Completed

E. Katsanis ( College of Medicine - Pediatric Hematology / Oncology)

UA may submit one proposal. 

The intent of the HHOW pediatric cancer research grants is to provide funding for principal investigators (herein referred to as “PI”), whose research projects are likely to have a significant impact on improving the understanding of the biology of childhood cancer and/or developing novel diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic approaches for pediatric malignancies. The grants are awarded to the institution for the benefit of the research of the approved projects. Projects eligible to be funded by this program will be those that pursue innovative research that is translational in nature, that is, has the potential to impact childhood cancer diagnosis and treatment. Proposals requesting support for clinical trials are not eligible for consideration.

Funding for the Grants is awarded to the applying institution (herein referred to as the applicant) for the purpose of supporting the PI and the research specified in the proposal. Submitting PIs must include a letter of support from the division chief of pediatric oncology at the applicant institution, and concurrence of the development office. With the submission of the Grant application(s), the PI(s) confirm(s) that each is authorized by the officers of the institution to submit the application and the institution agrees to abide by all terms and conditions of the grant.

The funds of awarded grants may not be transferred to a different institution under any circumstance, should the designated PI leave the institution for any reason. However, the institution may nominate a new qualified candidate to serve as the PI, subject to the new candidate meeting all guidelines and with no substantive changes to the approved project.
 

2023 SCHOLAR HOPE GRANT

The Scholar Hope Grant is a $300,000 award (paid $150,000 per year), which may be used for up to two years. Approved funding may be used only for the purposes expressly set forth in the applicant’s proposal and specifically performed under the auspices of the PI identified in the proposal.

Applicant eligibility for Scholar Hope Grant:

1. PI must be an MD or MD/PhD whose research is focused on pediatric oncology.
2. A PhD is not eligible to be a PI, for the purposes of the award, but may participate as a member of a research team.
3. PIs must have completed their fellowship sub-specialty training at the time of the award.
4. Applicant may have no more than 1 R01 or R01-equivalent grant, at the time of application.
5. Applicants must be based in and research is focused on projects within the U.S. market.
6. Clinical research studies or medical trials are not eligible for consideration.
7. Applicant may not have concurrent HHOW funding, but may apply during the second year of funding for a second HHOW grant (i.e. consecutive funding).

Research proposals will be evaluated based on:

1. Relevance to pediatric cancer
2. Quality of science
3. Innovation
4. Potential for success
5. Potential impact on the field
6. Quality of applicant
7. Quality of institutional environment
8. Demonstrated need for funding

• Only ONE proposal in each category (i.e. one Young Investigator and one Scholar Hope may be submitted from any individual Applicant), for a total of TWO per institution.
• A PI may apply in either category, but not both. An applying PI may not have two HHOW grants at the same time. If the PI is a current HHOW grant awardee, they may not apply for a second HHOW grant award until the second year of their current award.
• Grant funds may be used to support bench or translational research and must have a direct relevance to pediatric cancer. 
• Less than 10% of funds can be used for indirect costs and no funds can be used for fringe benefits through the Scholar Hope or Young Investigator Grants.
• Applicants may use funds in conjunction with another award on the same topic. However, the difference has to be clearly identified in the budget.
• If Applicant has submitted multiple applications to other foundations or granting agencies, for funding the same project  concurrently, HHOW must be notified in the written application (Section VII below)
• The PI for either the Young Investigator or Hope Scholar award may not have more than 1 RO1 or RO1-equivalent at the time of application. K awards or equivalent are permitted for Young Investigator and Scholar PIs.

UArizona may submit one inquiry form per department/unit.
 

Founded in 1956, the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts fosters the development and exchange of diverse and challenging ideas about architecture and its role in the arts, culture, and society. The Graham realizes this vision through making project-based grants to individuals and organizations and producing exhibitions, events, and publications.

Grantmaking Focus

Architecture and related spatial practices engage a wide range of cultural, social, political, technological, environmental, and aesthetic issues. The Foundation is interested in projects that investigate contemporary conditions, expand historical perspectives, or explore the future of architecture and the designed environment.

