The Swift Cycle 17 Peer Review will take place in the Washington DC metropolitan area in early December 2020. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. "D����&�Ez���Ӈ����a`�+�����[� 8[r
GIs that are successful in Phase 1 will be invited to submit detailed budgets for review in Phase 2, provided the GI is eligible for funding (i.e., is at a US institution).
%PDF-1.6
%����
NASA Information for Investigators . Joint Swift/NRAO Program: NRAO
Such budget requests will be considered, provided they are strongly justified. The primary motivation for reviewing proposals in a dual-anonymous fashion is to minimize unconscious bias in the review process. %%EOF
Radio data acquired through the Swift GI Program will be property of the proposers for the standard NRAO 12-month proprietary period. PIs are required to upload a one-page "Team Expertise" PDF through ARK as a separate upload when submitting the science justification. Fill-In Proposals: No funding will be provided for proposals in the "Fill-in" category, therefore no Phase-2 budget proposal is requested.
The award of Swift observing time will be made to highly ranked Chandra proposals and will be subject to approval by the Swift Project. Regardless of whether a Co-I will be funded through a subaward via the proposing institution or funded directly by NASA, the budget for the proposal must include all funding requested from NASA for the proposed investigation so as to facilitate the review of the budget by the grant officer upon which the award is contingent.
At that time the peer reviewers will have the opportunity to comment on the qualifications and capabilities of the team. UVOT grism observations are not part of the Fill-in program, and can not be requested through proposals in this category. Proposals are due Friday, September 25, 2020, 7:30 PM EDT. The Swift GI program is part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space And Earth Science 2020 (ROSES 2020). References! The exact date and location are still to be determined at this point.
Collected for NASA records - does not effect acceptance of the proposal.
If any duplications exist, they must be identified and justified in the proposal. %%EOF
Standard Proposal Style Formats . Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
A PDF file containing the text of your proposal, uploaded via the.
endstream
endobj
116 0 obj
<. It is the responsibility of the proposers to check the proposed observations against the catalog of previously executed observations (see the Swift Archive) or accepted programs (see below).
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, STScI in the evaluation of Hubble Space Telescope observing proposals in recent cycles, Guidelines for Anonymous Proposals document, ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 "Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Cycle 17", Description of the Swift Guest Investigator Program, Appendix D.5 Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator - Cycle 17, Swift Cycle 2 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2005 Selection List, Swift Cycle 3 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2006 Selection List, Swift Cycle 4 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2007 Selection List, Swift Cycle 5 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2008 Selection List, Swift Cycle 6 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2009 Selection List, Swift Cycle 7 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2010 Selection List, Swift Cycle 8 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2011 Selection List, Swift Cycle 9 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2012 Selection List, Swift Cycle 10 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2013 Selection List, Swift Cycle 11 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2014 Selection List, Swift Cycle 12 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2015 Selection List, Swift Cycle 13 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2016 Selection List, Swift Cycle 14 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2017 Selection List, Swift Cycle 15 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2018 Selection List, Swift Cycle 16 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2019 Selection List.
To download a working excel document click here. Duplication policies: an observation is a duplication of another observation if it is on the same astronomical target or field, and it is performed with the same instrument. Proposals that request changes to Swift on-board capabilities or operational procedures may require special scrutiny during the review process and may require approval by the Swift team before implementation.
The experience from the Hubble Space Telescope dual-anonymous reviews is that revising previous proposals to be compliant requires some thought but is straightforward in most cases. X��c�0H30�2�3[0�0u� The previous limitation that no more than 500 time-constrained observations could be performed has been removed. permits the Swift GI Program to award up to 5% of NRAO scientific observing time on NRAO's VLA, GBT and VLBA, or up to 200-300 hours per year on each telescope. Proposals submitted after the proposal deadline will not be considered. endstream
endobj
startxref
Software, response matrices, count rate simulators for Swift simulations. Research Associate 4.
Theory Proposals: Theory proposals are not restricted to GRB investigations and will be considered provided that they address the degree to which the investigations directly advance Swift science goals.
