8.1     Overview

Subject to the availability of funds from NASA, funding will be provided to support eligible investigators of approved proposals. It is anticipated that approximately 200 awards will be issued for an estimated total amount of $10.5M. In the case of Co-Is seeking funding, it is planned for awards to be issued directly to the Co-I’s institution in order to avoid double charging of institutional overheads.

Any investigator whose proposal receives sufficiently high evaluations during the Stage 1 review and that requires financial support is invited to submit a Stage 2 Cost Proposal. See Section 8.3 for the eligibility requirements for funding.

Based on Stage 1 ratings, the Selecting Official (the CXC Director) will invite eligible investigators whose investigations were recommended by the peer review to submit a Stage 2 Cost Proposal. Proposers not recommended to proceed to Stage 2 are not prohibited from preparing a Stage 2 proposal, but they should be aware that their proposed investigation is unlikely to be selected. Optional Education and Public Outreach (EPO) proposals will also be solicited from successful Stage 1 proposers (see Chapter 9). Stage 2 and EPO proposals will be due in accordance with the deadlines listed in Table 1.1.

8.2     Content and Submission of Cost Proposals

PI and Co-I Cost Proposals are required to be submitted both electronically, using the Remote Proposal System (RPS), and via hardcopy. If electronic submission is impossible, hardcopy only will be accepted. Hardcopies may be generated either using RPS or using the PDF forms available at http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/sp/forms/GO_forms.html

Each separately funded Co-I at a different institution shall submit their hardcopy to the PI for inclusion in the PIs Cost Proposal package. The electronic version of a Co-I proposal shall be submitted to the CXC directly. Co-I hardcopy proposals arriving under separate cover from that of the PI will not be accepted.

Note that changes to the science proposal will not be allowed or considered in Stage 2.

For Joint Proposals, the Chandra X-ray Center, the Space Telescope Science Institute (http://www.stsci.edu/institute/) the XMM-Newton Guest Observer Facility (http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/xmm/xmmgof.html), and the Spitzer Science Center (http://ssc.spitzer.caltech.edu/propkit) will separately fund the observations performed with the appropriate satellite. The PI will need to submit both their observation specifications and a cost proposal to the relevant organization, following their schedule and using their forms. Cost proposals for all approved Chandra programs, including those awarded time as part of the HST or Spitzer proposal process will be due in accordance with the deadline listed in Table 1.1 XMM-Newton-approved projects may be requested to submit their cost proposals early due to the earlier allocation dates. Cost proposals must include:

 

1. The Chandra Cost Proposal Cover Page Form with institutional signature. Note that the Institution Administrative Contact information and Investigator information must be complete. This includes the email addresses for both the Administrative Contact and the Investigator. Group email addresses, e.g., sponsoredprojects@institution.edu, are not acceptable.
2. A budget using the Chandra Cost Proposal Budget Form (see the item “Cost Proposal and Funding Information” at (http://cxc.harvard.edu/). A Cost Proposal for each funded Co-I must be included. The PI’s Budget Form must include the totals of the Co-I’s budgets as line items in Section J of the Budget Form
3. A succinct one or two page Budget Justification. The Budget Justification should include a breakdown of the work assignments for all funded investigators taking part in the investigation, justification for any funded line item including any major purchases such as workstations, and justification of foreign or domestic travel. Funding for observing proposals is normally issued after the data from the first successful observation is released to the PI. Funding for Archival Research, Theory/Modeling, and Joint Observing Projects is issued at the beginning of the observing cycle. If the PI requires more than a one-year period-of-performance, he/she may request a longer period-of-performance (up to two years) in his/her proposal, with supporting justification. For Target of Opportunity proposals, the budget justification must show the breakdown of funding for each approved target. If there is more than one approved target, the award may be incrementally funded as each target is successfully observed and the data is released to the PI.
4. A written certification for any workstation and general-purpose equipment costing $5,000 or more. The certification form can be found at http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/sp/forms/GO_forms.html
5. A List of Current and Pending Support Information must be provided for all ongoing and pending projects and proposals that involve the proposing PI and any Co-Is who are requesting funding. This information must be provided for each such individual for each of the following two categories of awards that may exist at the time of the proposal submission deadline:
   • Current Awards (for any of the period that overlaps with the submitted proposal), and
   • Pending Awards (including the proposal being submitted to CXC).

