Extramural Research
Funding Opportunities
Research Project Search
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Research
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program
CLOSED - FOR REFERENCES PURPOSES ONLY
1998 Regional Scale Analysis and Assessment
Opening Date: November 25, 1997
Closing Date: February 12, 1998
This invitation provides relevant background information, summarizes EPA's interest in the topic areas, and describes the application and review process.
Background
In fiscal year 1995 EPA began an expansion of its investigator-initiated
research grants program for academic and not-for-profit institutions
(the STAR Program, Science to Achieve Results). Subsequently, this
program increased in fiscal years 1996 and 1997, and in fiscal year
1998 EPA anticipates reaching its programmatic goal of $100 million.
As a part of that program, this Request for Applications (RFA) describes
one of the programmatic areas which is a part of the EPA 1998 solicitation.
Additional program topic areas and joint programs with the National
Science Foundation and other agencies will be announced separately.
EPA Mission and R & D Strategy
The mission of EPA is to protect both environmental quality
and human health through effective regulations and other policy
initiatives. Achievement of this mission requires the application
of sound science to assessment of environmental problems and to
evaluation of possible solutions. A significant challenge is to
support both long-term research that anticipates future environmental
problems as well as research that fills gaps in knowledge relevant
to meeting current Agency goals. This Request for Applications and
the multi-agency solicitations are important steps toward promoting
a sound scientific foundation for environmental protection.
EPA's research programs focus on reduction of risks to human health and ecosystems and on the reduction of uncertainty associated with risk assessment. Through its laboratories and through grants to academic and other not-for-profit institutions, EPA promotes research in both domains, according the highest priority to those areas in which risk assessors are most in need of new concepts, methods, and data. EPA also fosters the development and evaluation of new risk reduction technologies across a spectrum, from pollution prevention through end-of-pipe controls to remediation and monitoring. In all areas, EPA is interested in research that recognizes issues relating to environmental justice, the concept of achieving equal protection from environmental and health hazards for all people without regard to race, economic status, or culture.
EPA's extramural research grant programs are administered by ORD's National Center for Environmental Research (NCER). The specific topic area of this solicitation, research on Regional Scale Analysis and Assessment, is discussed below.
Regional Scale Analysis
and Assessment Research
Much of the ecological information generated today comes from intensive
investigations of single sites or relatively small geographic areas.
Yet many of the management questions being asked or ecological assessments
being conducted are focused over broad geographic regions. The specific
purpose of this solicitation by the STAR program on behalf of EPA's
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) is to request
proposals for research that lead to the development and demonstration
of approaches to link site specific information with regional survey
data and remote sensing imagery for conducting regional level ecological
assessments. You may find extensive information about the EMAP program
at <http://www.epa.gov/emap>
Background
Ecologists have learned an extensive amount about systems and how
they function by long-term studies of individual locations. Research
conducted at the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites (funded
primarily by the National Science Foundation) is outstanding among
the many examples of these types of studies. A lingering question
from studies of this nature is the extent to which the findings
from the single site can be extrapolated to broader areas. Determining
the "representativeness" of the site is one approach toward
creating regional scale analyses from the site studies. Knowledge
of the important system drivers at the site is generally needed
along with a knowledge of how those drivers are distributed over
broader geographic areas containing apparently similar types of
systems.
Another dimension of this concern comes in applying the multi-scale monitoring framework proposed by EMAP in 1990 and recently proposed by the White House Office of Science and Technology's Committee on the Environmental and Natural Resources (CENR) for its national monitoring and research framework. These frameworks suggest that monitoring and research must make use of a three tier approach to include (1) remote sensing, (2) sample surveys, and (3) intensive studies. Remote sensing can provide "complete coverage" of a geographic area. It can monitor changes in land-use/land cover that aid in interpreting changes in single resources, such as streams and wetlands. It can also provide estimates (through models) of important terrestrial features such as leaf area index (LAI). Sample surveys can characterize specific properties of ecological resources in a region through use of statistical sampling of a subset of the resource, followed by rigorous statistical inference back to the entire resource. The use of ground-based surveys broadens the range of ecological characteristics which can be measured, but surveys conducted over extensive spatial scales are often limited to measurements during a restricted portion of the year. Intensive studies at individual locations can provide even more detailed measurements of a wider range of system structure and function and often provide more temporally intensive data within a year. These studies are severely limited however, in their spatial coverage.
