STEM, Education, Training

Limit: 2 // M. Arora ( Community, Environment, and Policy) , M.Wetherell (School of Information)

The internal deadline has been extended to May 1, 2024. 

The submission of this funding program is coordinated by RII with the assistance of the UA Foundation. For more information, please contact Cyndi Laughren.

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.

Submit ticket request   // Limit: One nomination per College

Major divisions (e.g., College of Arts and Sciences, Medical School) of an institution may nominate only one applicant each year.

The William T. Grant Scholars Program supports career development for promising early-career researchers. The program funds five-year research and mentoring plans that significantly expand researchers’ expertise in new disciplines, methods, and content areas.

The William T. Grant Foundation’s mission is to support research to improve the lives of young people ages 5-25 in the United States. They pursue this mission by supporting research within two focus areas. Researchers interested in applying for a William T. Grant Scholars Award must select one focus area: Reducing Inequality or Improving the Use of Research Evidence

Applicants should have a track record of conducting high-quality research and an interest in pursuing a significant shift in their trajectories as researchers. Recognizing that early-career researchers are rarely given incentives or support to take measured risks in their work, this award includes a mentoring component, as well as a supportive academic community.

Awards are based on applicants’ potential to become influential researchers, as well as their plans to expand their expertise in new and significant ways. The application should make a cohesive argument for how the applicant will expand his or her expertise. The research plan should evolve in conjunction with the development of new expertise, and the mentoring plan should describe how the proposed mentors will support applicants in acquiring that expertise. Proposed research plans must address questions that are relevant to policy and practice in the Foundation’s focus areas. Award recipients are designated as William T. Grant Scholars. Each year, four to six Scholars are selected and each receives up to $350,000, distributed over five years.

Areas of Interest

The Foundation supports research in two distinct focus areas: 1) Reducing inequality in youth outcomes, and 2) Improving the use of research evidence in decisions that affect young people.  Proposed research must address questions that align with one of these areas.

Focus Area: Reducing Inequality

In this focus area, we support studies that aim to build, test, or increase understanding of programs, policies, or practices to reduce inequality in the academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes of young people, especially on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic standing, language minority status, or immigrant origins.

Focus Area: Improving the Use of Research Evidence

While an extensive body of knowledge provides a rich understanding of specific conditions that foster the use of research evidence, we lack robust, validated strategies for cultivating them. What is required to create structural and social conditions that support research use? What infrastructure is needed, and what will it look like? What supports and incentives  foster research use? And, ultimately, how do youth outcomes fare when research evidence is used? This is where new research can make a difference. 

Eligibility

Applicants must have received their terminal degree within seven years of submitting their application. We calculate this by adding seven years to the date the doctoral degree was conferred. In medicine, the seven-year maximum is dated from the completion of the first residency.

Applicants must be employed in career-ladder positions. For many applicants, this means holding a tenure-track position in a university. Applicants in other types of organizations should be in positions in which there is a pathway to advancement in a research career at the organization and the organization is fiscally responsible for the applicant’s position. The award may not be used as a post-doctoral fellowship.

Institutionally Coordinated  // Limit: 3 // Available: 0

Please contact RDS for more information. 

CJ Knox (Arizona Astrobiology Center)
U. Ricoy (Neuroscience)
V. Subbian (BIO5 institute)

*Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: Implementation and Evaluation Proposals: Eligible institutions may submit up to a total of three IEP proposals per solicitation deadline, regardless of level. UArizona is not eligible for the  Educational Instrumentation (EI) Track.

The Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) Program is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as a cross-divisional effort with multiple funding opportunities that support the nation's colleges that have been designated as Hispanic Serving Institutions. This program is part of a Foundation-wide effort to accelerate improvements in the quality and effectiveness of undergraduate education in all STEM fields including the learning, social, behavioral, and economic sciences. With Congressional support, the NSF uses this program to build capacity at institutions of higher education that typically do not receive high levels of NSF grant funding.

Implementation and Evaluation Projects (IEP) Track

The track welcomes projects looking to implement, adapt, or study promising practices and also invites theoretically grounded, methodologically rigorous research projects on undergraduate experiences in STEM at HSIs. IEP projects include activities that are anticipated to support research and efforts to improve the HSI undergraduate experience for STEM majors and for non-majors enrolled in STEM courses.