Note that any detailed budget you submit for Phase 2 must be less than or equal to the Anticipated Total Budget entered here. **Proposals containing insufficient detail will not be considered** Salaries and Fringe: _____ Proposers may use the LaTeX template or the Word template for the scientific justification. Proposals requesting funds need to include a budget narrative. 115 0 obj
<>
endobj
The Swift's Guest Investigator (GI) Program, part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES) Announcement, provides opportunities for Guest Investigators (GIs) to carry out basic research relevant to the Swift Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) mission. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. 8+0��2ܸY���~����|�x�)J��dd`��
��n iN�e!F@&�e0������"6�M[ :� ��
The budget narrative is sometimes referred to as the budget justification. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. NSPIRES web page with links to the ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 with all details of the Swift Cycle 17 elements. No funds will be provided from the Swift Project for such joint Swift/XMM-Newton investigations. Joint Swift/XMM-Newton Program: Proposers interested in making use of Swift time as part of their XMM-Newton science investigation may submit a single proposal in response to the XMM-Newton Announcement of Opportunity. Swift proposers can receive funds to carry out, U.S.
Beginning in Cycle 17, all Phase-1 proposals submitted to the Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Program will be evaluated following a dual-anonymous peer review process. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Release of Funds: Funds will be released to successful U.S. PIs after the start of FY21 (October 2020). 0
Proposers should address how the use of their facilities will complement the Swift science program. Provided below is a justification template for such proposals. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs.
If you feel you are qualified to be considered as a reviewer, please contact the Swift GI Lead, Dr. Eleonora Troja, by sending an email to the HEASARC Peer Review Mailbox and mention that you are interested in being a reviewer for Swift Cycle 17. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. NASA Oklahoma EPSCoR RID Proposal Budget Budget must include detailed costs for all categories. %PDF-1.5
%����
3.
The extent to which the proposed research will enhance the science return from Swift will be considered in the proposal evaluation process.
For coordinated and constrained observations, it is the proposer's responsibility to inform the Swift Science Operations Team (by sending a ToO request) of the observing time window at least one week before observations commence. Scientific Justification (4 page limit, including figures, tables, and references; 6 page limit for Key Projects and high-z IR correlative proposals). The LaTeX template or the Word template is available. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Guidelines for Preparing the Proposal Budget Form The offeror shall electronically submit a price proposal of estimated costs with detailed information for each cost element, consistent with the offeror's cost accounting and estimating system. Proposals in this category may request support for new Swift projects, theoretical investigations, observations of non-GRB non-ToO targets, and observations of ToO targets. Direct Labor Profit Rate / Cost Sharing Budget Allocated $0.00 /$750,ooo.oo Milestone Plan DO any Of these additional components apply to your proposed research? However, the font size and margins should meet the proposal style format requirement described in the ROSES Summary of Solicitation. As during previous cycles, the detailed cost evaluation will be deferred until Phase 2 (budget review). The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes. %%EOF
This is the probability that the proposed source will meet its trigger criteria during Cycle 17. h�b``Pd``�����8-���1�4a�0f`e�g�ata�`�rq�hdX�)��A.�.aJ�c�,�Ol� ���"a�{�r�4d6H,0:�I�Ń�C�@y�탖��]z�����O`�Li�f�-7���z�C����LV�4#w�
g��� ��c�
If no strong justification is provided, all observations will be performed in "filter of the day" mode. Below we distill the highlights.
The narrative serves two purposes: it explains how the costs were estimated and it justifies the need for the cost. Budget Narrative: Proposers must submit a budget narrative that explains in sufficient detail how the proposed funds will be used to achieve the goals outlined in the proposal. "Key Projects" proposals may also require funding in the range of $100,000 per year. h�bbd```b``N�� �q�d�"����"X�f��M��`v��&c�"�lW0,�xDr��m��a~`v��? Reviewing NASA proposals: From External Reviews to Review Panel! h�bbd```b``N��+@$�Gɰ,�D2,Gb#ˮ���`s��&X��D�H��&!�׃�l0�"� j�����H��`�خP��,�&�@��u�.S ɘ�f�Q��q$q��Dʂ]��$�=��w.���#������:@� S�! �)��(W�]>�zv�B�v��=w��� � C��``R� r@���aBL�Pu��PA4�0��@Z
The Swift Cycle 17 Peer Review will take place in the Washington DC metropolitan area in early December 2020. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. "D����&�Ez���Ӈ����a`�+�����[� 8[r
GIs that are successful in Phase 1 will be invited to submit detailed budgets for review in Phase 2, provided the GI is eligible for funding (i.e., is at a US institution).