   For each of these two categories, using a format of the proposers choosing, provide the following information: name of the investigator, project title, sponsoring agency, period-of-performance, amount of award or total proposed budget, and commitment by PI (or Co-I) in terms of a fraction of a full-time equivalent (FTE) work year. If the PI and each funded Co-I have no Current or Pending Support, then include a statement to that effect.

6. A copy of the applicant institution’s federally-approved Indirect Cost (IDC) Rate Agreement (required for PI institution and any Co-I institutions). Note – If multiple proposals are being submitted by the same institution, then one copy of the IDC per applicant institution is sufficient.
7. Certifications and and Assurances Required by U.S. Code: The signature of the Institutional Representative on the Budget Form verifies that the proposing organization complies with the required certifications and assurances (see Appendix A for full text); therefore, they do not need to be independently signed and submitted.

The Budget Form and Justification must contain estimated costs for the following potential expenditures:

• salaries and wages: List personnel, individual person-months, and total cost for each individual.
• other direct labor: Costs and/or stipends for Individuals providing research assistance, such as graduate students, post-doctoral research associates or science data aides.
• fringe benefits
• equipment: Provide estimated costs for workstations and other equipment. List items separately. Explain the need for items costing more than $5,000. Describe the basis for estimated cost. General-purpose equipment is not allowable as a direct cost unless specifically approved by the SAO Grant Officer. Any general-purpose equipment purchase requested to be made as a direct charge under this award must include the equipment description, how it will be used in the conduct of the proposed research and a written certification that the equipment will be used exclusively for research activities. The certification form can be found at http:// www.cfa.harvard.edu/sp/forms/GO_forms.html  (See below for additional information on workstation requests.)
• travel: Describe the purpose of the proposed travel, specifically who will be traveling, the departure location and destination, estimated airfare and per diem rates, length of trip, the relationship of the travel to the grant, and the basis of cost estimate. [Note: For Nonprofit Nonacademic Organizations, foreign travel destinations listed on the proposal must be specific. If additional foreign travel is added or if the destination changes after the proposal has been approved, prior approval from the SAO Grant Awards Section is required by the Code of Federal Regulations, 2 CFR Part 230.51.e, Foreign Travel (OMB Circular A-122).]
• supplies: Provide general categories of needed supplies and the estimated cost.
• publication costs: Provide number of papers, total pages, and total cost.
• computer services: Provide type of service and total cost.
• other direct costs: Enter the total of direct costs not covered above. Provide an itemized list explaining the need for each item and the basis for the estimate.
• indirect costs: Provide the name of the cognizant Federal agency, date of negotiation agreement, rate(s), base, and total. Attach a copy of the rate agreement per Section 8.2, Item 6 above.
• subtotal: Enter the sum of items above.
• co-I awards: Provide name, institution, and total dollar amount for each Co-I requesting funds.
• project total: Total cost of support being requested for the project.

Allowability of the above costs is dependent upon conformance with the Terms and Conditions for CXC Observing Program Awards (see http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/sp/polices/grants.html for the Terms and Conditions currently being used for Cycle 8; the Terms and Conditions for Cycle 10 will be posted at a later date).

While proposals from investigators working at for-profit organizations are eligible for funding, profit is unallowable; however, management fees of up to 3% may be permitted on a case-by-case basis.

Proposals involving NASA employees as either a PI or as a Co-I should use the full cost accounting method authorized at their Centers at the time proposals are due for the entire proposed period-of-performance.

Note that when a cost proposal requests funds for both PI and Co-Is at different institutions, each Co-I must also submit a complete cost proposal package (all six items described above) and these must be submitted with the PI cost proposal as one package. In the case of a non-U.S. PI (ineligible for funding) and U.S. Co-Is, the U.S. Co-Is can apply for funding but one Co-I must take the lead as “Administrative PI” for the cost proposal package. This person will have overall oversight and responsibility for the budget submissions of the U.S. Co-Is. The Cost Proposal Cover Page Form for both the PI and all Co-Is requesting funding must have the original signature of the institution’s authorized signatory.

To assure compatibility with NASA’s data systems, requested workstation systems must be capable of establishing one of the existing portable data analysis environments supported by the CXC. Information on the minimum computer system and platforms on which the software is available can be found on the CXC web page (http://cxc.harvard.edu/) (click on “Data Analysis” and then “Download”) or by direct link at http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/download.html.

