- Home
- Agencies
- Department of Agriculture
- Department of Housing and Urban Development
- General Services Administration
- Department of Commerce
- Department of the Interior
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- Department of Defense
- Department of Justice
- National Science Foundation
- Department of Education
- Department of Labor
- Office of Personnel Management
- Department of Energy
- Department of State
- Small Business Administration
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Department of Transportation
- Social Security Administration
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of the Treasury
- U.S. Agency for International Development
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Goals
- Initiatives
- Programs
Primary tabs
Karen TipladyDirector, Division of Grants and AgreementsOffice of Budget, Finance and Award Management (BFA)
FY 14-15: Agency Priority Goal
Optimize the Award Process to Level Workload
Priority Goal
Goal Overview
NSF typically awards half of its nearly 20,000 funded grant actions in the 4th quarter due to the fact that almost 75 percent of proposals and funding requests are recommended for award during the last half of the fiscal year. This unbalanced award workload is largely a result of clustered proposal deadlines, as well as due to annual budget delays, uncertainties of final allocations, and program practice of making funding decisions late in the fiscal year. Issuing such a high volume of awards in a compressed time period during the end of the fiscal year not only strains NSF’s workforce, and other resources such as IT business systems and space for conducting review panels, but also increases risk and places added stress on awardee capabilities coinciding with these peak workload periods.
Adopting strategies that address calendar management, operating procedures, and potential IT improvements should result in improved efficiencies that mitigate the negative impacts of the current imbalanced award distribution for both NSF and the nation’s scientific research community, supporting NSF’s strategic goal to excel as a federal science agency. Spreading proposal deadlines and leveling issuance of awards in a more balanced approach across the fiscal year would provide for more optimal utilization of limited resources to administer and manage research funding and therefore improve award compliance and overall stewardship of federal research dollars. Realizing improved efficiency in the administration of federally sponsored scientific research would also help to further reduce administrative burden and enable research to be initiated and executed more efficiently across the research community.
Implementation of this goal will require the full support of all program directorates and offices that make funding recommendations to NSF awarding divisions. Implementation teams will be established in each program directorate and office to develop approaches that consider the full proposal cycle and are sensible for each program area (e.g., polar programs may need to time funding solicitation deadlines and subsequent recommendations in a manner that accommodates the logistical concerns associated with operating in an extreme weather environment). NSF’s Office of Budget, Finance and Award Management (BFA) divisions will support the program directorates and offices in this effort by working with each of the implementation teams to suggest options for consideration, to foster pilot approaches, and to assist in the clearance process which impacts the release and timing of proposal solicitation deadlines.
Strategies
Some of the strategies for leveling that NSF may consider include:
NSF-wide Calendar Management Activities – e.g., shifting solicitation and proposal deadlines and evaluation of panel cycles related to distributed deadlines;
Operating Procedures – e.g., establishing quarterly program targets for funding recommendations, share best practices and prepare guidelines to streamline and/or reduce delays in clearance of proposal-generating documents, and standardize procedures across program directorates and divisions to maximize utilization of administrative staff; and
IT Improvements – e.g., modernize the outdated award system by migrating the functionality into a web-based eJacket system used by programs for proposal management in order to have an NSF-wide end-to-end proposal and award management system. This would enable process improvements and efficiencies in the agency’s administration and management of its portfolio.
Milestones:
First Quarter FY 2014 – Establish implementation teams that will develop approaches that make sense for each directorate/office and solicit input from advisory committees for awardee perspective on possible improvements.
Second Quarter FY 2014 – Develop an implementation plan to set the stage for success toward meeting goals that will be established for FY 2015.
Third and Fourth Quarters FY 2014 – Begin piloting approaches that may provide novel and/or innovative solutions to leveling proposal and award workload across the fiscal year.
First Quarter FY 2015 – Assess preliminary success of pilot efforts and scale up ideas that worked and share best practices across the agency.
Second Quarter FY 2015 – Monitor progress and make adjustments as needed.
Third and Fourth Quarters FY 2015 – Measure results and evaluate progress.
