempt All the 38 questions inside the given time-body. I score more than 87. I actually own to mention that I may want to in no way ever own carried out it on my own what i used which will accumulate with killexams.Com . Killexams.Com present the ultra-present day module of questions and cover the associated subjects. Thanks to killexams.Com .


am i able to locate phone number of SC0-402 licensed?
This is absolutely the achievement of killexams.com, now not mine. Very person pleasant SC0-402 exam simulator and bona fide SC0-402 QAs.


No waste cutting-edge time on internet! observed genuine source today's SC0-402 questions.
At ultimate, my score ninety% changed into more than desire. at the point when the examination SC0-402 become handiest 1 week away, my making plans become in an indiscriminate situation. I predicted that i would want to retake inside the occasion of disappointment to gain 80% pass imprints. Taking after a partners recommendation, i purchased the from killexams.com and could hold a qualify arrangement by way of commonly composed substance.


Very smooth to gain licensed in SC0-402 examination with this own a gape at manual.
sure, the question bank could live very useful and that i suggest it to anyone who desires to hold those assessments. Congrats on a process properly concept out and done. I cleared my SC0-402 tests.


simply attempted SC0-402 question bank as soon as and i'm convinced.
With the Use of exceptional products of killexams.com, I had scored ninety two percentage marks in SC0-402 certification. i waslooking for dependable commemorate fabric to boom my information stage. Technical standards and difficult language of my certification changed into hard to recognize therefore i used to live searching for dependable and clean hold a gape atproducts. I had gain to realize this internet site for the instruction of expert certification. It was not an clean task butonly killexams.com has made this task light for me. im feeling excellent for my achievement and this platform is satisfactory for me.


first rate source latest high-highexcellent SC0-402 mind dumps, reform answers.
im now not an aficionado of on line killexams.com, in light of the fact that they are often posted by way of flighty individuals who misdirect I into mastering stuff I neednt peril with and missing things that I absolutely want to recognise. not killexams.com . This business enterprise offers absolutely profitable sized killexams.com that assist me overcome SC0-402 exam readiness. that is the way by which I passed this exam from the second one strive and scored 87% marks. thanks


That changed into incredible! I got today's dumps present day SC0-402 examination.
There is not a profitable deal SC0-402 exam substances out there, so I went in promote and purchased those SC0-402 questions and solutions. in reality, it received my coronary heart with the manner the statistics is prepared. And yeah, thats right: mostquestions I noticed on the exam own been exactly what turned into furnished by killexams.com. Im relieved to own exceeded SC0-402 exam.


SCP SCP Network Defense and

SCA Property group raises $262.4 million | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

SCA Property neighborhood (ASX:SCP), a much landlord of the Woolworths neighborhood, has effectively achieved the thoroughly underwritten institutional placement announced the day gone by elevating $262.4 million during the situation of about 113.1 million novel completely paid standard devices.

The proceeds can live partly fund the acquisition of 10 shopping centres from vicinity for $573 million.

Eligible unitholders who were registered as SCP unitholders as at 7.00pm on Tuesday 2 October 2018 should live invited to subscribe for up to $15,000 of additional novel units, freed from brokerage and transaction expenses.

Shares in SCA Property neighborhood (ASX:SCP) are down 1.05 per cent to $2.35 


SCP Vitalife Expands Israel-To-US approach | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

SCP Vitalife is ramping up what has confirmed to live a profitable strategy of connecting the U.S. and Israeli clinical industries. Its former members consist of Israeli Deputy major Minister and Minister of defense Ehud Barak, who changed into a accomplice of SCP partners from 2001 to 2007.


Ametek SCP | killexams.com true Questions and Pass4sure dumps

No outcomes discovered, try novel key phrase!Matt Christiansen has joined Westerly, R.I.-primarily based Ametek SCP as senior design engineer. He changed into engineering supervisor at Seacon superior items. You exigency to own an Aviation Week Intelligence community (AWI...

SC0-402 Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)

Study steer Prepared by Killexams.com SCP Dumps Experts


Killexams.com SC0-402 Dumps and true Questions

100% true Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with tall Marks - Just Memorize the Answers



SC0-402 exam Dumps Source : Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)

Test Code : SC0-402
Test name : Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)
Vendor name : SCP
: 410 true Questions

nice to pay interest that contemporary-day dumps modern-day SC0-402 exam are to live had.
Hi all, gladden live knowledgeable that I actually own handed the SC0-402 examination with killexams.com, which was my essential training source, with a strong common rating. This is a totally valid examination fabric, which I exceptionally counsel to All people running closer to their IT certification. This is a dependable manner to set aside together and bypass your IT tests. In my IT employer, there isnt a person who has not used/visible/heard/ of the killexams.com substances. Not most efficacious achieve they assist you bypass, however they ensure which you learn and near up a a hit professional.


pleasant to hear that actual exam questions present day SC0-402 examination are to live had.
This is my first time that I took this service. I feel very confident in SC0-402 but. I prepare my SC0-402 using questions and answers with exam simulator softare by killexams.com team.


Updated and actual question bank of SC0-402.
I went loopy while my test changed into in every week and that i out of state my SC0-402 syllabus. I were given blank and wasnt able to discern out the way to cope up with the scenario. Manifestly, they All are privy to the consequence the syllabus at some point of the practise period. Its miles the excellent paper which directs the manner. At the selfsame time as i used to live almost mad, I were given to recognize about killexams. Cant thank my buddy for making me privy to the sort of blessing. Practise changed into a whole lot less difficult with the befriend of SC0-402 syllabus which I got via the web site.


Did you attempted this outstanding supply cutting-edge SC0-402 dumps.
I wanted to own certification in test SC0-402 and i gain it with killexams. consummate pattern of novel modules facilitate me to attempt All the 38 questions inside the given time-body. I score more than 87. I actually own to mention that I may want to in no way ever own carried out it on my own what i used which will accumulate with killexams.Com . Killexams.Com present the ultra-present day module of questions and cover the associated subjects. Thanks to killexams.Com .


am i able to locate phone number of SC0-402 licensed?
This is absolutely the achievement of killexams.com, now not mine. Very person pleasant SC0-402 exam simulator and bona fide SC0-402 QAs.


No waste cutting-edge time on internet! observed genuine source today's SC0-402 questions.
At ultimate, my score ninety% changed into more than desire. at the point when the examination SC0-402 become handiest 1 week away, my making plans become in an indiscriminate situation. I predicted that i would want to retake inside the occasion of disappointment to gain 80% pass imprints. Taking after a partners recommendation, i purchased the from killexams.com and could hold a qualify arrangement by way of commonly composed substance.


Very smooth to gain licensed in SC0-402 examination with this own a gape at manual.
sure, the question bank could live very useful and that i suggest it to anyone who desires to hold those assessments. Congrats on a process properly concept out and done. I cleared my SC0-402 tests.


simply attempted SC0-402 question bank as soon as and i'm convinced.
With the Use of exceptional products of killexams.com, I had scored ninety two percentage marks in SC0-402 certification. i waslooking for dependable commemorate fabric to boom my information stage. Technical standards and difficult language of my certification changed into hard to recognize therefore i used to live searching for dependable and clean hold a gape atproducts. I had gain to realize this internet site for the instruction of expert certification. It was not an clean task butonly killexams.com has made this task light for me. im feeling excellent for my achievement and this platform is satisfactory for me.


first rate source latest high-highexcellent SC0-402 mind dumps, reform answers.
im now not an aficionado of on line killexams.com, in light of the fact that they are often posted by way of flighty individuals who misdirect I into mastering stuff I neednt peril with and missing things that I absolutely want to recognise. not killexams.com . This business enterprise offers absolutely profitable sized killexams.com that assist me overcome SC0-402 exam readiness. that is the way by which I passed this exam from the second one strive and scored 87% marks. thanks


That changed into incredible! I got today's dumps present day SC0-402 examination.
There is not a profitable deal SC0-402 exam substances out there, so I went in promote and purchased those SC0-402 questions and solutions. in reality, it received my coronary heart with the manner the statistics is prepared. And yeah, thats right: mostquestions I noticed on the exam own been exactly what turned into furnished by killexams.com. Im relieved to own exceeded SC0-402 exam.