%PDF-1.6
%����
NASA Information for Investigators . Joint Swift/NRAO Program: NRAO
Such budget requests will be considered, provided they are strongly justified. The primary motivation for reviewing proposals in a dual-anonymous fashion is to minimize unconscious bias in the review process. %%EOF
Radio data acquired through the Swift GI Program will be property of the proposers for the standard NRAO 12-month proprietary period. PIs are required to upload a one-page "Team Expertise" PDF through ARK as a separate upload when submitting the science justification. Fill-In Proposals: No funding will be provided for proposals in the "Fill-in" category, therefore no Phase-2 budget proposal is requested.
The award of Swift observing time will be made to highly ranked Chandra proposals and will be subject to approval by the Swift Project. Regardless of whether a Co-I will be funded through a subaward via the proposing institution or funded directly by NASA, the budget for the proposal must include all funding requested from NASA for the proposed investigation so as to facilitate the review of the budget by the grant officer upon which the award is contingent.
At that time the peer reviewers will have the opportunity to comment on the qualifications and capabilities of the team. UVOT grism observations are not part of the Fill-in program, and can not be requested through proposals in this category. Proposals are due Friday, September 25, 2020, 7:30 PM EDT. The Swift GI program is part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space And Earth Science 2020 (ROSES 2020). References! The exact date and location are still to be determined at this point.
Collected for NASA records - does not effect acceptance of the proposal.
If any duplications exist, they must be identified and justified in the proposal. %%EOF
Standard Proposal Style Formats . Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
A PDF file containing the text of your proposal, uploaded via the.
endstream
endobj
116 0 obj
<. It is the responsibility of the proposers to check the proposed observations against the catalog of previously executed observations (see the Swift Archive) or accepted programs (see below).
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, STScI in the evaluation of Hubble Space Telescope observing proposals in recent cycles, Guidelines for Anonymous Proposals document, ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 "Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Cycle 17", Description of the Swift Guest Investigator Program, Appendix D.5 Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator - Cycle 17, Swift Cycle 2 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2005 Selection List, Swift Cycle 3 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2006 Selection List, Swift Cycle 4 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2007 Selection List, Swift Cycle 5 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2008 Selection List, Swift Cycle 6 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2009 Selection List, Swift Cycle 7 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2010 Selection List, Swift Cycle 8 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2011 Selection List, Swift Cycle 9 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2012 Selection List, Swift Cycle 10 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2013 Selection List, Swift Cycle 11 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2014 Selection List, Swift Cycle 12 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2015 Selection List, Swift Cycle 13 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2016 Selection List, Swift Cycle 14 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2017 Selection List, Swift Cycle 15 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2018 Selection List, Swift Cycle 16 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2019 Selection List.
To download a working excel document click here. Duplication policies: an observation is a duplication of another observation if it is on the same astronomical target or field, and it is performed with the same instrument. Proposals that request changes to Swift on-board capabilities or operational procedures may require special scrutiny during the review process and may require approval by the Swift team before implementation.
The experience from the Hubble Space Telescope dual-anonymous reviews is that revising previous proposals to be compliant requires some thought but is straightforward in most cases. X��c�0H30�2�3[0�0u� The previous limitation that no more than 500 time-constrained observations could be performed has been removed. permits the Swift GI Program to award up to 5% of NRAO scientific observing time on NRAO's VLA, GBT and VLBA, or up to 200-300 hours per year on each telescope. Proposals submitted after the proposal deadline will not be considered. endstream
endobj
startxref
Software, response matrices, count rate simulators for Swift simulations. Research Associate 4.
Theory Proposals: Theory proposals are not restricted to GRB investigations and will be considered provided that they address the degree to which the investigations directly advance Swift science goals.
Note that any detailed budget you submit for Phase 2 must be less than or equal to the Anticipated Total Budget entered here. **Proposals containing insufficient detail will not be considered** Salaries and Fringe: _____ Proposers may use the LaTeX template or the Word template for the scientific justification. Proposals requesting funds need to include a budget narrative. 115 0 obj
<>
endobj
The Swift's Guest Investigator (GI) Program, part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES) Announcement, provides opportunities for Guest Investigators (GIs) to carry out basic research relevant to the Swift Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) mission. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. 8+0��2ܸY���~����|�x�)J��dd`��
��n iN�e!F@&�e0������"6�M[ :� ��
The budget narrative is sometimes referred to as the budget justification. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. NSPIRES web page with links to the ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 with all details of the Swift Cycle 17 elements. No funds will be provided from the Swift Project for such joint Swift/XMM-Newton investigations. Joint Swift/XMM-Newton Program: Proposers interested in making use of Swift time as part of their XMM-Newton science investigation may submit a single proposal in response to the XMM-Newton Announcement of Opportunity. Swift proposers can receive funds to carry out, U.S.