Requests for workstations must be justified in the Budget Justification. Workstations are not allowable as a direct cost unless specifically justified. Any equipment purchase requested to be made as a direct charge under this award must include the equipment description, how it will be used in the conduct of the basic research proposed, why it cannot be purchased with indirect funds, and a statement certifying that the equipment will be used exclusively for research and not for general business or administrative purposes (http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/sp/forms/GO_forms.html). Regardless of whether the request is through direct or indirect costs, the justification must be provided and should briefly describe the computing capabilities that exist or are expected to exist at the proposers institution during the period in which the proposed research would be performed and then explain the impact to the proposed work if the request for the additional workstation is declined. The budget request for workstations must be clearly stated on the Budget Form as a line item.

Further information and instructions can be found on the CXC website: (http://cxc.harvard.edu/funding.html).

8.3     Eligibility for Grant Funds

Proposals for funding will be accepted from institutions/organizations described in Section 3.1.

Funding for these programs may be requested by scientists who are:

• U.S. Citizens residing in the United States;
• U.S. Citizens residing abroad if salary/stipend and support are being paid by a U.S. institution; and
• U.S. permanent residents and foreign national scientists working in the United States if salary/stipend and support are being paid by U.S. institutions.

(Note: U.S. is defined as the 50 states and the District of Columbia.) These definitions include U.S. Co-Is on observing projects with non-U.S. PIs.

Proposals by non-U.S. PIs that have one or more U.S. Co-Is who require funding must designate one of the U.S. Co-Is as the “Administrative PI”. This person will have general oversight and responsibility for the budget submissions by the U.S. Co-Is in Stage 2.

When a U.S. investigator obtains grant funds for a project that involves non-U.S. investigators, no funding may flow through the U.S. investigator to the non-U.S. investigators. This prohibition includes funding for travel.

8.3.1 Switching Institutions

Investigators who are switching institutions during a grant award period and whose current institution agrees to a transfer should contact the CXC and/or the SAO grants office as soon as possible to arrange for their award to be transferred to the new institution with the minimum of delay. Please see Section XIX, “Transferring the Award” of the SAO terms and Conditions for details of this process.

Investigators whose affiliation changes from a US to a non-US Institution cannot retain their NASA funding. However if, as a result of the PI’s move, other US-based co-Is of the original proposal have taken on a larger share of the work, it may be possible for that funding to be officially transferred to the relevant US-based co-I. The PI is should contact the CXC Helpdesk to discuss this matter.

Investigators who move from a foreign institution to a US-based institution within a year of the original science proposal submission may be eligible for funding and should contact the CXC helpdesk for more information.

8.4     Evaluation of Budgets

Each approved science proposal with US-based PIs and/or Co-Is will be allocated a fair share budget. Starting with Cycle 10, Cost Proposals including a budget which is less than or at (or very close to) the fair share allocation will not be subject to an external review. Cost Proposals requesting a budget above the fair share allocation will be reviewed by a subset of the Stage 1 peer review panelists. PIs who request a budget higher than the fair share allocation should include a detailed justification for the requested funding level in their proposal. The fair share budget allocation is based on the scientific/technical rating of the proposed investigation by the peer review, the amount of allocated Chandra time, the number of targets approved and an evaluation of the level of effort required to complete the data analysis and interpretation phase of the project. In the case of an Archival Research or Theory/Modeling proposal, the fair share allocation is based upon the budget proposed by the PI, the scientific/technical rating and the availability of funds.  The relative value of any highly rated proposals for Archival or Theory/Modeling Research will be considered against the perceived value of proposals for new observations, taking into account the critical resources of available funds and the amount of CXO observing time. The criteria used in the Stage 2 evaluation of the proposals will be: the total cost of the investigation, including cost realism and reasonableness, in the context of the anticipated level of effort required to carry out the investigation successfully, and the total proposed cost in relation to available funds.

The EPO proposals will undergo a separate review (see Chapter 9). The submission or not of an EPO proposal has no relevance or bearing on the budget for the research proposal.

8.5     Selection

After receipt and evaluation of Stage 2 proposals, selection will be made based on the Stage 1 evaluation of scientific merit and technical feasibility and the Stage 2 evaluation of proposed costs. Based on the totality of these evaluations, a recommended set of proposals will be delivered to the Selecting Official for final selection and award. Given the submission of proposals of sufficient merit, it is anticipated that approximately 200 investigations, including those for Archival Research and Theory/Modeling Research, will be recommended for selection. The CXC reserves the right to offer selections at a reduced level of cost and/or observing time from that proposed in order to fit within the program constraints. Proposers to this program should further understand that the lack of either monetary or observing time resources are sufficient grounds for not selecting a proposal even though it may have been judged to be of high intrinsic scientific merit.

