In 2022, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released an RFP for the “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education: Education and Human Resources” grant program, and it will likely do so again in the future. Grant writers who work for colleges, universities, and other kinds of institutions of higher education (IHEs) should be interested, because the “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” had a large amount of funding available (at $61 million) a high award ceiling (at $2 million), a low award floor (at $200,000—allowing the NSF to fund smaller colleges and universities that are interested in nonetheless improving STEM education for undergraduates), and a long deadline (the posted date for the NSF notice was October 20, but the due date is January 18). That long deadline, however, is there for good reason: NSF grants are notoriously hard to write, especially for civilians—a topic we’ve addressed before. NSF grants are lucrative, but they’re also difficult—facts that grant writers are know.
Experienced grant writers for NSF programs like “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” will be familiar with the foibles and challenges of writing and preparing NSF applications. There’s almost always a “Program Announcements & Information” page, but that page also consistently refers applicants to the NSF’s semi-standardized “Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG).” So applicants and their grant writers trying to get a handle on the NSF application process have to toggle between the Program Announcement (for the “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” in this example) and the PAPPG, since the one will constantly refer to the other. And the grant writer must pay close attention to all the exceptions, sub-headers, and caveats within both: some PAPPG sections apply only to small business innovation and research (SBIR) applications, to cite one example example. Some sections apply only to human-subjects projects, to cite another. Some sections have other kinds of applicability, which must be discerned by the grant writer. In other words, it’s very easy to get lost and make mistakes when completing an NSF application, whether that application is for the “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” program, or for some other program.
Despite the caveats above, why is “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” still good, and of interest? The amount of money available is one key reason, and the other is the wide and vague project eligibility criteria. Projects for the “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education” can do anything that might “adapt, improve, and incorporate evidence-based practices into STEM teaching and learning, and that lay the groundwork for institutional improvement in STEM education.” In other words, projects can cover almost any area, and they can apply to a tremendous range of potential activities. Whatever your college or university happens to be doing around STEM education will probably fit into the NSF’s program, which means that many colleges and universities can in essence fund the efforts they’re already engaged in. Almost all colleges and universities are interested in improving STEM education, and STEM subjects are where the big growth in student enrollment is happening, too. As enrollment in the humanities and many social science subjects have declined, enrollment in fields like computer science, engineering, and healthcare have grown.
Students aren’t stupid and most have figured out that college is an expensive, high-risk gamble: pick wrong, and it’s possible to be facing decades of debt with limited career upside (I’ve seen this happen to many of my friends, and some of my former students: the results of student loans not being dischargeable in bankruptcy are ugly). The NSF’s program is partially a response to student demand, which matches up well with employer demand and with the fields that have a substantial impact on the country and the world as a whole. Almost all colleges and universities have felt the strength of the shift from the humanities and social sciences to the fields that are growing. The NSF’s “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education: Education and Human Resources” is congruent with that shift.
As grant writers, we’ve written many funded NSF and similar grants for a variety of applicant types, including colleges and universities: if you’d like to know how we can make your proposal process easy, call us at 800.540.8906, ext. 1, or email us at seliger@seliger.com for a fast free fee quote. We’ll write your entire NSF proposal or edit your draft for a reasonable flat fee. The NSF’s “Improving Undergraduate STEM Education: Education and Human Resources” may be tricky to write, but it’s possible to get help now, and fast.