Beginning in Cycle 17, all Phase-1 proposals submitted to the Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Program will be evaluated following a dual-anonymous peer review process. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Release of Funds: Funds will be released to successful U.S. PIs after the start of FY21 (October 2020). 0
Proposers should address how the use of their facilities will complement the Swift science program. Provided below is a justification template for such proposals. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs.
If you feel you are qualified to be considered as a reviewer, please contact the Swift GI Lead, Dr. Eleonora Troja, by sending an email to the HEASARC Peer Review Mailbox and mention that you are interested in being a reviewer for Swift Cycle 17. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. NASA Oklahoma EPSCoR RID Proposal Budget Budget must include detailed costs for all categories. %PDF-1.5
%����
3.
The extent to which the proposed research will enhance the science return from Swift will be considered in the proposal evaluation process.
For coordinated and constrained observations, it is the proposer's responsibility to inform the Swift Science Operations Team (by sending a ToO request) of the observing time window at least one week before observations commence. Scientific Justification (4 page limit, including figures, tables, and references; 6 page limit for Key Projects and high-z IR correlative proposals). The LaTeX template or the Word template is available. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Guidelines for Preparing the Proposal Budget Form The offeror shall electronically submit a price proposal of estimated costs with detailed information for each cost element, consistent with the offeror's cost accounting and estimating system. Proposals in this category may request support for new Swift projects, theoretical investigations, observations of non-GRB non-ToO targets, and observations of ToO targets. Direct Labor Profit Rate / Cost Sharing Budget Allocated $0.00 /$750,ooo.oo Milestone Plan DO any Of these additional components apply to your proposed research? However, the font size and margins should meet the proposal style format requirement described in the ROSES Summary of Solicitation. As during previous cycles, the detailed cost evaluation will be deferred until Phase 2 (budget review). The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes. %%EOF
This is the probability that the proposed source will meet its trigger criteria during Cycle 17. h�b``Pd``�����8-���1�4a�0f`e�g�ata�`�rq�hdX�)��A.�.aJ�c�,�Ol� ���"a�{�r�4d6H,0:�I�Ń�C�@y�탖��]z�����O`�Li�f�-7���z�C����LV�4#w�
g��� ��c�
If no strong justification is provided, all observations will be performed in "filter of the day" mode. Below we distill the highlights.
The narrative serves two purposes: it explains how the costs were estimated and it justifies the need for the cost. Budget Narrative: Proposers must submit a budget narrative that explains in sufficient detail how the proposed funds will be used to achieve the goals outlined in the proposal. "Key Projects" proposals may also require funding in the range of $100,000 per year. h�bbd```b``N�� �q�d�"����"X�f��M��`v��&c�"�lW0,�xDr��m��a~`v��? Reviewing NASA proposals: From External Reviews to Review Panel! h�bbd```b``N��+@$�Gɰ,�D2,Gb#ˮ���`s��&X��D�H��&!�׃�l0�"� j�����H��`�خP��,�&�@��u�.S ɘ�f�Q��q$q��Dʂ]��$�=��w.���#������:@� S�! �)��(W�]>�zv�B�v��=w��� � C��``R� r@���aBL�Pu��PA4�0��@Z
[vc_row css=".vc_custom_1522215636001{padding-top: 50px !important;}"][vc_column][vc_column_text] PARTIES BY DYLAN & COMPANY OUR BIGGEST FANS ARE UNDER FIVE! [/vc_column_text][vc_separator color="custom" el_width="30" accent_color="#4a2f92"][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text el_class="sep-reduce"]
In the case of these proposals alone, proposers are allowed to exceed the average $40k budget range. 150 0 obj
<>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<306E0ED997CE4E4B91117F86CBE898DB>]/Index[115 71]/Info 114 0 R/Length 136/Prev 111790/Root 116 0 R/Size 186/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream
Single spaced, single column, font with no more than 15 characters per inch (Times New Roman 12 point font).
If you don't find the answer there, or have questions about the Swift instruments, mission, or simulation tools, contact the Swift Help Desk via our Feedback form. Proposals in this category must explicitly explain and strongly justify why the proposal represents a Swift "Key Project", and cannot be carried out as a regular GI program.
