Below is a summary assembled by the Research & Innovation Office (RIO). Please see the full solicitation for complete information about the funding opportunity.

Program Summary

The NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program seeks proposals that explore ways for graduate students in research-based master鈥檚 and doctoral degree programs to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers. The program is dedicated to effective training of STEM graduate students in high priority interdisciplinary or convergent research areas, through a comprehensive traineeship model that is innovative, evidence-based, and aligned with changing workforce and research needs. Proposals are requested that address any interdisciplinary or convergent research theme of national priority, as noted above.

The NRT program addresses workforce development, emphasizing broad participation, and institutional capacity building needs in graduate education. The program encourages proposals that involve strategic collaborations with the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, national laboratories, field stations, teaching and learning centers, informal science centers, and academic partners. NRT especially welcomes proposals that include partnership with NSF Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science (INCLUDES) and leverage INCLUDES project efforts to develop STEM talent from all sectors and groups in our society (). Collaborations between NRT proposals and existing NSF INCLUDES projects should strengthen both NRT and INCLUDES projects.

(AI) and (QISE) have been added to the national priority areas in which the NRT Program encourages proposals. We seek proposals on any interdisciplinary research theme of national priority, with special emphasis on AI and QISE and the six research areas within . The NSF research Big Ideas are Harnessing the Data Revolution (HDR), The Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier (FW-HTF), Navigating the New Arctic (NNA), Windows on the Universe: The Era of Multi-Messenger Astrophysics (WoU), The Quantum Leap: Leading the Next Quantum Revolution (QL), and Understanding the Rules of Life: Predicting Phenotype (URoL). Proposals that align with one of these designated priority areas should contain a title to reflect that alignment, as described in the program solicitation (e.g., NRT-AI: title, NRT-HDR: title, NRT-QL: title).

Deadlines

CU Internal Deadline: 11:59pm MST June 10, 2024

Sponsor Application Deadline: 5:00pm MT September 6, 2024

Internal Application Requirements (all in PDF format)

  • Project Summary (3 pages maximum): Please provide a summary description of the project, addressing the following elements: research area and theme, vision and goals of the proposed training program (with a brief description of the interdisciplinary or research theme), research-education integration, need for the program, whether the program will serve master鈥檚 students/doctoral students/both, intellectual merit, and broader impacts. Please describe how your proposal is in an interdisciplinary research theme of national priority, and any emphasis on AI, QISE or one of the six research areas within NSF鈥檚 10 Big Ideas: Harnessing the Data Revolution (HDR), The Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier (FW-HTF), Navigating the New Arctic (NNA), Windows on the Universe: The Era of Multi-Messenger Astrophysics (WoU), The Quantum Leap: Leading the Next Quantum Revolution (QL), and Understanding the Rules of Life: Predicting Phenotype (URoL).
  • List of Core Participants (2 pages maximum): Please provide a list of the core participants: PI, Co-PIs, other faculty and senior personnel, lead evaluator, and external collaborators. Include name, project role, departmental and institutional/organizational affiliation, and discipline(s). Please identify any other non-lead participating institutions or organizations.
  • Budget Overview (1 page maximum): A basic budget outlining project costs is sufficient; detailed OCG budgets are not required.

To access the online application, visit:

Eligibility

An individual may serve as Principal Investigator (PI) or co-PI on only one (1) proposal submitted to the NRT program per annual competition. Proposals that exceed the PI/co-PI eligibility limit (beyond the first submission based on timestamp), will be returned without review regardless of the individual's role (PI or co-PI) in the returned proposal.

Limited Submission Guidelines

An eligible organization may participate in two proposals per competition. Participation includes serving as a lead organization or non-lead organization on any proposal. Organizations participating only as evaluators on projects are excluded from this limitation. Proposals that exceed the organizational eligibility limit will be returned without review regardless of whether the organization on such a proposal serves as lead or non-lead collaborative organization.

Award Information

NRT Track 1 Awards (14-16 awards each year) are expected to be up to five (5) years in duration with a total budget up to $3,000,000.

NRT Track 2 Awards (4-6 awards each year) are expected to be up to five (5) years in duration with a total budget up to $2,000,000.

Track 1 proposals may request a total budget (up to five years in duration) up to $3 million for projects with a focus on STEM graduate students in research-based PhD and/or master鈥檚 degree programs. Track 2 proposals may request a total budget (up to five years in duration) up to $2 million; NSF requires that Track 2 proposals focus on programs from institutions not classified as Doctoral Universities: Very High Research Activity (R1). Requirements for Track 1 and Track 2 are identical.

Review Criteria

In addition to NSF鈥檚 standard criteria of intellectual merit and broader impacts, note the solicitation specific criteria below. The internal review process will evaluate submissions following these criteria.

  • Integration of Research and Education

Does the proposal address training needs that are not currently available at the institution(s) and/or in disciplines? Are there clear and compelling connections between the training elements and the interdisciplinary research theme? If this is a new program, is the degree path clear or, if trainees are drawn from existing degree programs, is there clear integration of research and with the timeline, requirements, and milestones of those programs? Is there indication that program activities will persist beyond the duration of the award?

  • Interdisciplinarity or Convergence

What is the degree of interdisciplinarity or and the potential for high impact synergies among the disciplines? Does the core team include appropriate expertise in the relevant fields? Does the interdisciplinary plan engage multiple disciplines appropriately to solve the research problems identified? Will the proposed convergent research and training integrate knowledge, methods, and expertise from different disciplines to potentially form novel frameworks to catalyze scientific discovery and innovation?

  • Professional Development

What is the breadth and quality of the plan to provide NRT trainees with professional development training for a range of research and research-related career pathways, both within and outside academia? Does the project provide the required communications and teamwork, team science or collaboration training and ethics training? Are the training expectations sufficient, and are they structured in such a way that they will not hinder trainee research or degree progress?

  • Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities

What is the quality of the recruiting and retention plans to broaden participation? Does the plan represent a realistic path given the baseline data reflected in the Demographic Table? Is there evidence of sufficient engagement of key personnel? Are collaborations and/or existing programs appropriately engaged?

  • Evaluation

Does the evaluation plan include outcomes, performance measures, benchmarks, and an evaluation timetable, as well as a description of how formative evaluation will improve practice? Are research and educational activities addressed? Is there a plan to share insights, practices, and findings broadly? Will the evaluation generate evidence to inform and document program sustainability?