Examples include, but are not limited to, the following types of activities:

• redesigning STEM courses, degree programs, student support systems, or practices;
• developing new STEM courses, certificates, minors and degree programs;
• enacting professional development for faculty, staff, and administrators to implement student-centered pedagogy, advising, leadership or other practices;
• conducting research studies to better understand aspects of undergraduates' STEM experiences in the focal areas of the HSI:ELPSE solicitation (courses, programs, departments, and schools/colleges);
• developing institutions' understanding of their students, practices, and HSI designation, particularly institutions that have been recently classified as HSIs; and
• building out the data infrastructure and methodologies that would allow an institution to collect and conduct thorough analyses of student data.

Proposals can focus on improving student learning and outcomes, broadening participation of historically underrepresented student groups in STEM at HSIs, or other efforts aligned with the HSI:ELPSE solicitation's areas of focus. The IEP track is intended to be a broad opportunity, and encourages the submission of high-risk, high reward approaches with transformative potential.

Common Expectations for Level 1 and Level 2 IEP Projects: There are two funding levels that determine the maximum budget, timeline, and scope for the proposed projects. The following elements are expected within all IEP proposals, regardless of funding level:

• Proposals are expected to address at least one of the goals of the HSI program and be aligned with one or more of the areas described above: Courses, Curricula, and Pedagogy; or Institutional Structures and Pathways.
• Proposals should be evidence-based, which could include indigenous knowledge and other traditions that may be transmitted outside of the traditional scholarly literature. Project components should be supported as appropriate by a review of the relevant literature.
• Proposals should be situated in the context of the institution and must include an Institutional Data Narrative as part of the proposal's 15-page Project Description that uses data, disaggregated to the extent that is feasible for proposers,to provide insights into the institution and its students.
• Activities, supports, evaluation and, if required, research plans must be designed using an intersectional lens. Specifically, proposers are encouraged to discuss how the project components account for students' intersecting membership in populations described by demographic characteristics and/or lived experiences (e.g., low-income, commuter, parenting, first-generation, or veteran status).
• Collaborative proposals from either single or multiple institutions must use a portion of the Management Plan to describe the roles of all senior personnel as well as the nature of the collaboration between institutions. It is imperative that all collaborating institutions have a clear and appropriate voice in the leadership and execution of the project as it applies to their students.
• All IEP proposals must include a detailed evaluation plan, executed by an experienced and independent evaluator, that will provide both formative and summative feedback on the project's progress towards its stated goals. Each evaluation plan should include clear evaluation questions, quantitative and/or qualitative data streams beyond baseline institutional research data, specified methods for data analysis, and a mechanism for providing a written evaluation report to the project team at least annually. Please see "Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions" below for additional information about the expectations for project evaluation.
• All IEP proposals that plan to financially support undergraduate or graduate students, for instance as tutors, peer mentors, research assistants, or other trainees must include a student mentoring plan of maximum 1 page as a supplemental document. This document should discuss specific strategies that will be utilized to provide academic, professional, and other valuable types of mentoring to these students. A student mentoring plan is not required if a project solely intends to provide incentives to students serving as research subjects without additional training requirements or duties.

Proposals may involve single operational units or departments of a college or multiple disciplines within a single division, school, or college at the institution. Collaborative proposals from multiple institutions or organizations are also welcome. Please see the Proposal Preparation Section below for additional guidelines regarding the submission of a complete proposal.

IEP Level 1: Up to 3 Years with a maximum budget of $500,000.

Awards at this level will support early-stage or exploratory projects that look to enrich the student experience, improve teaching and learning, broaden participation in undergraduate STEM, or improve student outcomes at HSIs. While IEP Level 1 proposals should be evidence-based as discussed above, they may be more exploratory and would generally be of a smaller scale than IEP Level 2 proposals.

The core activities of Level 1 projects may be wholly novel or may center on the replication and validation of promising approaches or high impact practices that may be novel at the institution. While STEM education or broadening participation research plans are welcome in Level 1 IEP proposals, they are not required. However, in the absence of a research plan, proposals must describe a plan to generate knowledge through the analysis and broad dissemination of data and outcomes obtained through project evaluation.

Level 1 IEP proposals are welcome to submit letters of collaboration from internal or external partners including faculty, administrators, corporations, non-profits or other entities as appropriate. These letters should adhere to the guidelines outlined in Chapter II.D.2.i.(iv) of the NSF PAPPG and should not be letters of support as described in that section.

IEP Level 2: Up to 5 Years with a maximum budget of $1,000,000

IEP Level 2 projects are supported for up to five years and should include efforts that are beyond the proof-of-concept stage and have potential to result in sustainable positive outcomes that align with the goals of the HSI program. Level 2 projects have a scale and scope beyond what would typically be expected for IEP Level 1 projects.