The Swift Cycle 17 Peer Review will take place in the Washington DC metropolitan area in early December 2020. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. "D����&�Ez���Ӈ����a`�+�����[� 8[r
GIs that are successful in Phase 1 will be invited to submit detailed budgets for review in Phase 2, provided the GI is eligible for funding (i.e., is at a US institution).
%PDF-1.6
%����
NASA Information for Investigators . Joint Swift/NRAO Program: NRAO
Such budget requests will be considered, provided they are strongly justified. The primary motivation for reviewing proposals in a dual-anonymous fashion is to minimize unconscious bias in the review process. %%EOF
Radio data acquired through the Swift GI Program will be property of the proposers for the standard NRAO 12-month proprietary period. PIs are required to upload a one-page "Team Expertise" PDF through ARK as a separate upload when submitting the science justification. Fill-In Proposals: No funding will be provided for proposals in the "Fill-in" category, therefore no Phase-2 budget proposal is requested.
The award of Swift observing time will be made to highly ranked Chandra proposals and will be subject to approval by the Swift Project. Regardless of whether a Co-I will be funded through a subaward via the proposing institution or funded directly by NASA, the budget for the proposal must include all funding requested from NASA for the proposed investigation so as to facilitate the review of the budget by the grant officer upon which the award is contingent.
At that time the peer reviewers will have the opportunity to comment on the qualifications and capabilities of the team. UVOT grism observations are not part of the Fill-in program, and can not be requested through proposals in this category. Proposals are due Friday, September 25, 2020, 7:30 PM EDT. The Swift GI program is part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space And Earth Science 2020 (ROSES 2020). References! The exact date and location are still to be determined at this point.
Collected for NASA records - does not effect acceptance of the proposal.
If any duplications exist, they must be identified and justified in the proposal. %%EOF
Standard Proposal Style Formats . Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
A PDF file containing the text of your proposal, uploaded via the.
endstream
endobj
116 0 obj
<. It is the responsibility of the proposers to check the proposed observations against the catalog of previously executed observations (see the Swift Archive) or accepted programs (see below).
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, STScI in the evaluation of Hubble Space Telescope observing proposals in recent cycles, Guidelines for Anonymous Proposals document, ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 "Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Cycle 17", Description of the Swift Guest Investigator Program, Appendix D.5 Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator - Cycle 17, Swift Cycle 2 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2005 Selection List, Swift Cycle 3 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2006 Selection List, Swift Cycle 4 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2007 Selection List, Swift Cycle 5 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2008 Selection List, Swift Cycle 6 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2009 Selection List, Swift Cycle 7 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2010 Selection List, Swift Cycle 8 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2011 Selection List, Swift Cycle 9 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2012 Selection List, Swift Cycle 10 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2013 Selection List, Swift Cycle 11 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2014 Selection List, Swift Cycle 12 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2015 Selection List, Swift Cycle 13 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2016 Selection List, Swift Cycle 14 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2017 Selection List, Swift Cycle 15 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2018 Selection List, Swift Cycle 16 NSPIRES page with link to PDF file containing 2019 Selection List.
To download a working excel document click here. Duplication policies: an observation is a duplication of another observation if it is on the same astronomical target or field, and it is performed with the same instrument. Proposals that request changes to Swift on-board capabilities or operational procedures may require special scrutiny during the review process and may require approval by the Swift team before implementation.
The experience from the Hubble Space Telescope dual-anonymous reviews is that revising previous proposals to be compliant requires some thought but is straightforward in most cases. X��c�0H30�2�3[0�0u� The previous limitation that no more than 500 time-constrained observations could be performed has been removed. permits the Swift GI Program to award up to 5% of NRAO scientific observing time on NRAO's VLA, GBT and VLBA, or up to 200-300 hours per year on each telescope. Proposals submitted after the proposal deadline will not be considered. endstream
endobj
startxref
Software, response matrices, count rate simulators for Swift simulations. Research Associate 4.
Theory Proposals: Theory proposals are not restricted to GRB investigations and will be considered provided that they address the degree to which the investigations directly advance Swift science goals.