While it is very hard task to pick dependable certification questions / answers resources with respect to review, reputation and validity because people gain ripoff due to choosing wrong service. Killexams.com Make it sure to serve its clients best to its resources with respect to exam dumps update and validity. Most of other's ripoff report complaint clients gain to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams happily and easily. They never compromise on their review, reputation and property because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams client self-possession is valuable to us. Specially they hold supervision of killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com ripoff report complaint, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. If you survey any unfounded report posted by their competitors with the name killexams ripoff report complaint internet, killexams.com ripoff report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com complaint or something like this, just retain in mind that there are always wrong people damaging reputation of profitable services due to their benefits. There are thousands of satisfied customers that pass their exams using killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams exercise questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their sample questions and sample brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will definitely know that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.

Back to Braindumps Menu


BCNS-CNS braindumps | E20-559 exercise test | 000-209 dumps | COG-700 cram | M2150-810 exercise test | 70-536-CSharp exercise Test | NS0-150 questions answers | HP0-438 test questions | 1Z0-550 study guide | C2170-051 brain dumps | 000-765 free pdf | HP0-417 test prep | BCP-410 braindumps | 700-104 exam prep | 000-806 questions and answers | HP0-D04 study guide | 70-779 examcollection | 200-310 exam questions | C2090-612 pdf download | CTFA study guide |


SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402

Once you memorize these SC0-402 , you will gain 100% marks.
killexams.com SCP Certification commemorate publications are setup by means of IT experts. Lots of students had been complaining that there are too many questions in such a lot of exercise assessments and exam guides, and they are just worn-out to own enough money any more. Seeing killexams.com professionals work out this comprehensive version at the selfsame time as nonetheless assure that every one the understanding is blanketed after deep studies and analysis.

We own Tested and Approved SC0-402 Exams. killexams.com provides the most accurate and latest IT exam materials which almost accommodate All information points. With the aid of their SC0-402 study materials, you dont exigency to waste your time on reading bulk of reference books and just exigency to spend 10-20 hours to master their SC0-402 true questions and answers. And they provide you with PDF Version & Software Version exam questions and answers. For Software Version materials, Its offered to give the candidates simulate the SCP SC0-402 exam in a true environment. killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for All exams on website
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
OCTSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for All Orders
Click https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/SC0-402

Great SC0-402 items: they own their specialists Team to guarantee their SCP SC0-402 exam questions are dependably the latest. They are for the most fragment exceptionally comfortable with the exams and testing focus.

How they retain SCP SC0-402 exams updated?: they own their uncommon approaches to know the latest exams data on SCP SC0-402. Once in a while they contact their accomplices exceptionally acquainted with the testing focus or now and again their clients will email us the latest criticism, or they got the latest input from their dumps advertise. When they learn the SCP SC0-402 exams changed then they update them ASAP.

Unconditional promise?: on the off casual that you really gain up short this SC0-402 Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC) and don't exigency to sit tight for the update then they can give you complete refund. Yet, you ought to forward your score respond to us with the goal that they can own a check. They will give you complete refund quickly amid their working time after they gain the SCP SC0-402 score report from you.

SCP SC0-402 Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC) Product Demo?: they own both PDF adaptation and Software variant. You can check their product page to perceive what it like.

killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017: 60% Discount Coupon for All exams on website
PROF17: 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17: 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
OCTSPECIAL: 10% Special Discount Coupon for All Orders


At the point when will I gain my SC0-402 material after I pay?: Generally, After successful payment your username/password are sent at your email address inside 5 min. live that as it may, if any deferral in bank side for installment approval, at that point it takes minimal longer.

SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402 | SC0-402


Killexams 156-915-70 exercise test | Killexams P2080-034 dumps | Killexams 000-420 test prep | Killexams C2090-549 braindumps | Killexams 646-365 questions answers | Killexams HP0-068 dump | Killexams BI0-145 brain dumps | Killexams C9020-970 exam prep | Killexams 050-728 free pdf | Killexams 9A0-136 true questions | Killexams C2020-013 true questions | Killexams E20-393 free pdf download | Killexams CD0-001 brain dumps | Killexams HP0-651 cheat sheets | Killexams 70-505-CSharp free pdf | Killexams 090-602 free pdf | Killexams 000-G40 exercise test | Killexams HP3-X02 sample test | Killexams A2180-376 braindumps | Killexams 500-170 exercise questions |


Exam Simulator : Pass4sure SC0-402 Exam Simulator

View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


Killexams HP0-171 brain dumps | Killexams 98-349 braindumps | Killexams 000-427 pdf download | Killexams JN0-692 cheat sheets | Killexams PMI-200 test prep | Killexams FNS examcollection | Killexams VCS-310 exercise test | Killexams HP0-095 exam questions | Killexams HP0-K02 study guide | Killexams ST0-237 cram | Killexams BAS-013 exercise test | Killexams IC3-2 study guide | Killexams P9530-089 exercise questions | Killexams 000-002 exercise test | Killexams C2180-181 true questions | Killexams CNOR test prep | Killexams E20-537 questions answers | Killexams 312-92 exam prep | Killexams 050-80-CASECURID01 true questions | Killexams 920-352 dump |


Network Defense and Countermeasures (NDC)

Pass 4 sure SC0-402 dumps | Killexams.com SC0-402 true questions | http://www.radionaves.com/

BAE Reveals novel ‘Smart D2’ Countermeasures System | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

BAE Systems has unveiled a next-generation threat management technology that can work with fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft to dispense countermeasures. The company calls the novel system Smart D2. It can deploy multi-shot flares, lively radio-frequency decoys and kinetic interceptors to protect aircraft. Traditional threat warning and countermeasure systems identify and conquer infrared and guided missiles by dispensing flares or chaff that befuddle threats and their talent to track. BAE ...

Register now for free access to "BAE Reveals novel ‘Smart D2’ Countermeasures System" and other premium content selected daily by their editors. 

Current magazine subscribers: digital access to articles associated with your subscription are now included at no added impregnate to you. Simply Use your subscriber email to log in to your account (or contact us for assistance in updating your account). Current Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) enterprise and individual members: gladden retrograde to http://awin.aviationweek.com for access.

Already registered? Log In here.

Computer and Network Systems (CNS): Core Programs | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

NSF Logo

National Science Foundation

Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering     Division of Computer and Network Systems

Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

LARGE projects

     September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

MEDIUM projects

     November 01, 2018 - November 15, 2018

SMALL projects

     September 09, 2019 - September 16, 2019

MEDIUM projects

     September 18, 2019 - September 25, 2019

LARGE projects

     October 31, 2019 - November 14, 2019

SMALL projects

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES

This is a revision of NSF 17-570, the solicitation for the CISE/CNS Core Programs. Significant changes own been made to the program description. The revisions include:

  • All proposals must live submitted to the “CNS Core” program, rather than the Research in Networking Technology & Systems (NeTS) or Computer Systems Research (CSR) programs.
  • Additional solicitation-specific review criteria, addressing security by design, robustness, manageability, and understanding of the system or system component; evaluation of expected research outcomes; and dissemination plans for independent validation.
  • A Results Dissemination procedure and a Data Management procedure are now required for All proposals.
  • The requirement of a Collaboration procedure for All proposals with more than one investigator for MEDIUM proposals and All large proposals.
  • The addition of novel submission taxonomy and keyword requirements; these are to live included at the near of the project summary.
  • The Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC) is now fragment of the coordinated solicitation, along with CNS (this solicitation), Computing and Communication Foundations (CCF), and Information and intelligent Systems (IIS).
  • Broadening Participation in Computing plans are strongly encouraged for Medium and large proposals, and approved plans are required before award.
  • Proposers are asked not to request start dates between July 2 and September 30 of a given year.
  • Eligibility requirements for PIs, co-PIs, and senior personnel are clarified.
  • Evaluation plans are required.
  • The section on Embedded REU Supplements has been removed. Requests for REU supplements may still live submitted in accordance with applicable NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) and CISE guidance.
  • Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should live submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) (NSF 18-1), which is efficacious for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 29, 2018.

    SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS General Information

    Program Title:

    Computer and Network Systems (CNS): Core Programs

    Synopsis of Program:

    CISE’s Division of Computer and Network Systems (CNS) supports research and education projects that hold a system-oriented approach to the evolution of novel computing and networking technologies, or to the enhancement of existing systems in any of several dimensions, or that explore novel ways to Make Use of existing technologies.

    Proposers are invited to submit proposals in three project classes, which are defined as follows:

  • Small Projects - up to $500,000 total budget with durations up to three years;
  • Medium Projects - $500,001 to $1,200,000 total budget with durations up to four years; and
  • Large Projects - $1,200,001 to $3,000,000 total budget with durations up to five years.
  • A more complete description of the three project classes can live found in Section II. Program Description of this document.

    Cognizant Program Officer(s):

    Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. survey program website for any updates to the points of contact.

    Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):

  • 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
  • Award Information

    Anticipated Type of Award: Standard accord or Continuing Grant

    Estimated Number of Awards: 100 to 150

    Anticipated Funding Amount: $60,000,000

    $60 million per year, dependent upon the availability of funds.

    Eligibility Information

    Who May Submit Proposals:

    Proposals may only live submitted by the following:

  • Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International fork Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to live provided to an international fork campus of a US institution of higher education (including through Use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must account for the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international fork campus, and justify why the project activities cannot live performed at the US campus.
  • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities.
  • Who May Serve as PI:

    As of the submission deadline, PIs, co-PIs, or other senior project personnel must hold primary, full-time, paid appointments in research or teaching positions at US-based campuses/offices of organizations eligible to submit to this solicitation (see above), with exceptions granted for family or medical leave, as determined by the submitting institution. Individuals with primary appointments at for-profit, non-academic organizations, or overseas fork campuses of US IHEs are not eligible, even if they besides own an appointment at a US campus.

    Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

    There are no restrictions or limits.

    Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 2

    In any contiguous September through November period, an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in no more than two proposals across All size classes submitted in response to the coordinated solicitations (where coordinated solicitations are defined to embrace the Computer and Network Systems (CNS): Core Programs, Computing and Communication Foundations (CCF): Core Programs, Information and intelligent Systems (IIS): Core Programs, and the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC): Core Programs solicitations). For example, between September 2018 and November 2018, an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in one proposal submitted to a core program in CCF and in a second proposal submitted to a core program in CNS, or an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in two proposals submitted to an IIS core program, etc.

    These eligibility constraints will live strictly enforced in order to treat everyone fairly and consistently. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals received within the confine will live accepted based on earliest date and time of proposal submission (i.e., the first two proposals received will live accepted and the remnant will live returned without review). No exceptions will live made.

    The confine on the number of proposals per PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel applies only to the coordinated solicitations.

    Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

    A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

  • Letters of Intent: Not required
  • Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
  • B. Budgetary Information

  • Other Budgetary Limitations:

    Other budgetary limitations apply. gladden survey the complete text of this solicitation for further information.

  • C. Due Dates

  • Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

         September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

    LARGE projects

         September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

    MEDIUM projects

         November 01, 2018 - November 15, 2018

    SMALL projects

         September 09, 2019 - September 16, 2019

    MEDIUM projects

         September 18, 2019 - September 25, 2019

    LARGE projects

         October 31, 2019 - November 14, 2019

    SMALL projects

  • Proposal Review Information Criteria

    Merit Review Criteria:

    National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. gladden survey the complete text of this solicitation for further information.

    Award Administration Information

    Award Conditions:

    Standard NSF award conditions apply.

    Reporting Requirements:

    Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Summary of Program Requirements

  • Introduction
  • Program Description
  • Award Information
  • Eligibility Information
  • Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
  • Proposal Preparation Instructions
  • Budgetary Information
  • Due Dates
  • FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
  • NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
  • Merit Review Principles and Criteria
  • Review and Selection Process
  • Award Administration Information
  • Notification of the Award
  • Award Conditions
  • Reporting Requirements
  • Agency Contacts
  • Other Information
  • I. INTRODUCTION

    The Division of Computer and Network Systems (CNS) supports research and education activities that lead to novel or enhanced computing and networking technologies, or that explore novel ways to Make Use of existing technologies. The Division seeks to develop a better understanding of the fundamental properties and tradeoffs involved in computer and network systems as well as the abstractions and tools used in designing, building, measuring, and using them.

    II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The CNS core program deals with All aspects of computer and network systems. Society's reliance on such systems as infrastructure has grown dramatically in the terminal decade. At the selfsame time, both the resources from which those systems are built—compute, storage, communication networks, and software—and the way those resources are organized and distributed, own continued to evolve rapidly.

    Current and future systems exigency to fullfil various requirements, both generic and purpose-driven. generic system requirements embrace security, reliability, manageability, usability, and sustainability, as well as cost-effectiveness and fitness for purpose. Depending on the context, other requirements may embrace performance, privacy-preservation, scalability, responsiveness, and survivability.

    CNS solicits innovative research that considers technology trends and emerging challenges, while emphasizing a systems focus and awareness of the types of requirements mentioned above. This solicitation recognizes the interdependency and blurring of boundaries among computing, storage, and networking (sub)systems and the research associated with them. As such, specific sub-programs are not called out. It is not the intent to confine the scope of the program, compared to previous solicitations. Rather, the intent is to animate cross-fertilization among areas of CNS research.

    Research of interest for this solicitation:

  • Explores fundamental principles and creates innovative technologies, protocols, and systems that define the future or—more realistically—harness current and emerging technologies, trends, and applications;
  • Produces practical abstractions, techniques, tools, artifacts, or datasets that address/enhance both generic and functional requirements such as those outlined above;
  • Reflects a pellucid understanding of what each component does and how it interfaces with the ease of the system and the environment;
  • Disseminates artifacts in such a way that others can repeat, reproduce, validate, or otherwise verify the results.
  • Although purely intellectual investigations are within scope, research that takes into account current and future societal needs is encouraged.

    A hallmark of systems research is the investigation and understanding of design tradeoffs that must live navigated when designing and implementing systems against the requirements above. Proposals that expose underlying principles or tradeoffs having predictive value that extends across different domains are especially encouraged. Proposers should identify and narrate the systems considered, the objectives or capabilities envisioned, and their expected contribution in the context of the overall system requirements. Three especially valuable illustration requirements are:

  • Secure by design: How can one ensure integrity and confidentiality of networked systems and data? How can one enhance abstractions, delineate permissible actions, enforce compliance, and establish security defaults in design processes that anticipate vulnerabilities and provide defense against unforeseen attacks from adversaries?
  • Robustness: How can systems—existing and future—be made more adaptable and resilient to natural and anthropogenic hazards (e.g., weather events, malware, sabotage), as well as other classic or expected events, such as component failures, misconfigurations, and overloads? What innovative approaches would enable one to ensure system robustness and to identify, communicate, and mitigate system anomalies in real-time for outages at both small and large scale?
  • Manageability: What novel architectures and protocols, measurement and monitoring capabilities are needed to support a growing set of diverse applications? How can these measurements and monitoring capabilities aid in overall system management? What are novel approaches to enable comprehensive, pervasive, accurate, and usable measurement capabilities, near real-time system analytics, and systems management when the systems are massive and at the scale of the Internet? What innovations are needed to enable truly autonomous systems, which are self-managing by definition?
  • In general, any topic having to achieve with augmenting, understanding, enhancing, or transforming computing and communication systems undertaken from a systems point of view is within scope.