Level 2 projects must include substantial educational research plans intended to generate new knowledge that may improve our understanding of how to build institutional capacity at HSIs, to meet the goals of enhancing the quality of undergraduate student experiences in STEM, and/or improving the recruitment, retention, and graduation rates of students pursuing STEM degrees at HSIs. Research plans should include specific and actionable research questions, be theoretically grounded, and draw from data streams that look beyond those traditional institutional research measures. The HSI program has no methodological preference and welcomes qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies as appropriate given the foci of each proposed study.

Specific plans to sustain and institutionalize successful project components should be included as part of the Project Description. All IEP Level 2 proposals must include letters of support from upper-level institutional administrators, at the Dean level or higher, with responsibility for faculty affairs and/or undergraduate STEM education in the proposal's focal unit(s). These letters should outline concrete mechanisms and institutional commitments for institutionalization and sustainability of the project activities and should be uploaded as supplemental documents.

Level 2 IEP proposals are welcome to submit additional letters of collaboration from internal or external partners including faculty, administrators, corporations, non-profits or other entities as appropriate. These letters should adhere to the guidelines outlined in Chapter II.D.2.i.(iv) of the NSF PAPPG and should not be letters of support as described in that section.

Limit: 1 //  S. Radovick ( Health Sciences)

The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) will award Institutional Research Career Development (K12) programs through the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA). The purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to encourage institutions to propose creative and innovative institutional research career development programs designed to prepare an outstanding heterogeneous pool of promising later stage postdoctoral fellows and junior faculty scholars in clinical and translational science who have made a commitment to independent research careers (i.e., tenure-track or equivalent faculty positions), and to facilitate their timely transition to more advanced support mechanisms, e.g., K08, K23, R01, R03, etc. Applicants must submit both a UM1 application to PAR-21-293: Clinical and Translational Science Award and a K12 application to this FOA.

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) allows appointment of Scholars (K12) proposing to serve as the lead investigator of an independent clinical trial; or proposing a separate ancillary clinical trial; or proposing to gain research experience in a clinical trial led by another investigator, as part of their research and career development.

With this solicitation for the K12 application, a separate, companion FOA solicits applications for a required UM1 (PAR-21-293). A UM1 hub application without the required companion K12 application will not be reviewed. The required K12 application will only be awarded if the UM1 application is awarded. Initial and resubmission of K12 will be accepted concurrently or if the UM1 application is awarded.

The application must provide a specific plan describing the partnership between the UM1, the required K12 and any optional components. The applicant institution must be the UM1 applicant. The UM1 institution must have a strong and high-quality research program in the area(s) proposed under this K12 FOA and must have the requisite faculty, staff, potential scholars and facilities on site to conduct the proposed institutional program. In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed program will complement other ongoing career development programs occurring at the applicant institution and that a substantial number of program faculty will have active research projects in which participating scholars may gain relevant experiences consistent with their research interests and goal.

The sponsoring institution must assure support for the proposed program. Appropriate institutional commitment to the program includes the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned program.

The PD/PI should be an established investigator in the scientific area in which the application is targeted and capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed program. The PD/PI will be responsible for the selection and appointment of trainees to the approved research training program, and for the overall direction, management, administration, and evaluation of the program. The PD/PI will be expected to monitor and assess the program and submit all documents and reports as required. The PD/PI has responsibility for the day to day administration of the program and is responsible for appointing members of the Advisory Committee (when applicable), using their recommendations to determine the appropriate allotment of funds.

Only one K12 application will be awarded if the UM1 application is awarded. If the UM1 is awarded and the initial K12 is not, the K12 application may be resubmitted. If the UM1 (A0) application is not awarded, then the K12 (A0) will not be awarded.

NCATS solicits the submission of one set of companion applications. With this FOA for the K12 application, a separate, companion FOA seeks applications for a required UM1 (PAR-21-293: Clinical and Translational Science Award). The UM1 and initial K12 applications must be submitted concurrently; a K12 application without the required companion UM1 application will not be reviewed. The required K12 application will only be awarded if the UM1 application is awarded. 

Limit: 1 // G. Yong (Eller College of Managemen)

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: An organization may submit one proposal per submission window. An organization must wait for a determination from NSF (e.g., Award, Decline, or Returned Without Review) on the pending proposal before submitting a new proposal in the next window. Declined proposals require a new invitation to submit (via the Concept Outline process) and significant revision, while proposals Returned Without Review may be submitted using the same invited Concept Outline (assuming that the proposal is received within one year of the original Concept Outline invitation).