Note that any detailed budget you submit for Phase 2 must be less than or equal to the Anticipated Total Budget entered here. **Proposals containing insufficient detail will not be considered** Salaries and Fringe: _____ Proposers may use the LaTeX template or the Word template for the scientific justification. Proposals requesting funds need to include a budget narrative. 115 0 obj
<>
endobj
The Swift's Guest Investigator (GI) Program, part of NASA's Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES) Announcement, provides opportunities for Guest Investigators (GIs) to carry out basic research relevant to the Swift Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) mission. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. 8+0��2ܸY���~����|�x�)J��dd`��
��n iN�e!F@&�e0������"6�M[ :� ��
The budget narrative is sometimes referred to as the budget justification. 2. a budget narrative template for use with proposals to federal sponsors. NSPIRES web page with links to the ROSES 2020 Appendix D.5 with all details of the Swift Cycle 17 elements. No funds will be provided from the Swift Project for such joint Swift/XMM-Newton investigations. Joint Swift/XMM-Newton Program: Proposers interested in making use of Swift time as part of their XMM-Newton science investigation may submit a single proposal in response to the XMM-Newton Announcement of Opportunity. Swift proposers can receive funds to carry out, U.S.
Beginning in Cycle 17, all Phase-1 proposals submitted to the Neil Gehrels Swift Guest Investigator Program will be evaluated following a dual-anonymous peer review process. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Release of Funds: Funds will be released to successful U.S. PIs after the start of FY21 (October 2020). 0
Proposers should address how the use of their facilities will complement the Swift science program. Provided below is a justification template for such proposals. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs.
If you feel you are qualified to be considered as a reviewer, please contact the Swift GI Lead, Dr. Eleonora Troja, by sending an email to the HEASARC Peer Review Mailbox and mention that you are interested in being a reviewer for Swift Cycle 17. The average award amount is in the $35- 40k range, except in special cases of "Key Projects" and correlative observations of high redshift GRBs. "Anticipated Total Budget": amount of funding you plan to request from NASA if your proposal is accepted. NASA Oklahoma EPSCoR RID Proposal Budget Budget must include detailed costs for all categories. %PDF-1.5
%����
3.
The extent to which the proposed research will enhance the science return from Swift will be considered in the proposal evaluation process.
For coordinated and constrained observations, it is the proposer's responsibility to inform the Swift Science Operations Team (by sending a ToO request) of the observing time window at least one week before observations commence. Scientific Justification (4 page limit, including figures, tables, and references; 6 page limit for Key Projects and high-z IR correlative proposals). The LaTeX template or the Word template is available. Please use this template as a guideline for NASA proposals to ROSES 2016, which prohibits the inclusion of all information regarding salaries, fringe benefits rates, indirect costs, or total costs from the main proposal document. Guidelines for Preparing the Proposal Budget Form The offeror shall electronically submit a price proposal of estimated costs with detailed information for each cost element, consistent with the offeror's cost accounting and estimating system. Proposals in this category may request support for new Swift projects, theoretical investigations, observations of non-GRB non-ToO targets, and observations of ToO targets. Direct Labor Profit Rate / Cost Sharing Budget Allocated $0.00 /$750,ooo.oo Milestone Plan DO any Of these additional components apply to your proposed research? However, the font size and margins should meet the proposal style format requirement described in the ROSES Summary of Solicitation. As during previous cycles, the detailed cost evaluation will be deferred until Phase 2 (budget review). The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes. %%EOF
This is the probability that the proposed source will meet its trigger criteria during Cycle 17. h�b``Pd``�����8-���1�4a�0f`e�g�ata�`�rq�hdX�)��A.�.aJ�c�,�Ol� ���"a�{�r�4d6H,0:�I�Ń�C�@y�탖��]z�����O`�Li�f�-7���z�C����LV�4#w�
g��� ��c�
If no strong justification is provided, all observations will be performed in "filter of the day" mode. Below we distill the highlights.
The narrative serves two purposes: it explains how the costs were estimated and it justifies the need for the cost. Budget Narrative: Proposers must submit a budget narrative that explains in sufficient detail how the proposed funds will be used to achieve the goals outlined in the proposal. "Key Projects" proposals may also require funding in the range of $100,000 per year. h�bbd```b``N�� �q�d�"����"X�f��M��`v��&c�"�lW0,�xDr��m��a~`v��? Reviewing NASA proposals: From External Reviews to Review Panel! h�bbd```b``N��+@$�Gɰ,�D2,Gb#ˮ���`s��&X��D�H��&!�׃�l0�"� j�����H��`�خP��,�&�@��u�.S ɘ�f�Q��q$q��Dʂ]��$�=��w.���#������:@� S�! �)��(W�]>�zv�B�v��=w��� � C��``R� r@���aBL�Pu��PA4�0��@Z
Call us: 