    Issues that reside primarily at the device or application flat and that are highly context-specific will not live considered a profitable lucky for this program. Projects that focus exclusively or primarily on cybersecurity threats and countermeasures may live a better lucky for the Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC) program. Projects focused primarily on design or enhancement of sensing and control systems that interact with the physical world may live a better lucky with the Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) program.

    Project Validation Plan: Proposers are strongly encouraged to embrace a project validation procedure in the Project Description that narrate the underlying setup, processes, mechanisms, and metrics to assess success of the proposed research. Proposers may validate hypotheses using simulations, emulations, testbeds, or a combination of these; architectural validation could occur at a time-scale larger than the project duration, in which case the approach to long-term architecture validation must live discussed in the proposal. Proposers are highly recommended to use, when appropriate, the wide array of community infrastructure testbeds that are available as fragment of their validation plan. The proposal must Make pellucid the intended flat of abstraction at which the underlying research will live validated.

    Results Dissemination Plan: Proposals submitted to this solicitation must narrate plans to ensure that the research results produced will live made available to the extent necessary to validate the findings independently, as indicated in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) Chapter XI.D.4.

    Data Management Plan: The data management procedure must besides narrate steps to ensure that germane software and hardware artifacts, data and the results are available (for a reasonable time) beyond the near of the project lifecycle. For details, survey the Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Data Management procedure at https://www.nsf.gov/cise/cise_dmp.jsp.

    Collaboration Plan: Since the success of collaborative research efforts is known to depend on thoughtful coordination mechanisms that regularly bring together the various participants of the project, a separate Collaboration procedure is required for All large proposals and All Medium proposals with more than one investigator. Collaboration Plans are optional for Small proposals.

    PROJECT CLASSES

    Proposals submitted to this solicitation must live consistent with one of three project classes defined below. Proposals will live considered for funding within their project classes.

  • SMALL Projects
  • Small Projects, with total budgets up to $500,000 for durations of up to three years, are well suited to one or two investigators (PI and one co-PI or other Senior Personnel) and at least one student and/or postdoc. A Collaboration procedure (up to 2 pages) may live provided under Supplementary Documents. gladden survey Proposal Preparation Instructions Section V.A for additional submission guidelines.

  • MEDIUM Projects
  • Medium Projects, with total budgets ranging from $500,001 to $1,200,000 for durations up to four years, are well suited to one or more investigators (PI, co-PI and/or other Senior Personnel) and several students and/or postdocs. Medium project descriptions must live comprehensive and well-integrated, and should Make a convincing case that the collaborative contributions of the project team will live greater than the sum of each of their individual contributions. Rationale must live provided to account for why a budget of this size is required to carry out the proposed work. Since the success of collaborative research efforts are known to depend on thoughtful coordination mechanisms that regularly bring together the various participants of the project, a Collaboration procedure is required for any Medium project with more than one investigator, even when the investigators are affiliated with the selfsame institution. Up to 2 pages are allowed for Collaboration Plans and they must live submitted as a document under Supplementary Documents. The length and flat of detail provided in the Collaboration procedure should live commensurate with the complexity of the proposed project. Collaboration Plans and proposed budgets should demonstrate that key personnel, and especially lead PIs, own allocated adequate time for both their individual technical contributions and the leadership of collaborative activities necessary to realize the synergistic effects of larger-scale research. If a Medium project with more than one investigator does not embrace a Collaboration Plan, that proposal will live returned without review. gladden survey Proposal Preparation Instructions Section V.A for additional submission guidelines.

  • LARGE Projects
  • Large Projects, with total budgets ranging from $1,200,001 to $3,000,000 for durations of up to five years, are well suited to two or more investigators (PI, co-PI(s), or other Senior Personnel), and a team of students and/or postdocs. large project descriptions must live comprehensive and well-integrated, and should Make a convincing case that the collaborative contributions of the project team will live greater than the sum of each of their individual contributions. large projects will typically integrate research from various areas, either within a cluster or across clusters, or tackle ambitious goals not feasible with smaller projects. Rationale must live provided to account for why a budget of this size is required to carry out the proposed work. Since the success of collaborative research efforts are known to depend on thoughtful coordination mechanisms that regularly bring together the various participants of the project, a Collaboration procedure is required for All large projects, regardless of the number of investigators. Up to 2 pages are allowed for Collaboration Plans and they must live submitted as a document under Supplementary Documents. The length and degree of detail provided in the Collaboration procedure should live commensurate with the complexity of the proposed project. Collaboration Plans and proposed budgets should demonstrate that key personnel, and especially lead PIs, own allocated adequate time for both their individual technical contributions and the leadership of collaborative activities necessary to realize the synergistic effects of larger-scale research. If a large project does not embrace a Collaboration Plan, that proposal will live returned without review. gladden survey Proposal Preparation Instructions Section V.A for additional submission guidelines.

  • EVALUATION PLANS

    PIs must embrace a procedure to evaluate the approaches developed as fragment of the Project Description. Evaluation methods will depend on the research area; examples embrace results from evolution of theories, applications of techniques to specific domains, efficacy studies, scalability on local or global scales, generalization, quantifiable usability, robustness, reliability in benign or hostile environments, compatibility with existing environments, performance measures on benchmark datasets, and other such activities. The procedure should live commandeer for the size and scope of the project.

    BROADENING PARTICIPATION IN COMPUTING

    CISE has long been committed to Broadening Participation in Computing (BPC). The under-representation of many groups—including women, African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska Natives, autochthonous Hawaiians, autochthonous Pacific Islanders, and persons with disabilities—in computing deprives large segments of the population of the chance to live creators of technology and not only consumers. Ending underrepresentation will require a compass of measures, including institutional programs and activities as well as culture change across colleges, departments, classes, and research groups.

    With this solicitation, CISE is expanding a pilot endeavor started terminal year encouraging the research community to engage in meaningful BPC activities. This novel activity builds on many of the programs, research, and resources created in CISE's long history of support for BPC, and it aligns with the recommendations of the Strategic procedure for Broadening Participation produced by the CISE Advisory Committee in 2011. Specifically:

  • Each Medium and large project must, by the time of award, own in state an approved BPC plan. In this ongoing pilot phase, CISE will work with each PI team following merit review and prior to making an award to ensure that plans are meaningful and embrace concrete metrics for success. CISE will besides provide opportunities for PIs to share BPC experiences and innovations through program PI meetings. PIs of Medium and large proposals are therefore strongly encouraged to consider this eventual requirement as they develop their proposals, and to embrace one- to three-page descriptions of their planned BPC activities under Supplementary Documents in their submissions. Feedback will live provided on such plans.
  • PIs submitting to the Small size class should note that CISE intends to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the above approach and determine commandeer next steps, including potential further expansion of this endeavor in future years. PIs of Small proposals are therefore strongly encouraged to embrace plans, or commence preparing to embrace plans, for broadening participation activities in their proposals.
  • More information, including examples of BPC activities and metrics, can live found at: https://www.nsf.gov/cise/bpc/.

    PROPOSALS FOR CONSIDERATION BY MULTIPLE CISE PROGRAMS

    Proposals that intersect more than one CISE research program are welcome. In such cases, PIs must identify the most germane programs in the proposal submission process (for information about submission and how to identify such proposals, survey Proposal Preparation Instructions later in this document). CISE Program Officers will ensure that these proposals are co-reviewed as appropriate.

    IMPORTANT PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

    The submission of far-reaching, creative research and education projects is encouraged. Funds will live used to support potentially transformative research with high-impact potential. In this way, CISE will catalyze exciting novel research activities with the potential to Make significant advances in the state of the art.