The Foundation supports innovative, thought-provoking investigations in architecture; architectural history, theory, and criticism; design; engineering; landscape architecture; urban planning; urban studies; visual arts; and related fields of inquiry. The interest also extends to work being done in the fine arts, humanities, and sciences that expands the boundaries of thinking about architecture and space. In an effort to bridge communities and different fields of knowledge, we support a wide range of practitioners (such as architects, scholars, critics, writers, artists, curators, and educators) and organizations (such as non-profit galleries, colleges and universities, publishers, and museums).

Open discourse is essential to advance study and understanding, therefore our grantmaking focuses on the public dissemination of ideas. With our support, the work of individuals and organizations reaches new audiences, from specialized to general, and creates opportunities for critical dialogue between various publics.

Priorities and Criteria

For organizations, our priorities are to:

• Assist with the production and presentation of significant programs about architecture and the designed environment in order to promote dialogue, raise awareness, and develop new and wider audiences.
• Support them in their effort to take risks in programming and create opportunities for experimentation. 
• Recognize the vital role they play in providing individuals with a public forum in which to present their work. 
• Help them to realize projects that would otherwise not be possible without our support. 

Overall we are most interested in opportunities that enable us to provide critical support at key points in the development of a project or career.

Criteria for Evaluation

Given our priorities, we believe projects of the greatest potential should fulfill the following criteria:

• Originality: the project demonstrates an innovative, challenging idea; critical, independent thinking; advanced scholarship; a new or experimental approach
• Potential for impact: the project makes a meaningful contribution to discourse and/or to the field; expands knowledge; is a catalyst for future inquiry; raises awareness of an understudied issue; promotes diversity in subject matter, participants, and audience
• Feasibility: the project has clear and realistic goals, timeframe, work plan, and budget
• Capacity: applicant possesses strong qualifications and/or knowledge; demonstrates the ability to carry out the project successfully; has access to necessary resources outside of the grant request

H. Chen (Artificial Intelligence Laboratory - AZSecure Cybersecurity Fellowship Program) Institutionally Coordinated Resubmission. 

The goals of the CyberCorps(R): Scholarship for Service (SFS) program are aligned with the U.S. strategy to develop a superior cybersecurity workforce. These goals are to increase the quantity of new entrants to the government cyber workforce, to increase the national capacity for the education of cybersecurity professionals, to increase national research and development capabilities in critical information infrastructure protection, and to strengthen partnerships between institutions of higher education and relevant employment sectors. The SFS program welcomes proposals to establish or to continue scholarship programs in cybersecurity. All scholarship recipients must work after graduation for a federal, state, local, or tribal Government organization in a position related to cybersecurity for a period equal to the length of the scholarship. A proposing institution must provide clearly documented evidence of a strong existing academic program in cybersecurity. Such evidence can include ABET accreditation in cybersecurity; a designation by the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security as a Center of Academic Excellence in Cyber Defense Education (CAE-CDE), in Cyber Operations (CAE-CO) or in Research (CAE-R); or equivalent evidence documenting a strong program in cybersecurity.

Apply to the UA internal competition.
UA may submit one proposal.

The mission of the Foundation is to support early stage investigators engaged in basic biomedical research that has the potential to significantly advance the understanding, diagnosis or treatment of disease.

The funds are designed to provide to tenure track faculty members in their first to fourth year, at American Institutions, who hold M.D. and/or Ph.D. degrees, start-up support to move the project forward to the point where R01 or other independent funding can be obtained.  Applicants with current R01 funding should not apply.

Grant provides $60,000 annually for a period of up to three years.  Grants are not renewable.  Institutions may submit one proposal per session.  Interested candidates should work through their sponsored projects office.

Proposals must contain an adequately detailed description of the project to be clearly understandable by the scientific members of the Trustees.  They need not be in the detail requested by the NIH for R01 grants and should not exceed five pages in length.  Additional material can be submitted, but the five-page application should contain the essential information.  References should also be included to support the proposal.  Note that the five page limit is only for the project description.  

In addition to the institution providing recognition of an internal selection process resulting in no more than one candidate, (this requires just a sentence that may be included in the letters), the proposal must be accompanied by letters of approval by the Dean of the medical school and/or another senior faculty member or members who can represent the support of the institution and who are acquainted with the qualifications of the applicant and the potential impact of his/her work.

Institutionally Coordinated.
Please contact RDS for more information. 

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), invites grant applications for Education and Research Centers (ERCs) that are focused on occupational safety and health training. NIOSH is mandated to provide an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the ERCs are one of the primary means for meeting this mandate.