The National Science Foundation and its partners support the continued growth of a broad and diverse interdisciplinary research community for the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-powered innovation, providing a unique opportunity to broadly promote the NSF vision and core values, especially inclusion and collaboration. The National Artificial Intelligence Research Institutes program has established a national network of multisector flagship centers of AI research and workforce development that address a wide range of society's grand challenges through AI-powered innovation.

PROGRAM TRACKS

This program solicitation offers two Tracks corresponding to stages of readiness for partnerships in AI Institutes. These are “ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots” and “ExpandAI Partnerships” as described below.

Track 1: ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots

Capacity Building Pilots (CAP) are planning and growth efforts focused on the establishment of AI activities at the funded MSI and the early exploration of future synergistic partnerships that have the potential to be part of prospective ExpandAI Partnerships. Successful pilots will result in establishing new AI research capacity, education/workforce development in AI, and/or AI infrastructure capacity at the proposing institution and, potentially, a basis for future AI partnerships. CAP activities should plan for engaging appropriate communities to test the feasibility of partnerships as well as developing plans for continuing capacity development. Plans should consider required research infrastructure, plans to leverage established groups in related research areas, and inclusion of faculty training and research experiences that emphasize the diversification of investigators. 

Proposals must articulate a clear vision motivating the capacity building activities, with a focus on long-term benefits to the MSI such as enhanced faculty capacity for foundational and/or use-inspired AI research or new effective models for increased education and career pathways in AI. Proposals to this track must include a strong Institutional Need and Support Statement (see proposal preparation instructions) containing an assessment of the current AI research and instructional capacity and infrastructure, a demonstration of institutional need for capacity building in AI, and a statement of the commitment of institutional support for the proposed activities. Proposals that substantiate a strong case in this need and support statement are likely to be most compelling for the funding opportunity. Further guidance for this supporting document can be found in Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Successful proposals will feature a Capacity Building Plan that features clear and measurable outcomes/benefits of capacity building. Suitable activities for such a plan are:

• establishment or significant enhancement of foundational or use-inspired AI research, marked by increased faculty research output;
• design of academic pathways or innovative models for teaching and learning in AI, incorporating how students learn effectively in AI activities, and bringing AI disciplinary advances into the undergraduate and graduate experience;
• establishment or significant expansion of AI career pathways for students resulting from new AI activities;
• enhanced AI research infrastructure;
• significant increase in the participation of investigators and students who have been traditionally underserved and underrepresented in AI; and
• a plan for objective process evaluation in support of the proposed efforts.

Note that this list is representative of suitable activities and outcomes for this track. CAP activities need not be limited to this list, and proposals do not have to include every type of outcome represented in that list. Proposers are encouraged to select and integrate the activities most appropriate for their institutional context and their vision for capacity building toward partnerships. 

Early partnership development between the proposing MSI and one or more AI Institutes is neither required nor encouraged in a CAP proposal.

Track 2: ExpandAI Partnerships

The ExpandAI Partnership (PARTNER) track is an opportunity for MSIs to scale up already-established AI research and/or education programs and to initiate/leverage new collaborations with AI Institutes. These partnerships will be multi-organization collaborations submitted by an MSI and will include a subaward to an AI Institute. PARTNER projects are centered around shared, complementary goals. Proposals will be submitted as single-organizational collaborative proposals. PARTNER proposals may only be submitted by a qualifying MSI as indicated in Eligible Institutions in this solicitation. 

PARTNER proposals should scale up and make fully productive an appropriate existing capacity in AI research, education/workforce development, and/or infrastructure capacity. The proposing MSI in this track is not required to have previously been awarded a CAP project under this program. PARTNER proposals must constitute a significant new partnership that has the clear potential to build on the institution’s current AI capacity as well as leverage the intrinsic strengths and talents of the MSI for mutual benefit in collaborative AI activities.

MSIs applying for this track must demonstrate readiness to leverage external expertise and financial resources to focus on medium- and long-range plans to leverage this funding opportunity and new partnerships to develop AI capacity within the MSI, including but not limited to further development of the MSI’s envisioned methodological thrusts, use cases, educational and/or workforce development activities, and the potential for the MSI to expand and scale these efforts through formal, mutually beneficial partnerships. Proposals should include at least one (and if appropriate, more) established AI Institutes in developing a roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. 

