Applicant FAQs

The Office of Science makes grant awards, cooperative agreement awards, interagency awards, and task authorizations under Management and Operations contracts to the DOE National Laboratories. SC also enters into procurement contracts. Unlike other agencies, SC does not differentiate between different types or "mechanisms" of grants or cooperative agreements.

In general, any organization capable of performing the work is eligible to apply. Funding Opportunity Announcements will describe any limitations on eligibility, and Program Announcements to the DOE National Laboratories are only available to DOE/NNSA National Laboratories. Note that SC's awards are almost always made to an organization: SC does not usually make awards directly to an individual.

There are a few unique systems that you will need to use for SC&spos;s research awards.

1. The Portfolio Analysis and Management System (PAMS) is used for submitting preapplications, applications, letters of intent, revised budgets, and receiving merit reviewers' comments. DOE National Laboratories will submit their application materials in PAMS. Additional functions to manage an award, such as submitting progress reports, are also conducted in PAMS.
2. Institutions that are not DOE National Laboratories will submit their applications through the Government-wide portal of https://www.Grants.gov. Institutions of Higher Education typically submit applications through their Office of Sponsored Research.
3. Applicants from organizations other than DOE National Laboratories will need to use FedConnect to receive Notices of Financial Assistance Award.

Sometimes. If you are encountering technical difficulties in submitting an application, a letter of intent, or a pre-application, the Office of Science may extend the deadline if the problem was caused by a government computer system or was otherwise beyond your control. A Funding Opportunity Announcement will contain details.

No. Neither the Office of Science nor the Department of Energy have a salary cap that applies to grants. This is markedly different from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), whose grants and cooperative agreements are subject to a statutory salary cap.

Note that the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act as amended requires reporting the total compensation of the five highest-paid executives of any recipient of an award of $25,000 or more. Additional information is contained in 2 CFR 170, the System for Award Management, and the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System.

If there are limits on the costs that can be requested or the type of research that will be supported or the number of personnel supported, the limitations will be described in the Funding Opportunity Announcement or the Program Announcement to the DOE National Laboratories. Please read the announcement carefully.

The best course of action is to discuss your application with the relevant SC program manager and to respond to the merit reviewer&apod;s critiques in a new application. Principal Investigators may view reviewer comments in PAMS when they are released to the applicants following selection decisions.

Yes. As appropriate, academic year funding may be requested to support the proposed work. An award, however, does not obligate an academic institution to provide a course reduction. Typically course reductions require approval at the departmental and divisional level.

Yes. If administrative and clerical support are integral to the scope of work, then funding can be requested. It may be appropriate to discuss cost categories and permissible costs with your institutional Office of Research.

Yes. Workforce development support, which includes professional development, mentorship, and associated training activities, can be proposed. If such support is requested, then the proposal should include the assessment plan for the proposed activities and efforts.

If the retired professor is an active member of the research group for which the DOE grant will provide support, participation in the conference or workshop is necessary, and the costs are reasonable and consistent with university policy and procedure, then travel for the retired professor is an allowable cost.

Yes, you may request support for costs associated with transportation at experimental sites. All expenses must conform to DOE budgetary regulations, as well as your institution’s policies with regard to travel and/or leasing of vehicles. Responsibility for any vehicle commitments, leases, insurance, or other related expenses are risk of the PI’s institution, not DOE.

Yes, you may request support for costs associated with extended housing at or near experimental sites. All expenses must conform to DOE budgetary regulations, as well as your institution’s policies regarding travel, housing and/or leasing of rental spaces. Responsibility for any housing commitments, leases, insurance, or other related expenses are the risk of the PI’s institution, not DOE. You should work with your office of sponsored research to understand your institutional polices before submitting a supplemental request.

DOE acknowledges that experiments are regularly conducted outside of the US due to the nature of the field work or the unique ability to leverage an existing study or facility. Maintenance and operation of the detector and/or experiment specifically related to a current scope of work to an active award is allowable. However, support to keep instruments online without a specific application, or to maintain field sites for unspecified future activities would not be appropriate.

As of FY 2023, all applications to the Office of Science (SC) requesting funds to support a conference require the host organization of the conference to have an established code of conduct or policy in place that addresses discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment, other forms of harassment, and sexual assault. The organization’s code of conduct or policy must include processes for reporting complaints and addressing complaints. The policy or code of conduct must be shared with all participants prior to the conference, symposium, or workshop, and made easily available. And the application must include a recruitment and accessibility plan for speakers and attendees that includes discussion of recruitment of individuals from groups historically underrepresented in the research community, and plans to address possible barriers for attending, including but not limited to physical barriers.

See the FY 2024 Continuation of Solicitation for the Office of Science Financial Assistance Program Funding Opportunity Announcement for the exact guidance language.