All three approaches to research and monitoring are essential for an integrated assessment capability. Unfortunately, few examples exist which demonstrate how these different approaches and tools can be carefully linked to provide a more comprehensive assessment of a geographic region.
Scope of Research
EPA's STAR program solicits proposals for research on
novel approaches for either conducting regional scale assessments
by combining data from intensive investigations, regional surveys,
and remotely sensed data or for novel approaches to determine the
"representativeness" of an intensively studied site within
a region. Priorities for funding will be:
(1) Development and demonstration of methodologies that link remote
sensing, regional survey data, and intensively studied site research
into an integrated ecological assessment. For example, how would
one approach linking (a) studies of carbon allocation at a specific
forest research site with (b) production estimates from forest inventory
and analysis (FIA) surveys with (c) remote sensing estimates of
forest cover and leaf area index to provide a better description
and understanding of forest productivity?
(2) Studies which demonstrate approaches for determining the "representativeness"
of individual research locations. Lake Tahoe, for example, has been
extensively studied but is also considered quite unique. How applicable
are findings of research on Lake Tahoe to other lakes in western
North America? If a less "unique" western lake were studied,
how would one quantify its "representativeness" among
other western lakes? Each of the LTER sites is located within a
particular biome. How would one rigorously quantify how applicable
the results from H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, for example,
are to other forested systems in the northwest?
A range of research may be appropriate for this request. Research
which relies on existing data but demonstrates novel approaches
for linking information from different sources would be appropriate.
Other research might require additional primary data collection
from any or all of the three tiers in order to demonstrate the approach
proposed.
The outcome of this research should assist in answering some of
the following questions:
How can the "representativeness" of an intensively
studied site within a region be determined?
To what degree can intensive studies at smaller, traditional ecological scales be extrapolated to larger scales in which effects typical of regional anthropogenic stresses are expressed?
To what degree are assessments at fine scale spatially concordant with assessments made at coarse scale?
What are the implications of the demonstrated approach for designing
research and monitoring at any or all of the three tiers? To what
extent do the three tiers need to be designed in concert, or can
they be independently designed and integrated after the fact?
Funding: Approximately $3 million is expected to be awarded in fiscal year 1998 for research under this RFA, depending on the availability of funds. It is anticipated that the annual funding levels (for up to three years) will range from $75,000 to $250,000. Applicants: Do not exceed these funding levels.
ELIGIBILITY
Academic and not-for-profit institutions located in the U.S., and
state or local governments are eligible under all existing authorizations.
Profit making firms and other federal agencies are not eligible
to receive grants from EPA under this program. Federal agencies,
national laboratories funded by federal agencies (FFRDCs), and federal
employees are not eligible to submit applications to this program
and may not serve in a principal leadership role on a grant.
Federal and FFRDC employees are strongly encouraged to cooperate
or collaborate with eligible applicants within the limits imposed
by applicable legislation and regulations. They may participate
in planning, conducting, and analyzing the research directed by
the principal investigator, but may not direct research on behalf
of the applicant organization or principal investigator or receive
salary or research funding from the grant. However, the principal
investigator's institution may subcontract to a federal agency or
FFRDC to purchase unique supplies or services unavailable in the
private sector. Examples are purchase of satellite data, census
data tapes, chemical reference standards, unique analyses or instrumentation
not available elsewhere, etc. A written justification for such federal
involvement must be included in the application, along with an assurance
from the federal agency which commits it to supply the specified
service.
Potential applicants who are uncertain of their eligibility should
contact Dr. Robert E. Menzer in NCER, phone (202) 564-6849, EMail:
menzer.robert@epamail.epa.gov
Standard Instructions for Submitting an Application
This section contains a set of special instructions related
to how applicants should apply for an NCER grant. Proposed projects
must be for research designed to advance the state of knowledge
in the research areas described in this solicitation.