PARTNER proposals must feature a compelling Partnership Roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. Roadmaps are the beginning of a joint strategy between organizations for collaborative work. These roadmaps may also include community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and goals for the growth of collaborative activities. Effective roadmaps are both depicted visually (e.g., conceptual diagram, logic model, table, etc.) and fully explained by a descriptive narrative. The roadmap should address all proposed projects involving research, education/workforce development, infrastructure, and any other types that are applicable to the collaboration. Roadmaps might address:

• enhancement of existing projects by virtue of new collaboration;
• initiation of new projects made possible by the collaboration;
• community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and further growth of the partnership;
• potential and plans for scaling nascent programs;
• an evaluation plan for measuring the growth and mutual benefit of activities in all projects.

No Applicants /// Limit: 1 // Tickets Available: 0

There won't be a submission for this program during the June deadline. 

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: An organization may submit one proposal per submission window. An organization must wait for a determination from NSF (e.g., Award, Decline, or Returned Without Review) on the pending proposal before submitting a new proposal in the next window. Declined proposals require a new invitation to submit (via the Concept Outline process) and significant revision, while proposals Returned Without Review may be submitted using the same invited Concept Outline (assuming that the proposal is received within one year of the original Concept Outline invitation).

The National Science Foundation and its partners support the continued growth of a broad and diverse interdisciplinary research community for the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-powered innovation, providing a unique opportunity to broadly promote the NSF vision and core values, especially inclusion and collaboration. The National Artificial Intelligence Research Institutes program has established a national network of multisector flagship centers of AI research and workforce development that address a wide range of society's grand challenges through AI-powered innovation.

PROGRAM TRACKS

This program solicitation offers two Tracks corresponding to stages of readiness for partnerships in AI Institutes. These are “ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots” and “ExpandAI Partnerships” as described below.

Track 1: ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots

Capacity Building Pilots (CAP) are planning and growth efforts focused on the establishment of AI activities at the funded MSI and the early exploration of future synergistic partnerships that have the potential to be part of prospective ExpandAI Partnerships. Successful pilots will result in establishing new AI research capacity, education/workforce development in AI, and/or AI infrastructure capacity at the proposing institution and, potentially, a basis for future AI partnerships. CAP activities should plan for engaging appropriate communities to test the feasibility of partnerships as well as developing plans for continuing capacity development. Plans should consider required research infrastructure, plans to leverage established groups in related research areas, and inclusion of faculty training and research experiences that emphasize the diversification of investigators. 

Proposals must articulate a clear vision motivating the capacity building activities, with a focus on long-term benefits to the MSI such as enhanced faculty capacity for foundational and/or use-inspired AI research or new effective models for increased education and career pathways in AI. Proposals to this track must include a strong Institutional Need and Support Statement (see proposal preparation instructions) containing an assessment of the current AI research and instructional capacity and infrastructure, a demonstration of institutional need for capacity building in AI, and a statement of the commitment of institutional support for the proposed activities. Proposals that substantiate a strong case in this need and support statement are likely to be most compelling for the funding opportunity. Further guidance for this supporting document can be found in Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Successful proposals will feature a Capacity Building Plan that features clear and measurable outcomes/benefits of capacity building. Suitable activities for such a plan are:

• establishment or significant enhancement of foundational or use-inspired AI research, marked by increased faculty research output;
• design of academic pathways or innovative models for teaching and learning in AI, incorporating how students learn effectively in AI activities, and bringing AI disciplinary advances into the undergraduate and graduate experience;
• establishment or significant expansion of AI career pathways for students resulting from new AI activities;
• enhanced AI research infrastructure;
• significant increase in the participation of investigators and students who have been traditionally underserved and underrepresented in AI; and
• a plan for objective process evaluation in support of the proposed efforts.

Note that this list is representative of suitable activities and outcomes for this track. CAP activities need not be limited to this list, and proposals do not have to include every type of outcome represented in that list. Proposers are encouraged to select and integrate the activities most appropriate for their institutional context and their vision for capacity building toward partnerships. 

Early partnership development between the proposing MSI and one or more AI Institutes is neither required nor encouraged in a CAP proposal.

Track 2: ExpandAI Partnerships

The ExpandAI Partnership (PARTNER) track is an opportunity for MSIs to scale up already-established AI research and/or education programs and to initiate/leverage new collaborations with AI Institutes. These partnerships will be multi-organization collaborations submitted by an MSI and will include a subaward to an AI Institute. PARTNER projects are centered around shared, complementary goals. Proposals will be submitted as single-organizational collaborative proposals. PARTNER proposals may only be submitted by a qualifying MSI as indicated in Eligible Institutions in this solicitation. 

