Directorate forEngineering

Engineering Educationand Centers

Engineering Educationand Centers

Engineering Educationand Centers

EPSCoR “Developing NSF Centers” Conference

Lexington, KY

March 23, 2001

Bruce M. KramerDivision Director

Engineering Education and Centers Divisionbkramer@nsf.gov

(703)292-5348

http://www.eng.nsf/eec

Driving Forces for Creation of NSFEngineering Research Centers

Program*

U.S. industry under threat from foreign competitors despite leading scientific excellence

Globalization of industry and markets Disconnect between academe and industry Academic engineering has lost its focus on

systems, integration, and engineering practice Graduates take too long to be productive in

industry

* ERC Program initiated in 1985 at recommendation of the National Academy of Engineering and industry

Goals of the Engineering Research Centers Program

Develop centers to integrate disciplines, research and education to produce next-generation innovations in engineered systems

Develop new generations of engineers, more effective in industry, better positioned to lead in a global economy

Develop partnerships between academe, industry, and government to strengthen the competitiveness of industry and the Nation

Key Features of an ERC

Strategic vision for advances in a next-generation engineered system and new generation of engineering leaders in a global economy;

Strategic plan to focus and integrate the ERC to deliver; Research synthesizes engineering, science, and other disciplines, from

discovery to proof-of-concept at the systems level; Education program integrating research & education producing new team

culture and curriculum innovations; Partnership with industry strengthens the ERC and achieves a more

effective flow of knowledge into innovation to benefit the Nation; Strong leadership; cohesive interdisciplinary team; diverse in gender, race,

and ethnicity; infrastructure of space, experimental equipment ; Dynamic, flexible program for outreach involving faculty and students

from other universities and colleges; A commitment from the academic, industrial, and other partners to

substantially leverage NSF’s funds and sustain the ERC

Vision & Strategic Plan

Research

Education IndustrialCollaboration

An NSF Engineering Research CenterA Complex, Interdependent System

Leadership &Management

Funds, Equipment,Facilities

Students,Faculty & Staff

Industry/Users

Graduates Knowledge Technology

ResearchIteration

ResearchIteration

SystemsPlane (Starting Point):

Fundamental Research

FundamentalResearch

Fundamental Research

Testbed

Interface with environment/marketplacein which system will be used

Testbed

SystemsResearch

Systems Research

ERC Strategic Concept

Fundamental Science Plane

SystemRequirements

EnablingTechnologyPlane

Deliverable

Deliverable

Deliverable

DeliverableDeliverable

Deliverable

Enabling Tech. ResearchEnabling Tech.

Research

Testbed

Effectiveness of the ERC Model

ERCs successfully integrate disciplines to produce numerous advances in knowledge, enabling and systems-level technology

ERCs have produced a wide range of courses, course materials, and degree programs/options advancing education in next-generation fields of technology

ERCs have produced students whom 90% of their supervisors in industry find more effective in carrying out their responsibilities than their single-investigator trained peers

ERCs have provided benefit to 90% of their industrial partners and impacted the competitiveness of 68% of them

Life Span of an ERC under NSF Support

Years 9 & 10, Phase Down1/3 of prior budget year

Third-YearRenewal Review

Sixth-year Renewal Review

Two-Year Phase-DownIf Terminated

Years One - Three Years Four - Six

Award One - Five YearsAward Two - Five Years,Starting in Year Four

Award Three - Four Years,Starting in Year Seven

Year 1 Year 3 Year 6 Year 10

ERC Program Management Strategies to Achieve

Program Goals ERC Key Features drive the ERC Competitions, pre-award review

and post-award oversight through evaluation criteria Post-award oversight by a lead ERC PD(EEC & other Divisions)

and a small team of other NSF PDs; Developmental post-award review process, using peer review

through site visits to determine strengths and weaknesses and suggest improvements;

Information on performance comes from annual reports/renewal proposals and data submitted to the ERC Program’s data base of indicators of performance;

Renewal reviews in 3rd & 6th years to cull out weak ERCs Strategic planning required to focus an ERC’s resources to its

goals

Assistance Provided to ERCs in Achieving Program Goals

Evaluation criteria and reporting guidelines; Start-up briefings by NSF and visits by experienced staff

from other ERCs; Annual Meetings to develop sharing across ERCs on means

to achieve goals; Best Practices “Manual” on WWW (http://www.erc-

assoc.org/); Periodic meetings with ERCs’ industrial partners at NSF; SWOT* analysis approach by site teams, industrial partners

and students for continuous improvement; Program level evaluations by outside contractors.*SWOT=Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats to Survival

I/UCRC Proposal Process

Concept Paper

Planning Grant

I/UCRC Operational Grant

I/UCRC Budget by Year

$ millions

1.3 1.5

1.5

2

3 3 2.9 3 3.1

3.6 3

.9 4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.2

5 5.2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Fiscal Year

Total Funding by Source and Year

Note: Data prior to 1985 based on NSF records. CD figures for ‘87 and ‘88 have been adjusted: Capital dollars have been removed. CD figures 1980-1996 have been adjusted to reflect total dollars from direct dollars.

$ millions

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90UniversityOtherStateOther IndustryInd. Member FeesNSF/IUCRC

Industrial Memberships by Year

Total Number of Members

Average Number ofMembers per Center

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0

5

10

15

20

25

I/UCRC Concept Paper

8 pages or less1. Industry’s Research Needs2. University (s) Capabilities3. Envisioned Research4. Center Management and Policies

At least 6 Company Letters of Interest

NSF internal evaluation within 3 months

I/UCRC Planning Grant

Utilize NSF Grant Proposal Guide Format

1. Introduction2. Envisioned I/UCRC Structure and Policies3. Research Agenda Envisioned4. Planning Work Statement and

Industry/University Meeting Agenda

$10K Budget

Competitive Review

I/UCRC Operational Grant

Proposal for 5 Year Continuing Grant

Decision Criteria1. Research Program2. Industry Membership Support3. University/Industry Agreement4. University Support

Peer Review

I/UCRC Funding

First five-year award: $70,000 annually per institution receiving at least $300,000 cash membership fees.

Second five-year award: $35,000 annually per institution receiving at least $300,000 cash membership fees.

Second Decade - Centers can compete for continued NSF funding - must have substantially new intellectual substance.

Multi-University Centers

Partner Site:- Minimum $150,000/year Center membership fees- Can Request up to $50,000/year from NSF

Affiliate Site:- Minimum $75,000/year Center membership fees- Can request up to $25,000/year from NSF

Host Site:- NSF will cover cost of extra administrative burden

Single and Multi-Site Centers by Year

16

1

35

2

33

2

37

4

38

4

39

4

47

4

45

5

46

5

47

8

39

15

31

19

36

19

2725

30

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

85 88 90 92 94 96 98

2000

Single Site

Multi-Site

New I/UCRC Announcement

Old New

No Deadline Concept Paper December 31 DeadlineInternal Review Internal Review

No Deadline Planning Proposal March 31 DeadlineInternal Review Competitive Review

No Deadline I/UCRC Proposal Deadline – 18 MonthsAfter Receiving Planning Grant

Review Review