    Interdisciplinary, international, and/or academic-industry collaborations that pledge to result in major science or engineering advances are welcome. The directorate hopes to attract proposals from faculty at a broad compass of academic institutions, including faculty at minority-serving and predominantly undergraduate institutions.

    Proposals submitted should demonstrate that moneyed learning experiences will live provided for a diverse population of students and may pose the evolution of innovative curricula or educational materials that promote literacy about and expertise in areas supported by CISE.

    Scientific progress often results by considering a special case of a generic problem. If the proposed research falls into this category, PIs can befriend the reviewers and NSF staff better understand the intellectual merit and/or broader impacts of the proposal by discussing to what extent the findings are likely to generalize.

    In the interest of completeness and transparency, PIs are strongly encouraged to describe, as fragment of their Data Management Plans, how they will provide access to well-documented datasets, modeling and/or simulation tools, and codebases to support reproducibility of their methods. For more information, survey the Dear Colleague note “Encouraging Reproducibility in Computing and Communications Research” available at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf17022.

    START DATES

    In order to avoid overdue reports blocking award actions during the near of a fiscal year, institutions are discouraged from seeking project start dates between July 2 and September 30 of a given year. Awardee institutions may incur allowable pre-award costs within the 90-day term immediately preceding the start date of the accord subject to the conditions specified in the PAPPG; this will allow support for students or other germane activities to commence over this period.

    III. AWARD INFORMATION

    Up to $60 million each year will support up to 150 awards, pending the availability of funds.

    IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

    Who May Submit Proposals:

    Proposals may only live submitted by the following:

  • Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International fork Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to live provided to an international fork campus of a US institution of higher education (including through Use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must account for the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international fork campus, and justify why the project activities cannot live performed at the US campus.
  • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities.
  • Who May Serve as PI:

    As of the submission deadline, PIs, co-PIs, or other senior project personnel must hold primary, full-time, paid appointments in research or teaching positions at US-based campuses/offices of organizations eligible to submit to this solicitation (see above), with exceptions granted for family or medical leave, as determined by the submitting institution. Individuals with primary appointments at for-profit, non-academic organizations, or overseas fork campuses of US IHEs are not eligible, even if they besides own an appointment at a US campus.

    Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

    There are no restrictions or limits.

    Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 2

    In any contiguous September through November period, an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in no more than two proposals across All size classes submitted in response to the coordinated solicitations (where coordinated solicitations are defined to embrace the Computer and Network Systems (CNS): Core Programs, Computing and Communication Foundations (CCF): Core Programs, Information and intelligent Systems (IIS): Core Programs, and the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC): Core Programs solicitations). For example, between September 2018 and November 2018, an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in one proposal submitted to a core program in CCF and in a second proposal submitted to a core program in CNS, or an individual may participate as PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel in two proposals submitted to an IIS core program, etc.

    These eligibility constraints will live strictly enforced in order to treat everyone fairly and consistently. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals received within the confine will live accepted based on earliest date and time of proposal submission (i.e., the first two proposals received will live accepted and the remnant will live returned without review). No exceptions will live made.

    The confine on the number of proposals per PI, co-PI or Senior Personnel applies only to the coordinated solicitations.

    Additional Eligibility Info:

    Subawards are not permitted to overseas fork campuses/offices of US-based proposing organizations eligible to submit to this solicitation.

    V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

    Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

  • Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should live prepared and submitted in accordance with the generic guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. Paper copies of the PAPPG may live obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation conceal on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is censorious to determining the germane proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may detain processing.
  • Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should live prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A steer for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application steer is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To obtain copies of the Application steer and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a accord Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding chance number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application steer besides may live obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
  • In determining which routine to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, gladden note the following:

    Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must live submitted via the NSF FastLane system. PAPPG Chapter II.D.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

    See PAPPG Chapter II.C.2 for guidance on the required sections of a complete research proposal submitted to NSF. gladden note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

    The following information SUPPLEMENTS (note that it does NOT replace) the guidelines provided in the NSF.

    Cover Sheet: PIs submitting accord Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) proposals should select “GOALI” from the Type of Proposal drop down list in the Proposal Preparation module in FastLane or Grants.gov. gladden survey Chapter II.E.4 of the PAPPG for additional information about preparing a GOALI proposal: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappg17_1/pappg_2.jsp#IIE4.

    Proposal Titles:

    Proposal titles should commence with "CNS Core", followed with a colon, then the project class followed by a colon, then the title of your project. For example, if you are submitting a Medium proposal, then your title would live CNS Core: Medium: Title.

    If you submit a proposal as fragment of a set of collaborative proposals, the title of the proposal should commence with "CNS Core" followed by a colon, then the project class followed by a colon, then "Collaborative Research" followed by a colon, and the title. For example, if you are submitting a collaborative set of proposals for a large project the title of each would live CNS Core: Large: Collaborative Research: Title.

    Proposals from PIs in institutions that own RUI (Research in Undergraduate Institutions) eligibility should own a proposal title that begins "CNS Core", followed by a colon then the project class, followed by a colon then "RUI", followed by a colon and then the title, for example, CNS Core: Small: RUI: Title.

    PIs submitting GOALI proposals should own a proposal title that begins "CNS Core", followed by a colon then the project class, followed by a colon then "GOALI", followed by a colon and then the title, for example, CNS Core: Small: GOALI: Title.

    Proposals that extend beyond the scope of one CISE core program or region are welcome. Proposals should live submitted in response to the solicitation for the CISE division (CCF, CNS, IIS, or OAC) that includes the most germane core program. In such cases, PIs should identify the acronym for the most germane core program or area, followed by any other germane program acronym(s) separated by colons (for example, CNS Core: CHS: Medium: Title). In this case, the proposal would live submitted to the CNS solicitation and would live considered by both the CNS Core and Cyber-Human Systems (CHS) programs. CNS Program Officers will work with their NSF and CISE colleagues to ensure that these proposals are appropriately reviewed and considered for funding. gladden survey the coordinated CCF, IIS, and OAC solicitations for information on other CISE core programs and the corresponding acronyms.

    Project Summary:

    The Project Summary consists of an overview, a statement on the intellectual merit of the proposed activity, a statement on the broader impacts of the proposed activity, and a set of keywords.

    To assist the proposers and the NSF in identifying a “home” for submissions to this program, proposers are required to select keywords in each of the following four dimensions. The first dimension describes the most germane systems topic area; the second dimension identifies the context or class of systems; the third dimension corresponds to the primary goal or objective of the proposed work, and the fourth indicates any specialized information or techniques to live applied (for illustration machine learning, game theory, etc.). Proposers must select at least one keyword from each list below for the first three dimensions; the fourth dimension should live filled in if any specialized technique is proposed, otherwise "none" should live indicated.

    The required keywords should live input in order, with each dimension delimited by square brackets ("[" and "]"), and multiple keywords within a dimension separated by commas.

    Dimension 1: Topic Area

  • Compilers and Programming Languages
  • Computer Architecture
  • Distributed Systems
  • File Systems
  • Middleware/Services
  • Operating Systems
  • Software Defined Infrastructure/Virtualization
  • Wired Networks
  • Wireless Networks
  • Dimension 2: Target Context or Platform Class

  • Access Networks
  • Application Services
  • Content Delivery Networks
  • Data headquarters Networks
  • Mobile Systems
  • Cluster/Data Center
  • Cloud/Edge
  • Enterprise Networks
  • High Performance Computing
  • Network Architecture
  • Network Protocols
  • Optical Networks
  • Storage Systems
  • Vehicular Networks
  • Dimension 3: Target Requirement

  • Cost
  • Fairness
  • Quality of (experience, service)
  • Manageability
  • Measurability
  • Performance (throughput, latency)
  • Power/energy improvements
  • Real-time
  • Reliability
  • Robustness
  • Security
  • Scalability
  • Spectrum Coexistence
  • Dimension 4: Techniques

    Projects contemplating application of particular information or techniques (e.g., graph theory, game theory, control theory, machine learning, network coding, formal methods, and so on) should embrace keywords to bespeak the specialized information to live applied.