ERCs are academic institutions that provide high-quality interdisciplinary graduate and post-graduate training, research training, continuing education, and outreach in the core occupational safety and health disciplines of industrial hygiene, occupational health nursing, occupational medicine, and occupational safety, as well as allied disciplines.

Research and research training are integral components of ERCs, with ERC faculty and NIOSH trainees conducting research on issues related to the NIOSH National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) and emerging issues to advance the field of occupational safety and health. 

NIOSH ERCs have regional presence to further diversify the occupational safety and health profession through their core values, mission statements, and outputs.

ERCs serve as resources for our nation's workforce through continuing education, outreach and strong collaboration with professional associations, worker advocacy groups, businesses, industries, and public health agencies. ERCs work with other institutions and organizations, including Minority Serving Institutions and other NIOSH supported training programs to have a positive impact on worker health, safety, and well-being. 

No applicants // Limit: 2 // Tickets Available: 2 

UArizona may submit two proposals.
No more than two proposals across both tracks may be submitted by any Lead institution.

The Centers for Innovation and Community Engagement in Solid Earth Geohazards program supports university-based centers to advance research on the fundamental solid Earth processes that underpin natural hazards. Centers will catalyze, coordinate, and produce transformative research, lead innovation, and enable convergent approaches for systems-level insights that require the collective efforts of a large group of individuals.

Centers focus on addressing major, fundamental science challenges for understanding solid Earth geohazards, primarily those related to faulting, volcanoes, mass movements, and other dynamic processes. In particular, the Centers will advance understanding in one or more of the priorities outlined in the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine decadal survey report The Earth in Time, including; What is an earthquake? What drives volcanism? What are the causes and consequences of topographic change? and How can Earth science research reduce the risk and toll of geohazards?

Centers will also foster different dimensions of community engagement to meaningfully improve the national welfare. Flagship community engagement activities will take bold and creative action to broaden participation of underrepresented groups in the geoscience workforce and expand the impact of fundamental research in solid Earth geohazards to inform and prepare a broader community. Centers will establish partnerships to enable public outreach, hazard mitigation and other community engagement activities.

The Program has two tracks, both of which are described in this solicitation. Track I – Center Catalyst awards are intended to provide resources to catalyze initiatives to develop future centers. These awards would support groups to develop the science, management, and broader impact concepts for of a major research center. Track II – Center Operation awards are intended to support the operation of a fully developed center.
 

Track I – Center Catalyst 

For the FY 2022 competition, Track I – Center Catalyst proposals will address topics that focus on the fundamental processes that create solid Earth geohazards, including earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, and other solid earth or tectonic processes. The proposal’s scope will align with one or more of the priorities outlined in the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine decadal survey report The Earth in Time, including; What is an earthquake? What drives volcanism? What are the causes and consequences of topographic change? and How can Earth science research reduce the risk and toll of geohazards?

Catalyst proposals will outline center development activities, including goal setting, strategic planning and community building, as well as developing and piloting center-scale activities that generate new knowledge with a broad range of impacts. Awardees must engage in research, broader impact activities, and center development activities over the two-year duration of the award. The activities may build on pre-existing efforts, but new, collaborative results attributed to the award are expected.

Track I - Center Catalyst Principal Investigators are required to develop a complete strategic plan for operating a future Center. Proposals will describe community engagement activities that will be carried out to develop the plan by the end of the award period. NSF staff will evaluate the plan and monitor progress throughout the award period. Developing a strong strategic plan may require consultation with strategic planning experts. 

Proposals should speak to a broad audience of Earth scientists and clearly articulate the value of the proposed Center to fundamental research and community engagement in solid Earth geohazards.

Key milestones during a Track I project will include a mandatory virtual site visit at the end of year 1 and submission of the strategic plan at 24 months. Additional information is provided in the proposal preparation guidance for a Track I full proposal.

Track II – Center Operations

In FY 2022, the program will consider only those proposals built around a compelling research challenge or theme related to fundamental earthquake processes. NSF intends to open future competitions to proposals focused more broadly on solid Earth geohazards.