Sorting Codes
In order to facilitate proper assignment and review of applications, each applicant is asked to identify the topic area in which their application is to be considered. It is the responsibility of the applicant to correctly identify the proper Sorting Code. Failure to do so will result in an inappropriate peer review assignment. At various places within the application, applicants will be asked to identify this topic area by using the appropriate Sorting Code. The Sorting Code corresponding to research on Regional Scale Analysis and Assessment is 98-NCERQA-L1.
The Sorting Code must be placed at the top of the abstract (as shown in the abstract format), in Box 10 of Standard Form 424 (as described in the section on SF424), and should also be included in the address on the package that is sent to EPA (see the section on how to apply).
The Application
The initial application is made through the submission of the materials
described below. It is essential that the application contain
all the information requested and be submitted in the formats described.
If it is not, the application may be rejected on administrative
grounds. If an application is considered for award, (i.e., after
external peer review and internal review) additional forms and other
information will be requested by the Project Officer. The application
should not be bound or stapled in any way. The Application contains
the following:
A. Standard Form 424: The applicant must complete Standard Form
424 (see attached form and instructions). This form will act as
a cover sheet for the application and should be its first page.
Instructions for completion of the SF424 are included with the form.
The form must contain the original signature of an authorized representative
of the applying institution. Please note that both the Principal
Investigator and an administrative contact should be identified
in Section 5 of the SF424.
B. Key Contacts: The applicant must complete the Key Contacts Form
(attached) as the second page of the submitted application.
C. Abstract: The abstract is a very important document. Prior
to attending the peer review panel meetings, some of the panelists
may read only the abstract. Therefore, it is critical that the abstract
accurately describe the research being proposed and convey all the
essential elements of the research. Also, in the event of an award,
the abstracts will form the basis for an Annual Report of awards
made under this program. The abstract must not exceed one 8.5 x
11-inch page of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch
margins. The abstract should include the following information,
as indicated in the example format provided:
1. Sorting Code: Use the correct code that corresponds to this topic
area: 98-NCERQA-L1.
2. Title: Use the exact title as it appears in the rest of the
application.
3. Investigators: List the names and affiliations of each investigator
who will significantly contribute to the project. Start with the
Principal Investigator.
4. Project Summary: This should summarize: (a) the objectives
of the study (including any hypotheses that will be tested), (b)
the experimental approach to be used (which should give an
accurate description of the project as described in the proposal),
(c) the expected results of the project and how it addresses
the research needs identified in the solicitation, and (d) a brief
description of the improvement in risk assessment or risk management
that will result from successful completion of the work proposed.
5. Supplemental Keywords: A list of suggested keywords is
provided for your use. Do not duplicate terms already used in the
text of the abstract.
D. Project Description: This description must not exceed fifteen
(15) consecutively numbered (center bottom), 8.5x11-inch pages of
single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins. The description
must provide the following information:
1. Objectives: List the objectives of the proposed research
and the hypotheses being tested during the project and briefly state
why the intended research is important. This section can also include
any background or introductory information that would help explain
the objectives of the study (one to two pages recommended).
2. Approach: Outline the methods, approaches, and techniques that
you intend to employ in meeting the objective stated above (five
to 10 pages recommended).
3. Expected Results or Benefits: Describe the results you expect
to achieve during the project, the benefits of success as they relate
to the topic under which the proposal was submitted, and the potential
recipients of these benefits. This section should also discuss the
utility of the research project proposed for addressing the environmental
problems described in the solicitation (one to two pages recommended).
4. General Project Information: Discuss other information relevant
to the potential success of the project. This should include facilities,
personnel, project schedules, proposed management, interactions
with other institutions, etc. (one to two pages recommended).
5. Important Attachments: Appendices and/or other information may
be included but must remain within the 15 page limit. References
cited are in addition to the 15 pages.
E. Resumes: The resumes of all principal investigators and important
co-workers should be presented. Resumes must not exceed two consecutively
numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard
12-point type with 1-inch margins for each individual.
F. Current and Pending Support: The applicant must identify any
current and pending financial resources that are intended to support
research related to that included in the proposal or which would
consume the time of principal investigators. This should be done
by completing the appropriate form (see attachment) for each investigator
and other senior personnel involved in the proposal. Failure to
provide this information may delay consideration of your proposal.