PARTNER proposals should scale up and make fully productive an appropriate existing capacity in AI research, education/workforce development, and/or infrastructure capacity. The proposing MSI in this track is not required to have previously been awarded a CAP project under this program. PARTNER proposals must constitute a significant new partnership that has the clear potential to build on the institution’s current AI capacity as well as leverage the intrinsic strengths and talents of the MSI for mutual benefit in collaborative AI activities.

MSIs applying for this track must demonstrate readiness to leverage external expertise and financial resources to focus on medium- and long-range plans to leverage this funding opportunity and new partnerships to develop AI capacity within the MSI, including but not limited to further development of the MSI’s envisioned methodological thrusts, use cases, educational and/or workforce development activities, and the potential for the MSI to expand and scale these efforts through formal, mutually beneficial partnerships. Proposals should include at least one (and if appropriate, more) established AI Institutes in developing a roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. 

PARTNER proposals must feature a compelling Partnership Roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. Roadmaps are the beginning of a joint strategy between organizations for collaborative work. These roadmaps may also include community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and goals for the growth of collaborative activities. Effective roadmaps are both depicted visually (e.g., conceptual diagram, logic model, table, etc.) and fully explained by a descriptive narrative. The roadmap should address all proposed projects involving research, education/workforce development, infrastructure, and any other types that are applicable to the collaboration. Roadmaps might address:

• enhancement of existing projects by virtue of new collaboration;
• initiation of new projects made possible by the collaboration;
• community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and further growth of the partnership;
• potential and plans for scaling nascent programs;
• an evaluation plan for measuring the growth and mutual benefit of activities in all projects.

 Limit: 1 //  A. Ganchorre (Assistant Dean, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Students Affairs) 

The purpose of the Higher Education Multicultural Scholars Program (MSP) is to provide scholarships to support recruiting, engaging, retaining, mentoring, and training committed multicultural scholars, resulting in either baccalaureate degrees within the food and agricultural science disciplines. The goals and objectives of the scholarships are to encourage outstanding students from groups that are historically underrepresented and underserved to pursue and complete baccalaureate degrees in food and agricultural sciences, that would lead to a diverse and highly skilled work force. This may include the teaching and preservation of traditional ecological knowledge.

Underrepresented/underserved groups are those whose representation among food and agricultural professionals is disproportionately less than their proportion in the general population as indicated in standard statistical references, or as documented on a case-by-case basis by national survey data (e.g., the U.S. Department of Education's Digest of Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Agricultural Education Information Systems, etc.).

The need for this program is supported by the USDA 2020-2025 Employment Opportunities in Food, Agriculture, Renewable Natural Resources, and the Environment. The report indicates shortages of graduates in the food and agricultural disciplines, and a corresponding need to fill an estimated 57,400 annual openings for individuals with baccalaureate or higher degrees in food, renewable energy, and environmental specialties between 2020 and 2025.

Through scholarships, MSP aims to increase the participation of any group historically underrepresented in USDA mission areas and prepare them for the professional and scientific workforce in the food and agricultural sciences.

USDA/NIFA is soliciting applications for student education that will:

1. Prepare graduates to meet the demand for highly qualified personnel entering the workforce related to the food and agricultural sciences;

2. Support more undergraduates in transitioning to graduate education in USDA mission sciences;

3. Contribute to the reduction of the disparity among underrepresented and underserved populations entering graduate schools to better reflect the demographics of the U.S. and enable higher education to remain globally competitive;

4. Promote student success within food and agricultural disciplines at the undergraduate level; and

5. Focus on social support structure, and professional mentoring to ensure entry into food and agricultural science areas and completion of graduate education or high level of competitiveness for the workforce.

Limit: 2 // E. Enikov (Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering), C. Atkins (Student Engagement and Recruitment)

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 2

The Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) Program is designed to encourage development and implementation of bold, new, and potentially transformative approaches to STEM graduate education training. The program seeks proposals that a) explore ways for graduate students in STEM master's and doctoral degree programs to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers, or b) support research on the graduate education system and outcomes of systemic interventions and policies.

IGE projects are intended to generate the knowledge required for the customization, implementation, and broader adoption of potentially transformative approaches to graduate education. The program supports piloting, testing, and validating novel models or activities and examining systemic innovations with high potential to enrich and extend the knowledge base on effective graduate education approaches.