Center Operations proposals are expected to outline broad, strategic, center-scale activities in accordance with the Center Attributes, as described earlier in this section. Centers will be agile structures that respond rapidly to emerging opportunities, promote synergy, enhance collaborations, and engage in potentially transformative research. Centers will integrate research, innovation, education, science communication, and efforts to broaden participation.

Center proposals will organize their scope into Major Activities, which will provide the framework for aligning the proposed scope with realistic budgets and timelines for achieving Center goals. A Major Activity will most frequently be a major research thrust of the Center but may also be a large-scale effort for workforce development, community-building, broadening participation, or other comparable effort to support broader impacts.

Centers may need flexibility to advance Major Activities or to respond quickly and effectively to emerging research and/or broader impact opportunities through subaward seed funding. These emerging areas may include (but are not limited to): high-risk research projects; emerging areas of interdisciplinary research; development of new cyberinfrastructure to support the Center; support for early-career faculty or for investigators changing fields; and innovative educational, diversity-promoting, or outreach ventures. Seed funding is not intended to provide a substitute for NSF individual investigator funding, nor should it be used to fund foundational operational support for the Center. Proposals should describe the criteria and mechanisms for selecting and evaluating projects that may require seed funding.

Key milestones will include periodic site visits and other oversight by NSF staff. The initial Track II awards will be made for five years (contingent on acceptable progress). Additional information is provided in the proposal preparation guidance for a Track II full proposal.

Institutionally Coordinated.
Please contact RDS for more information. 

The Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Awards Program supports the research and teaching careers of talented young faculty in the chemical sciences. Based on institutional nominations, the program provides discretionary funding to faculty at an early stage in their careers. Criteria for selection include an independent body of scholarship attained in the early years of their appointment (see below), and a demonstrated commitment to education, signaling the promise of continuing outstanding contributions to both research and teaching. The Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Awards Program provides an unrestricted research grant of $100,000.

Eligibility

The Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Awards Program is open to academic institutions in the States, Districts, and Territories of the United States of America that grant a bachelor’s or higher degree in the chemical sciences, including biochemistry, materials chemistry, and chemical engineering. Nominees must hold a full-time tenure-track academic appointment, and are normally expected to have been appointed no earlier than mid-year 2017. Awardees are from Ph.D. granting departments in which scholarly research is a principal activity. Undergraduate education is an important component. Institutions may submit only one Camille Dreyfus nomination annually. Renominations are accepted.

Selection

The Foundation seeks Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholars who demonstrate leadership in research and education. Nominations must provide compelling evidence of the advance of important knowledge in the chemical sciences by the nominee. Further, the nomination should describe dedication and contributions to education in the chemical sciences, particularly with respect to undergraduates.

The nominee’s scholarly research achievements are assessed by a panel of distinguished faculty in the chemical sciences. The letters of recommendation should address the nominee’s research accomplishments as an independent faculty member. Other considered factors are: awards and honors, publication of research achievements in leading journals, and success in attracting research funding.

Budget

The Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Award provides a $100,000 unrestricted research grant. Of the total amount, $7,500 is for departmental expenses associated with research and education. Charges associated with indirect costs or institutional overhead are not allowed. Defrayal of academic-year salary is not permitted. Funds are normally expended over a period of five years. Foundation approval is not required for budgetary changes after an award is made. If the awardee leaves the institution, the transfer of the remaining funds requires prior Foundation approval.

Nomination Procedure

Institutions may make only one nomination annually for the Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Awards Program. All nomination materials, including the letters of support, must be received at the Foundation office by the deadline noted above. Nominations recommended for approval are presented to the Foundation’s Board of Directors in time for award announcements by early May 2023. The nomination consists of:

1. The online nomination form 
2. A letter of nomination from an institutional representative highlighting the nominee’s achievements, and the basis for selection (limited to two pages)
3. A summary description of the nominee’s research accomplishments as an independent faculty member, and a description of research plans (limited to five pages, including references, with use of at least one graphic being encouraged)
4. A statement intended to convince the reviewers of the nominee’s dedication to education in the chemical sciences (limited to two pages)
5. A CV (limited to four pages) including a list of publications in which independent contributions and undergraduate coauthors are clearly identified. Research support should be indicated
6. A budget (limited to one page) describing how award funds are anticipated to be used

C. Hall currently  (Department of Civil, Environmental and Sustainable Engineering) - Track 1:  Planning Grants

UArizona may serve as sole submitting organization or as lead organization on only one submission per competition, regardless of track, but may serve as the non-lead organization of a collaborative project more than once per competition.