Indicators:
To improve efficiency and timeliness of agency funding decisions that enable grant-making across the fiscal year, the following quarterly targets for funding recommendations by program directorate have been established using baseline data averaged over FY 2010-2013 to ensure that more than half of all funding recommendations are made before the second half of the fiscal year. This would shift approximately 27 percent of funding recommendations to an earlier time period.
Agency Funding Recommendation Targets:
FY Quarter 1: 20 percent of funded actions, which represents a 12 percent increase over baseline (8 percent)
FY Quarter 2: 35 percent of funded actions, which represents a 15 percent increase over baseline (20 percent)
FY Quarter 3: 25 percent of funded actions, which represents a 6 percent decrease over baseline (31 percent)
FY Quarter 4: 20 percent of funded actions, which represents a 21 percent decrease over baseline (41 percent)
External Indicators:
In order to assess awardee improvements in capacity to manage awards, NSF will seek to utilize evaluation tools such as a survey or before and after study of the impacts of proposal deadlines and award distribution on awardees.
Progress Update
Final Update
NSF did not meet its FY 2015 fourth quarter target to recommend no more than 20 percent of the year’s funded actions in this quarter. Overall, NSF did not meet its goal to level workload across the four quarters of FY 2015.
Though NSF did not meet its targets for this goal, there was a positive trend that moved award actions out of the last quarter of the year. Although there was no overall progress towards increasing awards in Q1 and Q2, NSF continued the trend from FY 2014 to recommend more awards in Q3, which contributed to a decrease in the percentage of awards recommended in Q4. Specifically, in FY 2015 NSF recommended 33.5 percent of the awards in Q4, a 6.3 percent reduction compared to the baseline average of 39.8 percent over the previous four years. Despite making six percent more awards in FY 2015 relative to FY 2014, NSF recommended 1.1 percent fewer awards in Q4 and moved two percent more awards into Q2 relative to FY 2014.
Data for percentage of NSF awards by quarter and across fiscal years:
|
Quarter |
FY 2010-2013 Average |
FY 2014 |
FY 2015 Target |
FY 2015 Actual |
|
Q1 |
7.6% |
6.5% |
20% |
6.6% |
|
Q2 |
19.7% |
17.4% |
35% |
19.4% |
|
Q3 |
32.9% |
41.5% |
25% |
40.5% |
|
Q4 |
39.8% |
34.6% |
20% |
33.5% |
Previous Updates
FY 2015 Q3
NSF did not meet its FY 2015 third quarter target to recommend only 25 percent of the year’s funded actions in this quarter. The Q3 target represents a decrease from the baseline and was established based on the assumption that more awards would be recommended in Q1 (20%) and Q2 (35%), thus reducing the awards in both Q3 (25%) and Q4 (20%). Because of the lack of progress in Q1 and Q2, the number of awards recommended in Q3 was above the target, more in line with historical trends (rather than decreased to meet the target). Slightly more funded actions have been recommended in Q3 compared to prior fiscal years, which may result in fewer Q4 actions and thus demonstrate progress in Q4.
Analysis of cumulative results shows some overall progress toward the goal:
- Cumulative Targets for Q1-Q3: 80% or ~13,000 actions
- FY 2010-2013 average: 60% or 9,830 actions
- FY 2014 actuals: 65% or 9,934 actions
- FY 2015 estimate: 66% or 10,818 actions
FY 2015 Q2
NSF did not meet its FY 2015 second quarter target to recommend 35 percent of the year's funded actions, but came close to matching FY 2010-2013 baseline averages of 20 percent. Challenges continue with program offices delaying making final funding decisions until release of the current year operating plan, which did not occur until late March. In addition, any FY 2014 efforts by program offices to adjust solicitation deadlines will not go into effect until FY 2016.
FY 2015 Q1
NSF did not meet its FY 2015 first quarter target to recommend 20 percent of the year's funded actions, and was unable to exceed baseline averages. Challenges were expected with the late startup due to transition to a new financial system. In addition, many FY 2014 efforts by program offices to adjust solicitation deadlines will not go into effect until FY 2016. With the enactment of appropriations in the first quarter of FY 2015, NSF anticipates that it will make progress toward shifting award decisions into the second and third quarter. Lessons learned will go into adjusting agency targets going forward in development of a performance goal for FY 2016.