8.6     Grant Award

The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) is under contract to NASA to operate the CXC, and therefore CXC grants will be issued and administered by the SAO Grant Awards Section, with the exception of awards issued to NASA Centers (including JPL) and Other Federal Agencies. For the latter, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center will be responsible for the transfer of funds as well as the administration of these awards.

It is important to note that until an award is made, there is no guarantee that the recommended financial resources will be available and that awards are made to the proposing institution and not directly to the PI.

Those proposers selected for award by the CXC will be notified of the recommended funding level for their investigation.  Revised budgets will not be required to be submitted when the amount approved for funding is within twenty percent (20%) of the proposed amount.  However, if there are separately funded Co-Is on the project, the PI must provide the Grant Awards Section, in writing, the revised information on how funds are to be allocated.  In cases where the reallocation of funds will result in a difference exceeding 20% of the original budget submitted by the PI or any individual Co-I, a revised budget will be required to be submitted by that investigator.  Awards to winning proposers will be implemented through the issuance of grants. No awards will be funded by the contract mechanism.

Following selection and notification, the CXC will communicate formally only with the PI, or, in the event that the PI is unavailable, the CXC will communicate with the person identified in the proposal as the Observing Investigator. It will be the PI’s responsibility to respond to any questions concerning observational constraints or configurations.

Grants awarded for programs that do not include new Chandra observations (e.g., Archival Research and Theory/Modeling projects) as well as Joint Observing projects will be issued at the beginning of the Cycle, and spending against the grant may commence as soon as both SAO and the Recipient Institution have signed off on the grant. Those grantees that include new Chandra observations will receive their awards when the data from their first observations have been successfully processed and delivered to the PI. Target of Opportunity awards with more than one approved target may be incrementally funded as each target is successfully observed and the data is released to the PI. Depending on the availability of funds, the Award should arrive approximately one-month after the first processed data has been distributed to the PI. A copy of the Award will go to the Investigator cited in the approved proposal, with the original Award documents sent via overnight courier to the Recipient Institution.

Funding for observing awards is normally issued after the data from the first successful observation is released to the PI. Funding for Archival Research, Theory/Modeling, and Joint Observing awards is issued at the beginning of the observing cycle. If the PI requires more than a one-year period-of-performance, he/she may request a longer period-of-performance (up to two years) in his/her proposal, with supporting justification. A one-year no-cost extension is available upon request should work not be completed during the initial award period.  Second one-year extensions may also be granted when justified.

We will continue to issue awards with a two-year period-of-performance when requested in the submitted budget. Please note that the Code of Federal Regulations, 2 CFR Part 215 Section 215.51, Monitoring and Reporting Program Performance, requires that a Program Performance Report be submitted at least annually for all multi-year awards. This Annual Report must be submitted thirty (30) days prior to the end of each twelve-month period. The eligibility of individual Investigators to receive future multi-year awards will depend upon recipients’ compliance with the Annual Report requirement.

In unusual cases where the PI requires work to be accomplished prior to the observation, up to 25% of the approved funds can be awarded before the first observation has been taken. If preparatory funds are required, the PI shall submit a written justification to the SAO Grant Awards Section after the investigator’s institution has received notification that it will be receiving funding.

All grants will be administered in accordance with the Terms and Conditions for CXC Observing Program Awards (or see the Terms and Conditions currently being used for Cycle 8; the Terms and Conditions for Cycle 10 will be posted at a later date).

8.7     Contact Information for Cost Proposals

Questions concerning the Stage 2 Cost Proposals may be addressed to:

Grant Awards Section
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
60 Garden Street, Mail Stop 22
Cambridge, MA 02138-1516
Email: grants@cfa.harvard.edu
Telephone: 617-496-7705
Fax: 617-495-4224

Technical questions regarding the Remote Proposal System (RPS) should be directed to the CXC HelpDesk at http://cxc.harvard.edu/helpdesk/ or by email to “cxchelp@cfa.harvard.edu”

Address for courier (e.g., FedEx) delivery of hardcopies:

Grant Awards Section

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory

100 Acorn Park Drive, Mail Stop 22

     Cambridge, MA 02140-2302