Because the Implementation Projects requires an LOI due February 01, 2022, there is insufficient time to hold an internal competition. Therefore, this opportunity will be listed as "Open" based on the earliest sponsor's deadline for submission toward either the March Implementation deadline or the May planning grant deadline.

J. Wolfe (Mathematics) 
M. Hosten (Mathematics)

UA may submit two proposals.
The submission of this funding program is coordinated by RII with the assistance of the UA Foundation.

The APS Foundation supports programs that enhance academic achievement in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). Since 1981, the Foundation has invested more than $44 million in projects throughout Arizona that help prepare students to compete in a 21st century economy.
A workforce proficient in STEM skills is critical to attracting and retaining high-quality businesses and industries to the state. The APS Foundation targets projects that help educators increase content knowledge in STEM subjects as well as the ability to transfer this knowledge effectively to students.

Average funding amount: ~ $75,000

How we evaluate potential programs:
Organizations must be registered as a 501(c)(3) public charity in good financial and public standing. Programs should demonstrate their ability to improve educational outcomes, increase access and/or offer an innovative approach to learning.
All grantees will have specific reporting requirements and must submit a final evaluation before they can be considered for additional funding.

Please note, the APS Foundation will not support:
• Individuals
• Individual K-12 schools
• Religious organizations, churches and programs that are purely denominational in purpose
• Political, labor or fraternal organizations, associations or civic service clubs
• Legislative, lobbying or advocacy efforts or organizations
• Private or family foundations
• Animal shelters or agencies
• Foundations or organizations which are grant-making entities or that distribute funds to other nonprofit organizations (pass through)
• Start-up organizations defined as nonprofits whose ruling year has been granted by the IRS for less than three years
• Organizations that discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, disability, gender, gender identity, age, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, protected veteran status or any other classification protected by law
• Health organizations whose primary focus is funding programs or services for a specific disease or illness
• Sports teams or sporting programs
• Scouting troops
While not a part of our traditional grant program, the APS Foundation occasionally supports capital requests of our long-standing partners on an invite-only basis.

RII is Institutionally Coordinating the submission of proposals to NSF.
Contact RDS for more information.

The S-STEM program provides institutions of higher education (IHEs) with funds for scholarships to encourage and enable domestic low-income students with academic ability, talent or potential and demonstrated financial need to enter the US workforce following completion of associate, baccalaureate, or graduate degrees in S-STEM eligible disciplines. To enable social mobility of these students with academic talent, funds should be allocated to support scholars in areas of regional or national need. 

Description of Program Tracks

• Track 1 (Institutional Capacity Building)
  UA is not eligible to apply to Track 1, due to a previous award under this track.
   
• Track 2 (Implementation: Single Institution)
  Track 2 proposals have the same S-STEM goals as Track 1 proposals. They generally involve and benefit only one institution, but they will serve more scholars than Track 1 proposals. Any IHE (as described under the eligibility section) can submit a Track 2 proposal, whether or not the institution has received prior S-STEM or STEP awards.
  Track 2 proposals may, in some cases, also include a focus on student transfer or progression to graduate school. In this case, if needed, two or more institutions could partner.
  Track 2 projects must be led by a PI who is (a) a faculty member currently teaching in one of the S-STEM eligible disciplines being pursued by the targeted scholars, or (b) an academic administrator who has taught in one of the eligible disciplines in the last two years from submission and can dedicate the time necessary to assure project success. The PI must be a member of the proposed project's leadership and management team. The leadership and management team should also include a STEM administrator (department head or above). Faculty members from all departments or academic units involved should have a role in the project either as Co-PIs, senior personnel, or scholar mentors. The project team could include, if appropriate, a non-teaching institutional, educational, or social science researcher to support evidence-based responses to items raised by the external evaluator through formative evaluation. This additional researcher cannot take the place of the external evaluator. Proposals for Track 2 may request up to $2,500,000 total for up to 6 years.
  