The program addresses both workforce development, emphasizing broad participation, and institutional capacity-building needs in graduate education. Strategic collaborations with the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, national laboratories, field stations, teaching and learning centers, informal science organizations, and academic partners are encouraged.

 Limit: 1 // J. M. Roveda (Electrical and Computer Engineering) - Track 1: ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots (CAP)

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: An organization may submit one proposal per submission window. An organization must wait for a determination from NSF (e.g., Award, Decline, or Returned Without Review) on the pending proposal before submitting a new proposal in the next window. Declined proposals require a new invitation to submit (via the Concept Outline process) and significant revision, while proposals Returned Without Review may be submitted using the same invited Concept Outline (assuming that the proposal is received within one year of the original Concept Outline invitation).

The National Science Foundation and its partners support the continued growth of a broad and diverse interdisciplinary research community for the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-powered innovation, providing a unique opportunity to broadly promote the NSF vision and core values, especially inclusion and collaboration. The National Artificial Intelligence Research Institutes program has established a national network of multisector flagship centers of AI research and workforce development that address a wide range of society's grand challenges through AI-powered innovation.

PROGRAM TRACKS

This program solicitation offers two Tracks corresponding to stages of readiness for partnerships in AI Institutes. These are “ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots” and “ExpandAI Partnerships” as described below.

Track 1: ExpandAI Capacity Building Pilots

Capacity Building Pilots (CAP) are planning and growth efforts focused on the establishment of AI activities at the funded MSI and the early exploration of future synergistic partnerships that have the potential to be part of prospective ExpandAI Partnerships. Successful pilots will result in establishing new AI research capacity, education/workforce development in AI, and/or AI infrastructure capacity at the proposing institution and, potentially, a basis for future AI partnerships. CAP activities should plan for engaging appropriate communities to test the feasibility of partnerships as well as developing plans for continuing capacity development. Plans should consider required research infrastructure, plans to leverage established groups in related research areas, and inclusion of faculty training and research experiences that emphasize the diversification of investigators. 

Proposals must articulate a clear vision motivating the capacity building activities, with a focus on long-term benefits to the MSI such as enhanced faculty capacity for foundational and/or use-inspired AI research or new effective models for increased education and career pathways in AI. Proposals to this track must include a strong Institutional Need and Support Statement (see proposal preparation instructions) containing an assessment of the current AI research and instructional capacity and infrastructure, a demonstration of institutional need for capacity building in AI, and a statement of the commitment of institutional support for the proposed activities. Proposals that substantiate a strong case in this need and support statement are likely to be most compelling for the funding opportunity. Further guidance for this supporting document can be found in Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Successful proposals will feature a Capacity Building Plan that features clear and measurable outcomes/benefits of capacity building. Suitable activities for such a plan are:

• establishment or significant enhancement of foundational or use-inspired AI research, marked by increased faculty research output;
• design of academic pathways or innovative models for teaching and learning in AI, incorporating how students learn effectively in AI activities, and bringing AI disciplinary advances into the undergraduate and graduate experience;
• establishment or significant expansion of AI career pathways for students resulting from new AI activities;
• enhanced AI research infrastructure;
• significant increase in the participation of investigators and students who have been traditionally underserved and underrepresented in AI; and
• a plan for objective process evaluation in support of the proposed efforts.

Note that this list is representative of suitable activities and outcomes for this track. CAP activities need not be limited to this list, and proposals do not have to include every type of outcome represented in that list. Proposers are encouraged to select and integrate the activities most appropriate for their institutional context and their vision for capacity building toward partnerships. 

Early partnership development between the proposing MSI and one or more AI Institutes is neither required nor encouraged in a CAP proposal.

Track 2: ExpandAI Partnerships

The ExpandAI Partnership (PARTNER) track is an opportunity for MSIs to scale up already-established AI research and/or education programs and to initiate/leverage new collaborations with AI Institutes. These partnerships will be multi-organization collaborations submitted by an MSI and will include a subaward to an AI Institute. PARTNER projects are centered around shared, complementary goals. Proposals will be submitted as single-organizational collaborative proposals. PARTNER proposals may only be submitted by a qualifying MSI as indicated in Eligible Institutions in this solicitation. 

PARTNER proposals should scale up and make fully productive an appropriate existing capacity in AI research, education/workforce development, and/or infrastructure capacity. The proposing MSI in this track is not required to have previously been awarded a CAP project under this program. PARTNER proposals must constitute a significant new partnership that has the clear potential to build on the institution’s current AI capacity as well as leverage the intrinsic strengths and talents of the MSI for mutual benefit in collaborative AI activities.