    Up to 6 additional proposal specific keywords may live added following these four required classifiers, without square bracket delimiters.

    For example, a proposal to Use machine learning to develop low-cost file system abstractions for content delivery in low-latency edge environments might own the following string in the Keywords field:

    [File Systems] [Access Networks] [Cost, Performance] [machine learning]

    A project focused on compilers to enhance manageability in enterprise networks could own the following as Keywords:

    [Compilers and Programming Languages] [Enterprise Networks] [Manageability] [none]

    A proposal on mmWave beamforming using machine learning could own the following Keywords:

    [Wireless Networks] [Access Networks] [Performance] [Machine Learning] mmWave, Beamforming

    The list of keywords should live the terminal paragraph of the Overview section of the Project Summary.

    Project Description:

    Length of Project Description - narrate the research and education activities to live undertaken in up to 15 pages for Small and Medium proposals and in up to 20 pages for large proposals. Proposals that exceed these limits will live returned without review.

    PIs submitting to the Small size class should note that CISE intends to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the BPC pilot approach and determine commandeer next steps, including potential further expansion of this endeavor in future years. PIs of Small proposals are therefore strongly encouraged to embrace plans, or commence preparing to embrace plans, for broadening participation activities in the Broader Impacts sections of their proposals.

    Supplementary Documents:

    In the Supplementary Documents section, upload the following information where relevant:

  • A list of Project Personnel and confederate Institutions (Note: In collaborative proposals, the lead institution should provide this information for All participants):
  • Provide current, accurate information for All personnel and institutions involved in the project. NSF staff will Use this information in the merit review process to manage reviewer selection. The list must embrace All PIs, Co-PIs, Senior Personnel, paid/unpaid Consultants or Collaborators, Subawardees, Postdocs, and project-level advisory committee members. This list should live numbered and embrace (in this order) complete name, Organization(s), and Role in the project, with each detail separated by a semi-colon. Each person listed should start a novel numbered line. For example:

  • Mary Smith; XYZ University; PI
  • John Jones; University of PQR; Senior Personnel
  • Jane Brown; XYZ University; Postdoc
  • Bob Adams; ABC Community College; Paid Consultant
  • Susan White; DEF Corporation; Unpaid Collaborator
  • Tim Green; ZZZ University; Subawardee
  • Note: In collaborative proposals, the lead institution should provide this information for All participants.

    Since the success of collaborative research efforts are known to depend on thoughtful coordination mechanisms that regularly bring together the various participants of the project, All Medium proposals that embrace more than one investigator and All large proposals must embrace a Collaboration procedure of up to 2 pages. The length of and degree of detail provided in the Collaboration procedure should live commensurate with the complexity of the proposed project. Where appropriate, the Collaboration procedure might include: 1) the specific roles of the project participants in All organizations involved; 2) information on how the project will live managed across All the investigators, institutions, and/or disciplines; 3) identification of the specific coordination mechanisms that will enable cross-investigator, cross-institution, and/or cross-discipline scientific integration (e.g., yearly conferences, graduate student exchange, project meetings at conferences, Use of the grid for videoconferences, software repositories, etc.); and 4) specific references to the budget line items that support collaboration and coordination mechanisms. If a large proposal, or a Medium proposal with more than one investigator, does not embrace a Collaboration procedure of up to 2 pages, that proposal will live returned without review.

  • Collaboration Plans for Medium and large projects (if applicable):

    Proposals must embrace a Supplementary Document of no more than two pages labeled "Data Management Plan." This Supplementary Document should narrate how the proposal will conform to NSF policy on the dissemination and sharing of research results.

    See Chapter II.C.2.j of the PAPPG for complete policy implementation.

    For additional information on the Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results, see: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp.

    For specific guidance for Data Management Plans submitted to the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) see: https://www.nsf.gov/cise/cise_dmp.jsp.

  • Data Management procedure (required):

    Proposals submitted to this solicitation must narrate plans to ensure that the research results produced will live made available to the extent necessary to validate the findings independently, as indicated in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) Chapter XI.D.4.

  • Results Dissemination procedure (required):

    Each Medium/Large project must, by the time of award, own in state an approved BPC plan. In this ongoing pilot phase, CISE will work with each PI team prior to making an award to ensure that plans are meaningful and embrace concrete metrics for success. CISE will besides provide opportunities for PIs to share BPC experiences and innovations through program PI meetings. PIs of Medium/Large proposals are therefore strongly encouraged to consider this eventual requirement as they develop their proposals, and to embrace descriptions (of one to three pages) of their planned BPC activities under Supplementary Documents in their submissions. Feedback will live provided on such plans.

  • Broadening Participation in Computing (BPC) Plans for Medium and large projects:

    There are two types of collaboration, one involving individuals/organizations that are included in the budget, and the other involving individuals/organizations that are not included in the budget. Collaborations that are included in the budget should live described in the Project Description. Any substantial collaboration with individuals/organizations not included in the budget should live described in the Facilities, materiel and Other Resources section of the proposal (see PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.i). In either case, whether or not the collaborator is included in the budget, a note of collaboration from each named participating organization other than the submitting lead, non-lead, and/or subawardee institutions should live provided at the time of submission of the proposal. Such letters should explicitly state the nature of the collaboration, emerge on the organization's letterhead and live signed by the commandeer organizational representative. These letters must not otherwise deviate from the restrictions and requirements set forth in the PAPPG, Chapter II.C.2.j.

    Please note that letters of support may not live submitted. Such letters achieve not document collaborative arrangements of significance to the project, but primarily convey a sense of enthusiasm for the project and/or highlight the qualifications of the PI or co-PI. Reviewers will live instructed not to consider these letters of support in reviewing the merits of the proposal.

  • Documentation of collaborative arrangements of significance to the proposal through Letters of Collaboration:

    RUI Proposals: PIs from predominantly undergraduate institutions should embrace a Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) impact Statement and Certification of RUI Eligibility in this section.

    GOALI proposals: PIs submitting GOALI proposals should embrace industry-university agreement letters on intellectual property in this section.

    No other Supplementary Documents, except as permitted by the NSF PAPPG, are allowed.

    Single Copy Documents:

    Collaborators and Other Affiliations Information:

    Proposers should follow the guidance specified in Chapter II.C.1.e of the NSF PAPPG.

    Note the distinction to detail (1) under Supplementary Documents above: the listing of All project participants is collected by the project lead and entered as a Supplementary Document, which is then automatically included with All proposals in a project. The Collaborators and Other Affiliations are entered for each participant within each proposal and, as Single Copy Documents, are available only to NSF staff.

    Collaborators and Other Affiliations due to participants listed on detail (1) under Supplementary Documents above who are not PIs, co-PIs, or Senior Personnel can live uploaded under Additional Single Copy Documents using Transfer File.

  • Other specialized information:
  • Submission Checklist:

    In an endeavor to assist proposal preparation, the following checklists are provided as a reminder of the items that should live checked before submitting a proposal to this solicitation. These are a summary of the requirements described above. For the items marked with (RWR), the proposal will live returned without review if the required detail is noncompliant at the submission deadline. Note that there are four lists: (1) for All proposals, unique to this solicitation; (2) additional requirements for Small proposals; (3) additional requirements for Medium proposals; and (4) additional requirements for large proposals.