   
• Track 3 (Inter-institutional Consortia)
  Track 3 projects support multi-institutional collaborations that focus on a common interest or challenge. Inter-institutional Consortia projects represent diverse collaborations, including partnerships between 2-year colleges and 4-year colleges and universities, between 4-year colleges and graduate programs, or between comparable institutions looking to implement and study parallel interventions. For example, a collaboration among community colleges and four-year institutions may focus on issues associated with successful transfer of low-income students from 2-year institutions to 4-year programs. In another example, a multi-institutional collaboration may focus on factors that contribute to the success or degree attainment of domestic, low-income students in different types of institutions.
  Proposals with a strong focus on the transfer or advancement of students from one educational level to another should collaborate with appropriate institutional partners. For example, proposals focused on the transfer of students from 2-year institutions to 4-year institutions should include faculty and administrators from 2-year institutions and 4-year institutions in the leadership team; likewise, proposals focusing on the advancement of undergraduate students at predominately undergraduate institutions to graduate programs should include institutions, administrators and Co-PIs representing both the undergraduate programs and the receiving graduate programs.
  Track 3 projects have the same overall goals as Track 1 and 2 projects but seek to accomplish these goals at a very large scale by leveraging multi-institutional efforts and infrastructure. In addition to the expectations stated below in section II.B.2 for all tracks, Track 3 projects are also expected to:

1. Establish an authentic, strong and mutually beneficial collaboration across all institutions involved in the consortia, providing comparable benefits to all institutions in terms of number of scholarships as well as in the infrastructure established to serve low-income students;
2. Establish strong technical assistance and processes that support and manage project activities across institutions involved in the collaborative effort.
3. Engage in high quality educational or social sciences research to advance understanding of how to adapt, implement and scale up effective evidence-based programs and practices designed to foster positive outcomes for low-income students in STEM.
   
   NSF does not favor a particular research design over others. How the chosen research methods and approaches are aligned with and appropriate for the research goals should be fully explained in the proposal. The ultimate goal of S-STEM is to support low-income students with awards covering their unmet need, up to the maximum allowable scholarship amount (whatever is less). Projects are strongly discouraged from allowing a desired sample size to play a role in the determination of the size of awarded scholarships.
   Track 3 projects are managed by leadership and management teams composed of faculty members who are currently teaching in an S-STEM eligible discipline(s), STEM administrators, and non-teaching institutional, educational, or social science researchers. The PI of Track 3 proposals must be either (a) a faculty member currently teaching in one of the S-STEM eligible disciplines, (b) a STEM administrator (department head or above), or (c) a non-teaching researcher whose expertise is in institutional, educational, or social science research in higher education. Faculty from all the institutions and disciplines involved need to be included in the leadership team and/or senior personnel. The lead PI needs to demonstrate the capacity, experience and resources needed to manage a complex, large-scale project and the necessary time to dedicate to assure project success.
   Track 3 proposals may request up to $5 million total for up to 6 years.
   Proposers should be aware that Track 3 projects will be formally reviewed by NSF during their third year to determine whether satisfactory progress has been made, with continued funding contingent on the result of the third-year review. See section VII.C on reporting requirements.

• Collaborative Planning Grants to Develop an Inter-institutional Consortium
  Collaborative Planning projects provide support for groups of two or more IHEs and other potential partner organizations to establish fruitful collaborations, increase understanding of complex issues faced by low-income students at each institution, establish inter-institutional agreements when necessary and develop mechanisms for cooperation in anticipation of a future Track 3 proposal that will benefit all institutions and their scholars as equal partners.
  This category of projects aims to provide proposers from two or more institutions the funds and time to establish the relationships and agreements necessary for submitting an Inter-institutional Consortia S-STEM proposal. It is expected that proposers will be ready to write and submit this Inter-institutional Consortia proposal within 1-2 years of receiving a Collaborative Planning grant award. Any subsequent proposals to S-STEM based on this work must describe the results of the planning effort.

New institutional restrictions for this program for 2022:

1. An institution may submit up to two proposals (either as a single institution or as subawardee or a member of an inter-institutional consortia project) for a given S-STEM deadline. Multiple proposals from an institution must not overlap with regard to S-STEM eligible disciplines. See Additional Eligibility Information below for more details (see IV. Eligibility Information).
2. Institutions with a current S-STEM award should wait at least until the end of the third year of execution of their current award before submitting a new S-STEM proposal focused on students pursuing degrees in the same discipline(s).

The above restrictions do not apply to collaborative planning grant proposals.