FY 2014 Q4
The milestone identified for the fourth quarter of FY 2014, to begin piloting approaches to leveling workload, was partially met. Preparatory actions took place, although none were considered pilots for the leveling activity. One set of activities, a stricter approach to year-end closeout deadlines and procedures, was undertaken as part of NSF’s transition to a new financial system in early FY 2015, but the lessons learned from the process can be applied to leveling in FY 2015 and beyond. NSF does not anticipate reaching the ambitious FY 2015 targets initially proposed, but plans to use them to stimulate progress that will extend beyond just one fiscal year.
NSF’s targets for this goal are for FY 2015, but reported here are the baseline values (averages of FY 2010-13) against FY 2014 results to provide context. The data show that NSF saw a shift in its annual workload of awards recommended for funding of 8.6 percent into the third quarter in FY 2014. This was due to two major factors unique to FY 2014: the government shutdown in Q1 and NSF’s preparations for its new financial system, which went live in early FY 2015.
- The government shutdown in the first quarter of FY 2014 halted receipt and delayed review of proposals NSF-wide, and is believed to be the primary reason for the shift in over 3 percent of the annual workload out of the first and second quarters.
- NSF made its year-end closeout procedures and deadlines significantly earlier and more stringent in preparation for the transition to a new financial system in early FY 2015. These changes resulted in movement of more than 5percent of recommended awards out of the fourth quarter, which demonstrates positive progress toward leveling.
Also in the fourth quarter, ideas and strategies to shift funding decisions for agency-wide programs to move actions out of the last quarter of next fiscal year were considered for two cross-Foundational programs, the Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) and Graduate Research Fellowship programs. Directorates have been making adjustments to target select programs and types of awards that may be shifted earlier in FY 2015 depending on the availability of funds and research community considerations.
FY 2014 Q3
The milestones identified for the third quarter of FY 2014 were partially met. A facilitated session was held with the directorates to further identify novel and/or innovative solutions to leveling award workload across the fiscal year. Key strategies identified include shifting NSF-wide solicitations and a more strategic use of recovered funds. The directorates shared strategies for managing identified barriers to progress, such as budget uncertainties and dealing with change management.
FY 2014 Q2
The milestones identified for the second quarter of FY 2014 were partially met. The different science offices have progressed to different stages of implementation. Programs have been assessing their solicitation and proposal deadlines and evaluating their workload as part of the calendar management strategies. Planning for budget uncertainties, dealing with change management, and transitioning to a new core financial system at the end of the fiscal year have impacted progress at the program level.
FY 2014 Q1
The milestones identified for the first quarter of FY 2014 were partially met. The agency was delayed in establishing implementation teams during the first quarter as a result of the government shutdown. The goal leader did continue socializing the idea through program outreach meetings and made a few key program contacts that would be involved in establishing implementation teams at the eight Directorate/Office levels that represent the Foundation’s science programs.
Next Steps
No Data Available
Contributing Programs & Other Factors
This activity, led by the Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management, affects all NSF grantmaking units.
Expand All
Strategic Goals
Strategic Goal:
Excel as a Federal Science Agency
Statement:
Excel as a Federal Science Agency
Strategic Objectives
Statement:
Use effective methods and innovative solutions to achieve excellence in accomplishing the agency’s mission
Description:
NSF can accomplish our mission only when our operational and administrative enterprise functions work seamlessly with the front-line organizations they support. A wide range of services--including human resources; performance management; information technology (IT); financial, procurement, and administrative support--provide the wherewithal for the agency’s program staff and leadership to make critical investments in science, research, engineering, and education.
The agency uses three key strategies to achieve organizational excellence: openness, inclusion, and effectiveness. Openness and inclusion are achieved when we conduct business in a transparent, collaborative, and participatory manner with all stakeholders. Continuous, clear communication with all parties is a hallmark of openness and inclusion. An organization is effective when all business processes work to optimize administrative efficiencies, provide business intelligence for data-driven decision making, and enable organizational agility.