  • For All proposals, regardless of size:
  • All proposals must live submitted to the “CNS Core” program, rather than the Research in Networking Technology & Systems (NeTS) or Computer Systems Research (CSR) programs.
  • Should embrace a Results Dissemination procedure and Data Management Plan.
  • The Project Summary must accommodate the set of required dimensional keywords, input in order, with each dimension delimited by square brackets ("[" and "]"), and multiple keywords within a dimension separated by commas.
  • The title should start with one of the following strings (submissions intended for CNS and besides additional core programs described in the CCF, IIS, or OAC core solicitations should follow a similar pattern):
  • CNS Core: Small:
  • CNS Core: Small: Collaborative:
  • In addition to the above title prefixes, proposals from PIs in institutions that own RUI (Research in Undergraduate Institutions) eligibility should embrace "RUI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Small: RUI: Title, and should embrace a Research in Undergraduate Institutions impact Statement and Certification of RUI Eligibility. Similarly, PIs submitting accord Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) proposals should select “GOALI” from the Type of Proposal drop down list in the Proposal Preparation module in FastLane or Grants.gov; and embrace "GOALI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Small: GOALI: Title.
  • (RWR) Maximum budget shown on the Cover Sheet and on the budget pages must not exceed $500,000, including All institutions in a collaborative proposal, plus funds for embedded REU supplements.
  • (RWR) The Project Description is limited to no more than 15 pages.
  • A Collaboration procedure (up to 2 pages) may live provided as a Supplementary Document. If provided, the collaboration procedure should embrace All institutions participating, not a separate procedure for each institution.
  • For Small proposals:
  • The title should start with one of the following strings (submissions intended for CNS and besides additional core programs described in the in the CCF, IIS, or OAC core solicitations should follow a similar pattern):
  • CNS Core: Medium:
  • CNS Core: Medium: Collaborative:
  • In addition to the above title prefixes, proposals from PIs in institutions that own RUI (Research in Undergraduate Institutions) eligibility should embrace "RUI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Medium: RUI: Title, and should embrace a Research in Undergraduate Institutions impact Statement and Certification of RUI Eligibility. Similarly, PIs submitting accord Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) proposals should select “GOALI” from the Type of Proposal drop down list in the Proposal Preparation module in FastLane or Grants.gov; and embrace "GOALI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Medium: GOALI: Title.
  • (RWR) The budget shown on the Cover Sheet and on the budget pages must live $500,001 to $1,200,000, including All institutions in a collaborative proposal, plus funds for embedded REU supplements.
  • (RWR) The Project Description is limited to no more than 15 pages.
  • (RWR) If there is more than one investigator, a Collaboration procedure (up to 2 pages) must live provided as a Supplementary Document, even if All investigators are affiliated with the selfsame institution. The Collaboration procedure should embrace All institutions participating, not a separate procedure for each institution.
  • A BPC procedure (of one to three pages) should live provided as a Supplementary Document.
  • For Medium proposals:
  • The title should start with one of the following strings (submissions intended for CNS and besides additional core programs described in the CCF, IIS, or OAC core solicitations should follow a similar pattern, assuming that All listed programs are accepting large proposals):
  • CNS Core: Large:
  • CNS Core: Large: Collaborative:
  • In addition to the above title prefixes, proposals from PIs in institutions that own RUI (Research in Undergraduate Institutions) eligibility should embrace "RUI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Large: RUI: Title, and should embrace a Research in Undergraduate Institutions impact Statement and Certification of RUI Eligibility. Similarly, PIs submitting accord Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) proposals should select “GOALI” from the Type of Proposal drop down list in the Proposal Preparation module in FastLane or Grants.gov; and embrace "GOALI:" immediately before the proposal title, for example, CNS Core: Large: GOALI: Title.
  • (RWR) The budget shown on the Cover Sheet and on the budget pages must live $1,200,001 to $3,000,000, including All institutions in a collaborative proposal, plus funds for embedded REU supplements.
  • (RWR) The Project Description is limited to no more than 20 pages.
  • (RWR) A Collaboration procedure (up to 2 pages) must live provided as a Supplementary Document, even if All investigators are affiliated with the selfsame institution. The Collaboration procedure should embrace All institutions participating, not a separate procedure for each institution.
  • A BPC procedure (of one to three pages) should live provided as a Supplementary Document.
  • For large proposals:
  • Proposals that achieve not comply with the requirements marked as RWR will live returned without review.

    B. Budgetary Information

    Cost Sharing:

    Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

    Other Budgetary Limitations:

    Other budgetary limitations apply. gladden survey the complete text of this solicitation for further information.

    C. Due Dates
  • Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

         September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

    LARGE projects

         September 24, 2018 - October 02, 2018

    MEDIUM projects

         November 01, 2018 - November 15, 2018

    SMALL projects

         September 09, 2019 - September 16, 2019

    MEDIUM projects

         September 18, 2019 - September 25, 2019

    LARGE projects

         October 31, 2019 - November 14, 2019

    SMALL projects

  • D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

    For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

    To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, survey detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane befriend Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane befriend Desk answers generic technical questions related to the Use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should live referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

    For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

    Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal accord on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application steer (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact headquarters at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact headquarters answers generic technical questions related to the Use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should live referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

    Submitting the Proposal: Once All documents own been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding chance and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will live transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.

    Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to Use FastLane to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers own received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should live used to check the status of an application.

    VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES

    Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the commandeer NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. supervision is taken to ensure that reviewers own no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

    A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.

    Proposers should besides live awake of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in pile the Future: Investing in Discovery and Innovation - NSF Strategic procedure for Fiscal Years (FY) 2018 – 2022. These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

    One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to promote the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF besides supports evolution of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in pile the information that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

    NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

    A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

    The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates novel information and enables breakthroughs in understanding across All areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to promote the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every endeavor to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

    1. Merit Review Principles

    These principles are to live given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

  • All NSF projects should live of the highest property and own the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
  • NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may live accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may live based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must live well justified.
  • Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should live based on commandeer metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the outcome of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to live meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best live done at a higher, more aggregated, flat than the individual project.
  • With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to live accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should embrace clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a procedure in state to document the outputs of those activities.

    These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

    2. Merit Review Criteria

    All NSF proposals are evaluated through Use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of unavoidable programs and activities.

    The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to live given complete consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i). contains additional information for Use by proposers in evolution of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

    When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will live asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to achieve it, how they procedure to achieve it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may Make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will live asked to evaluate All proposals against two criteria:

  • Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to promote knowledge; and
  • Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to capitalize society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.
  • The following elements should live considered in the review for both criteria:

  • What is the potential for the proposed activity to
  • Advance information and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
  • Benefit society or promote desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
  • To what extent achieve the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
  • Is the procedure for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the procedure incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
  • How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
  • Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?
  • Broader impacts may live accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific information and activities that contribute to achievement of societally germane outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: complete participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator evolution at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public date with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; evolution of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

    Proposers are reminded that reviewers will besides live asked to review the Data Management procedure and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

    Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

    For All proposals, reviewers will live asked to consider:

  • How well does the proposed work address and promote the following?
  • Secure-by-design systems;
  • Manageability of the system under consideration; and/or
  • Fundamental understanding of the system or system component.
  • How well does the proposal narrate an evaluation procedure that assesses and where commandeer quantifies the expected research outcomes?
  • How well does the proposal narrate research dissemination plans to ensure that the research results can live validated independently?
  • For large and germane Medium proposals, reviewers will live asked to:

  • Comment on the extent to which the project scope justifies the flat of investment requested, and the degree to which the Collaboration procedure (if required) adequately demonstrates that the participating investigators will work synergistically to accomplish the project objectives.
  • Comment on whether key personnel, and especially lead PIs, own allocated adequate time for both their individual technical contributions and the leadership of collaborative activities necessary to realize the synergistic effects of larger-scale research.
  • B. Review and Selection Process

    Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will live reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

    Reviewers will live asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally live completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the recommendation of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

    After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of commandeer factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should live declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to live able to uncover applicants whether their proposals own been declined or recommended for funding within six months. large or particularly involved proposals or proposals from novel awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

    After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will live forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers fulfill the processing and issuance of a accord or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may Make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or license the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the fragment of NSF should live inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes monetary or personnel commitments in the absence of a accord or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

    Once an award or declination determination has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In All cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the determination to award or decline funding.

    VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION A. Notification of the Award

    Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will live advised as promptly as workable by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will live provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process).

    B. Award Conditions

    An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as accord generic Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may live incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements besides are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement monetary and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

    *These documents may live accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may live obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

    More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other valuable information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

    C. Reporting Requirements

    For All multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the near of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI besides is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the generic public.

    Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will detain NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for All identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in promote to assure availability of required data.

    PIs are required to Use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report besides must live prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will live posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

    More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other valuable information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

    VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS

    Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. survey program website for any updates to the points of contact.

    General inquiries regarding this program should live made to:

    For questions related to the Use of FastLane, contact:

    For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

  • Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, gladden contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: support@grants.gov.

  • IX. OTHER INFORMATION

    The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to retain potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of novel NSF funding opportunities and publications, valuable changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time novel publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" besides is available on NSF's website.

    Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide accord opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may live accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may live obtained at http://www.grants.gov.

    ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to promote the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in All fields of science and engineering."

    NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

    NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, unavoidable oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation besides supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

    Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or materiel to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. survey the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures steer Chapter II.E.6 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

    The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or generic information. TDD may live accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

    The National Science Foundation Information headquarters may live reached at (703) 292-5111.

    The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.

    To gain the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov

    2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314

  • For generic Information (NSF Information Center):
  • (703) 292-5111

  • TDD (for the hearing-impaired):
  • (703) 292-5090

  • To Order Publications or Forms:
  • Send an e-mail to:

    nsfpubs@nsf.gov

    or telephone:

    (703) 292-7827

    (703) 292-5111

    PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC burden STATEMENTS

    The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will live used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will live used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive fork and to Congress. The information requested may live disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as fragment of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as fragment of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may live added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. survey Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide complete and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to middling 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. forward comments regarding the burden appraise and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:

    Suzanne H. PlimptonReports Clearance OfficerOffice of the generic CounselNational Science FoundationAlexandria, VA 22314


    Debunking the Missile-Defense Myth | killexams.com true questions and Pass4sure dumps

    A report by the Pentagon's own Defense Science Board (DSB) has poured icy water on U.S. missile-defense plans. It basically backs up what independent scientists and engineers own been saw for  decades: a dedicated adversary easily could conquer the planned system by using simple decoy warheads and other countermeasures. So while missile defense will create incentives for U.S. adversaries and competitors to up their ballistic-missile stockpiles, it won't provide any combat capability to counteract these enlarged arsenals.

    The simplest countermeasures to the planned missile defense are cheap inflatable balloons. Because the missile-defense interceptors try to strike ICBM warheads in the vacuum of space, any such balloons and the warhead would travel together, making it impossible to uncover the decoys from the true thing . An enemy bent on delivering a nuclear payload to the United States could inflate many such balloons nearby the warhead and overwhelm the defense system by swamping it with fake signals.

    The DSB report says that “the consequence of achieving dependable . . . discrimination [between the warhead and decoys] cannot live overemphasized.” It underlined that missile defense is “predicated on the talent to discriminate” true warheads from other targets, “such as rocket bodies, motley hardware, and intentional countermeasures.” One way around this challenge is to attempt to intercept the missile before it releases the warhead and decoys. But intercepting missiles in their boost phase, while the rocket booster is still firing, is “currently not feasible,” according to the DSB.

    There is a short interval between the time the missile stops burning and when the payload is released, assumed to live about one hundred seconds by the DSB. But, again, intercepting the missile in this window “requires Herculean endeavor and is not realistically achievable, even under the most optimistic set of deployment, sensor capability, and missile technology assumptions.” The main problem the DSB found is that missile-defense interceptors would not live able to gain the target quickly enough: “in most cases 100 seconds is too late” to prevent the release of decoys. And if “the defense should find itself in a situation where it is shooting at missile junk or decoys, the impact on the regional interceptor inventory would live melodramatic and devastating.” In short, the interceptor inventory would live exhausted in chasing decoy warheads.

    The latest tests of both the ground-based and sea-based missile-defense systems own failed—and these are rigged tests, where the intercept team knows the timing and trajectory of the incoming missile, and the missile has no decoys. There are no such luxuries in the true world, where adversaries launch surprise attacks and Use countermeasures and decoys. And on the very few occasions that the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has tested countermeasures, even these carefully rigged tests own never succeeded. The sea-based missile-defense system besides has never been tested in really harsh sea conditions and is known to live unreliable .

    How did such an untested and unworkable technology Make it so far in the DoD procurement process? Another recent government report, this one from the GAO, explains that instead of flying before buying, the MDA has been doing the exact opposite. Its cart-before-the-horse methodology has resulted in “unexpected cost increases, schedule delays, test problems, and performance shortfalls.”

    All told, the missile-defense program has cost more than the entire Apollo program without providing any credible combat capability against enemy ballistic missiles hosting simple countermeasures.

    The Reaction

    If missile defense is so dysfunctional and so simple to outfox, why achieve U.S. adversaries emerge to live so concerned? The respond is simple: their military planners are hypercautious—as are the ones in the Pentagon—and must assume a worst-case scenario in which the system is highly effective.

    Missile defense will therefore strengthen the hands of overcautious, misinformed, opportunistic or hawkish elements within the Iranian and North Korean—as well as Russian and Chinese—political and military establishments. Both unknowable future circumstances and pressures from hawkish internal constituencies will pressure All these regimes to increase deployed nuclear stockpiles and military expenditures.

    Since the interplay between strategic defense and strategic sin is explicitly recognized in the novel Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) between the United States and Russia, it is highly improbable that Russia will ever accept NATO missile defense, even if it's dysfunctional. Any system that raises uncertainties about the strict poise of arms agreed upon in novel START is a natural concern to both parties.

    The United States and NATO own repeatedly stated that the system is not directed at Russia and poses no threat to its nuclear-deterrent forces. And though NATO has invited the Russians to connect the program, there has been no consensus on the degree or the contour of that participation. Moscow prefers to develop a joint European missile-defense network with NATO to ensure that the elements of the system (in a number of European countries) will not threaten Russia’s national security. NATO, in contrast, proposes the creation of two entirely separate systems that would exchange information. To date, missile-defense talks between Russia and NATO are deadlocked over this contentious issue.



    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams

    3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Avaya [96 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CheckPoint [41 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Citrix [47 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
    College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institute [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DELL [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fortinet [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HP [746 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBM [1530 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Juniper [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Microsoft [368 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Mile2 [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NetworkAppliance [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
    OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Oracle [269 Certification Exam(s) ]
    P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Pegasystems [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Symantec [134 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]





    References :


    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12846751
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12942109
    Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2018/01/dont-miss-these-scp-sc0-402-dumps.html
    Wordpress : https://wp.me/p7SJ6L-2K8
    Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/b27kh8lmhs2072vbfzj98n0hk87eeaf7






    Back to Main Page





    Killexams exams | Killexams certification | Pass4Sure questions and answers | Pass4sure | pass-guaratee | best test preparation | best training guides | examcollection | killexams | killexams review | killexams legit | kill example | kill example journalism | kill exams reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review | review quizlet | review login | review archives | review sheet | legitimate | legit | legitimacy | legitimation | legit check | legitimate program | legitimize | legitimate business | legitimate definition | legit site | legit online banking | legit website | legitimacy definition | pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | certification material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure exams | pass4sure reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure security | pass4sure cisco | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure braindumps | pass4sure test | pass4sure torrent | pass4sure download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |

    www.pass4surez.com | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com | http://www.radionaves.com/