MSIs applying for this track must demonstrate readiness to leverage external expertise and financial resources to focus on medium- and long-range plans to leverage this funding opportunity and new partnerships to develop AI capacity within the MSI, including but not limited to further development of the MSI’s envisioned methodological thrusts, use cases, educational and/or workforce development activities, and the potential for the MSI to expand and scale these efforts through formal, mutually beneficial partnerships. Proposals should include at least one (and if appropriate, more) established AI Institutes in developing a roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. 

PARTNER proposals must feature a compelling Partnership Roadmap for collaborative work in some unifying theme or focus. Roadmaps are the beginning of a joint strategy between organizations for collaborative work. These roadmaps may also include community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and goals for the growth of collaborative activities. Effective roadmaps are both depicted visually (e.g., conceptual diagram, logic model, table, etc.) and fully explained by a descriptive narrative. The roadmap should address all proposed projects involving research, education/workforce development, infrastructure, and any other types that are applicable to the collaboration. Roadmaps might address:

• enhancement of existing projects by virtue of new collaboration;
• initiation of new projects made possible by the collaboration;
• community building activities (e.g., workshops) to further develop common interests, objectives, and further growth of the partnership;
• potential and plans for scaling nascent programs;
• an evaluation plan for measuring the growth and mutual benefit of activities in all projects.

UArizona is not eligible to submit during this FY* // Institutionally Coordinated //  Limit: 1 

Please contact HSI Initiatives for more information. 

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

• Planning or Pilot Projects (PPP) track: There are no restrictions or limits.
• Implementation and Evaluation Projects (IEP) track: There are no restrictions or limits.
• Institutional Transformation Projects (ITP) track: One award and one submission per institution is allowed. *Institutions with an active award are not eligible to apply to this track. Due to an active award, UArizona may not submit a proposal until 2028, unless the new guidelines indicate otherwise. 

The goals of the HSI program are to enhance the quality of undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and to increase the recruitment, retention, and graduation rates of students pursuing associates or baccalaureate degrees in STEM. Achieving these, given the diverse nature and context of the HSIs, requires additional strategies that support building capacity at HSIs through innovative approaches: to incentivize institutional and community transformation; and to promote fundamental research (i) on engaged student learning, (ii) about what it takes to diversify and increase participation in STEM effectively, and (iii) that improves our understanding of how to build institutional capacity at HSIs. Intended outcomes of the HSI Program include broadening participation of students that are historically underrepresented in STEM and expanding students' pathways to continued STEM education and integration into the STEM workforce.

The HSI program is aligned with the National Science Board's vision for, and the NSF's commitment to, a more diverse and capable science and engineering workforce.1 2 HSIs are heterogeneous and unique in many respects.3 Some HSIs have well-established undergraduate STEM programs while others are just beginning to create STEM programs. Whether 2-year or 4-year, public or private, the HSIs serve a wide range of students with a diverse set of educational backgrounds. The need for tailored initiatives, policies, and practices (mindful of socio-cultural awareness) should meet the students' needs and institutions' expectations while advancing undergraduate students at HSIs toward higher levels of academic achievement in STEM. This is the motivation behind three HSI program tracks: Track 1: Planning or Pilot Projects (PPP); Track 2: Implementation and Evaluation Projects (IEP); and Track 3: Institutional Transformation Projects (ITP). Track 3, ITP, is motivated by work on organizational identities for HSIs that suggest that organizational culture and identity play a key role in the success of an HSI in promoting student success in STEM.4

Track 3: The Institutional Transformation Projects (ITP) track supports institution-wide structural or systemic changes to enhance undergraduate STEM education at the proposing HSI. The ITP must be grounded in STEM education research and broadening participation research and be designed to make institutional infrastructure and policy changes to support long-term institutional changes that encourage and support faculty in implementing evidence-based practices that enhance student outcomes in STEM at the proposing HSI.

Under the ITP track, research (including foundational research) that improves our understanding of how to build HSI institutional capacity in STEM is encouraged. Such research should result in a strategic understanding about how the multiple components of the HSI program goals work synchronously to advance STEM education. All institution types are encouraged to apply, especially PUIs (including community colleges). Proposed activities can include adaptation of evidence-based strategies and/or the design and implementation of innovative strategies. The ITP must include both project evaluation and dissemination components, as well as an education research component. The ITP proposed structural or systemic changes are expected to be institutionalized and sustained by the HSI.