For the purpose of the DOE Office of Science conference policy, the term “conference” refers to a convening of individuals, typically from across multiple institutions, for the purpose of holding structured scientific and technical discussions or discussions related to the conduct of research, particularly in disciplines supported by the Office of Science. These events have a defined goals and desired outcomes and can be independent events or occur as part of larger meetings or conferences.

If a link to the actual code of conduct or equivalent policy addressing discrimination and harassment and procedures for addressing complaints is not available at the time of application, a link to where the where the code of conduct or policy will be posted must be provided at the time of application.

The Office of Science will not fund proposals for conference support if the host organization does not have an established code of conduct or equivalent policy addressing discrimination and harassment and procedures for addressing complaints.

The applicant is encouraged to contact the host organization to update its policies or procedures. Depending on the scope and extent of missing elements, the application may be declined.

The venue and location could be a factor to the extent that it positively or negative impacts the evaluation of the proposal according to the review criteria:

• Scientific and/or Technical Merit of the Project;
• Appropriateness of the Proposed Method or Approach;
• Competency of Applicant’s Personnel and Adequacy of Proposed Resources; and
• Reasonableness and Appropriateness of the Proposed Budget.

As a steward of public funding, the Office of Science has a responsibility to ensure that we are serving the public. This includes committing to expanding participation in SC-sponsored activities and being intentional about supporting participation by individuals from groups historically underrepresented in STEM fields.

The recruitment and accessibility plan should be included in the body of the conference proposal narrative. There is no page limit on the plan, however there is an overall page limit on the proposal narrative (10 pages) so applicants should limit the length of the recruitment and accessibility plan as appropriate.

The applicant’s recruitment efforts will be unique to the scope of the conference proposal. The Office of Science is not establishing any specific requirements beyond best efforts to ensure participation (speakers and attendees) is inclusive.

For conference proposals submitted when planning was underway prior to the new requirement, the recruitment and accessibility plan may include the efforts the applicant made to ensure a diverse, representative pool of speakers were invited as part of the overall narrative on recruitment of speakers and participants.

Barriers to access include any conditions that would prevent individuals, most often individuals with disabilities, from participating. Physical barriers refer to the structural environment where the proposed event is being held that may impede efficient access to navigating the venue. Beyond physical barriers, this includes but is not limited to administrative, caregiving, financial, or technical barriers to attendance that place undue burdens potential participants.

The Office of Science review criteria for conference proposals are listed in the FY 2024 Continuation of Solicitation for the Office of Science Financial Assistance Program Funding Opportunity Announcement. Those criteria are:

1. Scientific and/or Technical Merit of the Project;
2. Appropriateness of the Proposed Method or Approach;
3. Competency of Applicant’s Personnel and Adequacy of Proposed Resources; and
4. Reasonableness and Appropriateness of the Proposed Budget.

As part of the Appropriateness of the Proposed Method or Approach, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the quality and efficacy of the organization’s code of conduct and the applicant’s proposed recruitment and accessibility plan.  The guiding reviewer questions are provided to reviewers:

• Does the host organization’s code of conduct or equivalent policy for addressing discrimination and harassment sufficiently address all forms of harassment and include protocols for addressing complaints?
• To what extent is the recruitment and accessibility plan likely to lead to participation of individuals from diverse backgrounds, including individuals historically underrepresented in the technical focus area of the conference?

SC program staff will review the proposal to ensure it meets all application requirements, including ensuring a code of conduct and associated procedures (or plans for establishing the policy/procedures) are provided before the proposal is peer reviewed.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate whether the host organization’s code of conduct or equivalent policy sufficiently addresses all forms of harassment and evaluate quality and efficacy of the proposed recruitment and accessibility plan as part of their overall evaluation of the proposal. Specifically, the guiding reviewer questions are:

Does the host organization’s code of conduct or equivalent policy for addressing discrimination and harassment sufficiently address all forms of harassment and include protocols for addressing complaints?

To what extent is the recruitment and accessibility plan likely to lead to participation of individuals from diverse backgrounds, including individuals historically underrepresented in the technical focus area of the conference?

The host institution, per their code of conduct and associated policies and procedures, is responsible for ensuring that a violation of the code/policy is effectively addressed. If the Office of Science is made aware of the violation, any Office of Science actions may be determined by whether the parties involved are at institutions currently funded by the Office of Science and bound by Federal civil rights policies governing discrimination and harassment.

Yes. A link to the code of conduct or equivalent policy addressing discrimination and harassment and procedures for addressing complaints needs to be provided with the application.

Yes, funding for administering scholarship awards for travel a conference or workshop may be included in the scope of the conference proposal. The recruitment and accessibility plan should also include information regarding the selection process for qualified applicants for scholarship funding, the allocation and distribution of funds, and how the applicant will ensure recipient participation, and any other pertinent details.