An essential mechanism that NSF uses to accomplish our mission is the competitive merit review of research proposals. We have developed a strong business and operations model that is emulated around the world. This model uses frontline U.S. researchers who have the best sense of where opportunities for major advances lie to evaluate proposals for original research. NSF accepts proposals in a manner that represents an open portal for new ideas in all fields, including interdisciplinary proposals. Whether they are submitted in response to open funding opportunities or for formal targeted solicitations, the proposals undergo merit review, with the subject matter experts (peers) assessing the intellectual merits and broader impacts of the proposed research. This merit review may take many forms, but all are designed to provide NSF program officers with the information they need to make award recommendations from among the (usually) large number of high-quality possibilities. The agency’s IT systems are critical to the process, facilitating the flow of proposals through the merit review, award, and oversight processes. External members of the research community periodically assess the quality of the merit review process as a means of accountability for NSF management and staff. Construction and operation of large scientific instruments and infrastructure efforts present added challenges. NSF requires extensive project execution plans, including detailed work scope, milestone schedules, and risk management; progress is monitored continually by NSF staff using extensive Earned Value Management (EVM) data, supplemented by in-depth external reviews conducted at least once a year.
Statement:
Build an increasingly diverse, engaged, and high-performing workforce by fostering excellence in recruitment, training, leadership, and management of human capital.
Description:
NSF is only as capable as the people who make up the organization. Therefore, recruiting and retaining the best staff in all of our organization’s roles is of utmost importance. This strategic objective focuses on those aspects of recruitment, skill enhancement, leadership, and management of human capital that serve as the foundation for effective support of NSF’s people and mission. NSF recognizes the importance of building diversity in our staff, and ensuring that our staff stays current to match priority mission responsibilities. As an agency at the cutting edge of research and education, NSF also understands that the skills needed to carry out the agency’s work are constantly changing, and, as a result, on-going training is necessary for functions needed today and in the future. An excellent organization requires both vision and direction from our leadership, as well as a constant dialogue with the staff about potential change. It must be a dialogue in which all voices are heard and all contributions are valued. NSF looks to these dimensions of human capital management in order to share with all employees how they play a vital part in maximizing NSF’s performance.
Agency Priority Goals
Statement:
Improve agency and awardee efficiency by leveling the award of grants across the fiscal year. By September 30, 2015, meet targets to level distribution of awards across the fiscal year and subsequently improve awardee capacity to effectively manage research funding.
Description:
NSF typically awards half of its nearly 20,000 funded grant actions in the 4th quarter due to the fact that almost 75 percent of proposals and funding requests are recommended for award during the last half of the fiscal year. This unbalanced award workload is largely a result of clustered proposal deadlines, as well as due to annual budget delays, uncertainties of final allocations, and program practice of making funding decisions late in the fiscal year. Issuing such a high volume of awards in a compressed time period during the end of the fiscal year not only strains NSF’s workforce, and other resources such as IT business systems and space for conducting review panels, but also increases risk and places added stress on awardee capabilities coinciding with these peak workload periods.
Adopting strategies that address calendar management, operating procedures, and potential IT improvements should result in improved efficiencies that mitigate the negative impacts of the current imbalanced award distribution for both NSF and the nation’s scientific research community, supporting NSF’s strategic goal to excel as a federal science agency. Spreading proposal deadlines and leveling issuance of awards in a more balanced approach across the fiscal year would provide for more optimal utilization of limited resources to administer and manage research funding and therefore improve award compliance and overall stewardship of federal research dollars. Realizing improved efficiency in the administration of federally sponsored scientific research would also help to further reduce administrative burden and enable research to be initiated and executed more efficiently across the research community.
Implementation of this goal will require the full support of all program directorates and offices that make funding recommendations to NSF awarding divisions. Implementation teams will be established in each program directorate and office to develop approaches that consider the full proposal cycle and are sensible for each program area (e.g., polar programs may need to time funding solicitation deadlines and subsequent recommendations in a manner that accommodates the logistical concerns associated with operating in an extreme weather environment). NSF’s Office of Budget, Finance and Award Management (BFA) divisions will support the program directorates and offices in this effort by working with each of the implementation teams to suggest options for consideration, to foster pilot approaches, and to assist in the clearance process which impacts the release and timing of proposal solicitation deadlines.