G. Budget: The applicant must present a detailed, itemized budget
for the entire project. This budget must be in the format provided
in the example (see attachment) and not exceed two consecutively
numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages with 1-inch margins.
Please note that institutional cost sharing is not required and,
therefore, does not have to be included in the budget table. If
desired, a brief statement concerning cost sharing can be added
to the budget justification.
H. Budget Justification: This section should describe the basis for calculating the personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, and other costs identified in the itemized budget and explain the basis for their calculation (special attention should be given to explaining the travel, equipment, and other categories). This should also include an explanation of how the indirect costs were calculated. This justification should not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins.
I. Quality Assurance Narrative Statement: For any project involving
data collection or processing, conducting surveys, environmental
measurements, and/or modeling, provide a statement on how quality
processes or products will be assured. This statement should not
exceed two consecutively numbered, 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced
standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins. This is in addition
to the 15 pages permitted for the Project Description. The Quality
Assurance Narrative Statement should, for each item listed below,
either present the required information or provide a justification
as to why the item does not apply to the proposed research. For
awards that involve environmentally related measurements or data
generation, a quality system that complies with the requirements
of ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality
Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology
Programs," must be in place.
1. The activities to be performed or hypothesis to be tested (reference
may be made to the specific page and paragraph number in the application
where this information may be found); criteria for determining the
acceptability of data quality in terms of precision, accuracy, representativeness,
completeness, comparability.
2. The study design including sample type and location requirements
and any statistical analyses that were used to estimate the types
and numbers of samples required for physical samples or similar
information for studies using survey and interview techniques.
3. The procedures for the handling and custody of samples, including
sample identification, preservation, transportation, and storage.
4. The methods that will be used to analyze samples or data collected,
including a description of the sampling and/or analytical instruments
required.
5. The procedures that will be used in the calibration and performance
evaluation of the sampling and analytical methods used during the
project.
6. The procedures for data reduction and reporting, including a
description of statistical analyses to be used and of any computer
models to be designed or utilized, and associated verification and
validation techniques.
7. The intended use of the data as they relate to the study objectives
or hypotheses.
8. The quantitative and or qualitative procedures that will be used
to evaluate the success of the project.
9. Any plans for peer or other reviews of the study design or analytical
methods prior to data collection.
ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems
for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs"
is available for purchase from the American Society for Quality
Control, phone 1-800-248-1946, item T55. Only in exceptional circumstances
should it be necessary to consult this document.
J. Postcard: The Applicant must include with the application a self addressed, stamped 3x5-inch post card. This will be used to acknowledge receipt of the application and to transmit other important information to the applicant.
How to Apply
The original and ten (10) copies of the fully developed application and five (5) additional copies of the abstract (15 in all), must be received by NCER no later than 4:00 P.M. EST on the closing date assigned to this topic area: February 12, 1998.
The application and abstract must be prepared in accordance with
these instructions. Informal, incomplete, or unsigned proposals
will not be considered. The application should not be bound or stapled
in any way. The original and copies of the application should be
secured with paper or binder clips. Completed applications should
be sent via regular mail to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Peer Review Division (8703R)
Sorting Code: 98-NCERQA-L1
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC 20460
For express mail applications, the following address must be
used:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Peer Review Division (8703R)
Sorting Code: 98-NCERQA-L1
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Room B-10105
Washington, DC 20004
Phone: (202) 564-6939 (for express mail applications)
The sorting code must be identified in the address (as shown above).
Guidelines, Limitations, and Additional Requirements
Proposals must be submitted to only one topic area, using a single sorting code. Proposals submitted to more than one RFA topic will be assigned to the topic designated on the first version received or to the first sorting code designated on the application. If you wish to submit more than one application, you must ensure that the research proposed is significantly different from that in any other that has been submitted to this solicitation or from any other grant you are currently receiving from EPA or any other federal government agency.
Projects which contain subcontracts constituting more than 40% of the total direct cost of the grant for each year in which the subcontract is awarded will be subject to special review and may require additional justification.
Researchers will be expected to budget for and participate in an
annual All-Investigators Meeting with EPA scientists and other grantees
to report on research activities and to discuss issues of mutual
interest.
Review and Selection
All grant applications are initially reviewed by EPA
to determine their legal and administrative acceptability. Acceptable
applications are then reviewed by an appropriate technical peer
review group. This review is designed to evaluate each proposal
according to its scientific merit. In general, each review group
is composed of non-EPA scientists, engineers, social scientists,
and/or economists who are experts in their respective disciplines
and are proficient in the technical areas they are reviewing. The
reviewers use the following criteria to help them in their reviews:
1. The originality and creativity of the proposed research, the
appropriateness and adequacy of the research methods proposed, and
the appropriateness and adequacy of the Quality Assurance Narrative
Statement. Is the research approach practical and technically defensible,
and can the project be performed within the proposed time period?
Will the research contribute to scientific knowledge in the topic
area of the solicitation? Is the proposal well-prepared with supportive
information that is self-explanatory and understandable?
2. The qualifications of the principal investigator(s) and other
key personnel, including research training, demonstrated knowledge
of pertinent literature, experience, and publication records. Will
all key personnel contribute a significant time commitment to the
project?
3. The availability and/or adequacy of the facilities and equipment
proposed for the project. Are there any deficiencies that may interfere
with the successful completion of the research?
4. The responsiveness of the proposal to the research needs identified
for the topic area. Does the proposal adequately address all of
the objectives specified for this topic area?
5. Although budget information is not used by the reviewers as the
basis for their evaluation of scientific merit, the reviewers are
asked to provide their view on the appropriateness and/or adequacy
of the proposed budget and its implications for the potential success
of the proposed research. Input on requested equipment is of particular
interest.
Applications that receive scores of sufficient scientific quality
based on the peer review are subjected to a programmatic review
within EPA, the object being to assure a balanced research portfolio
for the Agency. Scientists from the ORD Laboratories and EPA Program
and Regional Offices review these applications in relation to program
priorities and their complementarity to the ORD intramural program
and make recommendations to NCER.
Funding decisions are the sole responsibility of NCER. Grants are
selected on the basis of technical merit, relevancy to the research
priorities outlined, program balance, and budget. A summary statement
of the scientific review by the peer panel will be provided to each
applicant.
Applications selected for funding will require additional certifications,
possibly a revised budget, and responses to any comments or suggestions
offered by the peer reviewers. Project officers will contact principal
investigators to obtain these materials.
Proprietary Information
By submitting an application in response to this solicitation, the applicant grants EPA permission to share the application with technical reviewers both within and outside of the Agency. Applications containing proprietary or other types of confidential information will be returned to the applicant without review.
Funding Mechanism
The funding mechanism for all awards issued under this solicitation
will consist of grants from EPA and depends on the availability
of funds. In accordance with Public Law 95-224, the primary purpose
of a grant is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation
authorized by Federal statute rather than acquisition for the direct
benefit of the Agency. In issuing a grant agreement, EPA anticipates
that there will be no substantial EPA involvement in the design,
implementation, or conduct of the research funded by the grant.
However, EPA will monitor research progress, based in part on annual
reports provided by awardees.
Contacts
Additional general information on the grants program,
forms used for applications, etc., may be obtained by exploring
our Web page at <http://www.epa.gov/ncerqa>. EPA does
not intend to make mass mailings of this announcement. Information
not available on the Internet may be obtained by contacting:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental Research
and Quality Assurance (8703R)
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC 20460
Phone: 1-800-490-9194
In addition, a contact person has been identified below for each topic within the RFA. These individuals will usually be the Project Officers for the grants funded under a particular topic. They will respond to inquires regarding the solicitation and can respond to any technical questions related to your application.
Regional Scale Analysis and Assessment
Barbara Levinson 202-564-6911
levinson.barbara@epamail.epa.gov
You need the required forms to complete an application for this grant. The grant forms are available in Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF) and can be downloaded and then read on screen and printed only if you have Adobe Acrobat Reader 2.1 or higher. The same forms can also be obtained via our Hotline automated FAX server (1-800-490-9194).
I need Adobe Acrobat Reader first...please take me to the Adobe download site.
I have it already and I have printed the HTML of the announcement above.....please let me download the PDF version of the STAR Research Grant Forms.
I have it already.....but I would like the PDF of this Announcement and the Grant Application Forms