FY 2012 Guidelines for Preparing Annual Reports and Renewal Proposals for the Engineering Research Centers

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
DIRECTORATE FOR ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTERS PROGRAM

FY 2012
GUIDELINES FOR
PREPARING
ANNUAL REPORTS
AND
RENEWAL PROPOSALS
for the
ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTERS
CLASSES OF 2003-2011

January 2012

Engineering Education & Centers Division
4201Wilson Boulevard, Suite 585
Arlington, VA 22230
Phone: (703) 292-8380
Facsimile: (703) 292-9051/9052

1

This page intentionally left blank

2

Table of Contents
Major Changes since the Release of the FY 2010 Guidelines ....................................... 5
1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 6

2

PLANNING FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT ................................................... 6

2.1

Report Preparation Steps ..................................................................................... 7

2.2
Requirements for New Centers: .......................................................................... 9
2.2.1 Development of a Data Collection System ......................................................... 9
2.2.2 Financial Management System ........................................................................... 9
3

CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF AN ANNUAL REPORT........................ 10

3.1
Annual Report Tables and Figures ................................................................... 11
3.1.1 ERCWeb-Produced Table and Chart Summary ............................................... 11
3.1.2 Center-Produced Table and Chart Summary .................................................... 12
4

VOLUME I REQUIREMENTS...................................................................... 14

4.1

Cover Pages ......................................................................................................... 14

4.2

Project Summary ................................................................................................ 14

4.3

Participants Tables ............................................................................................. 14

4.4

Table of Contents ................................................................................................ 16

4.5
Narrative .............................................................................................................. 16
4.5.1 Systems Vision and Value Added of the Center ............................................... 17
4.5.2 Strategic Research Plan and Overall Research Program .................................. 20
4.5.3 University and Pre-college Education Programs .............................................. 23
4.5.4 Industrial/Practitioner Collaboration, Technology Transfer and New Business
Development (For Gen-3, Innovation Ecosystem)........................................................ 26
4.5.5 Infrastructure ..................................................................................................... 30
4.6

References ............................................................................................................ 37

4.7

Bibliography of Publications.............................................................................. 37

4.8

Budget Requests .................................................................................................. 37

3

4.9
Volume I Appendices .......................................................................................... 38
4.9.1 Volume I, Appendix I – Glossary and Acronyms............................................. 38
4.9.2 Volume I, Appendix II – Agreements and Certifications ................................. 38
4.9.3 Volume I, Appendix III – Table 7 .................................................................... 39
5

VOLUME II REQUIREMENTS..................................................................... 39

5.1

Table of Contents ................................................................................................ 40

5.2

List of ERC Projects ........................................................................................... 40

5.3

Project Summaries .............................................................................................. 40

5.4

Associated Project Abstracts ............................................................................. 41

5.5

Data Management Plan ...................................................................................... 41

5.6

Biographical Sketches ......................................................................................... 42

5.7

Current and Pending Support (Only required for Renewal Proposals)........ 42

6

FORMATTING AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS ............................... 42

6.1

Formatting ........................................................................................................... 42

6.2

Submission ........................................................................................................... 43

7

GLOSSARY................................................................................................. 46

8

RESOURCES .............................................................................................. 46

8.1

NSF Documents ................................................................................................... 46

8.2
ERCWeb .............................................................................................................. 46
8.2.1 ERCWeb Technical Assistance ........................................................................ 46
8.2.2 ERC Planning Information ............................................................................... 46
8.2.3 Annual Report ................................................................................................... 46
8.2.4 Performance Review ......................................................................................... 47
8.2.5 Site Visit Information ....................................................................................... 47
8.2.6 Relevant ERC and other Engineering Program Studies ................................... 48
8.2.7 ERC Association Web Site ............................................................................... 48

4

Major Changes since the Release of the FY 2011 Guidelines
CHANGES IN ANNUAL REPORT
We would like to emphasize the following in the annual reporting guidelines:
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

Reporting on Translational Research Awards. Centers are requested to include a 2-3
page write-up of their ERC-SBIR and other ERC Translational Research Awards in
the appropriate section of the annual report. See Section 4.5 for additional guidance.
Reporting on Graduate Research Supplements. Centers are requested to include a 2-3
page write-up of their Graduate Research Supplements in Volume II.
New contact information for Courtland Lewis. See Section 6.2 for the new mailing
address for hardcopies of the annual report.
Matrix of educational activities. A new requirement this year is a center-produced
matrix that displays your university and pre-college education activities for the lead
and partner universities. See Section 4.5.3 for additional details.
Clarification for Table 2. Additional clarification is provided for reporting sponsored
and associated projects. See Section 4.5.2.2 for more information.
IRB Certification. If data are collected on the performance of ERC students (REU or
regular and the impact of pre-college programs on students) and these data are
presented to the public through a publication or talk at a conference, an IRB Human
Subjects approval is required.
Bibliography moved to Volume I. See Section 4.7 for additional information.

CHANGES TO DATA ENTRY IN ERCWEB
The ERCWeb Annual Data Reporting System underwent a substantial rebuild in FY2011.
The numerous changes to the database will not be detailed here; Centers are strongly
encouraged to review the rebuilt ERCWeb and all data entry requirements, in addition to
the revised Guidelines for ERCWeb Data Entry.

5

1

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this document is to provide information to Engineering Research Centers
(ERCs) in the Classes of 2003 through 2011 regarding the requirements for the
preparation of their respective annual performance report or renewal proposal. The
special features required of the Gen-3 ERCs starting with the Class of 2008 are also noted
in the following guidelines. The function of the Annual Report (submitted as a renewal
proposal in the case of centers in their 3rd or 6th years) is to communicate the ERC’s
vision, activities, plans, and achievements in all aspects of center operations. Because a
renewal proposal has the same general structure and content as the Annual Report, in
these Guidelines the term “Annual Report” will also refer to the renewal proposal. Where
there are differences, they will be noted. The Annual Report is an opportunity for each
center to present a unified picture of the strategic scope of their research, education, and
industrial collaboration programs; details about individual research projects and how they
fit into the center’s vision; and the progress and impacts they are making and milestones
they have achieved. The Annual Report also contains plans for the next year and, for
renewal proposals, contains plans for the next four to five years. In addition, the Annual
Report is used by the NSF Program Director and site visit team members to assess an
individual ERC’s performance. The ERC Program Leader also uses the full set of reports
to monitor the aggregate of all the centers’ performance and to prepare reports regarding
the outcomes and impacts of the ERC Program to NSF management, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and Congress. Finally, the leadership team of each
ERC also uses its Annual Report as a valuable internal management tool and record of
center accomplishments.
2

PLANNING FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT

Although the deployment of the on-line database system, ERCWeb, has made producing
the required tables and charts easier, producing the Annual Report itself is still a major
undertaking and one of the main responsibilities of the Administrative Director during the
year. The center leadership team should meet several months before the report is due to
develop a plan and schedule for the preparation of the document and assign chapter and
section responsibility. The Director and Deputy Director must be directly involved
throughout the process by writing sections and supervising the preparation of the content
for the remaining sections, reviewing drafts, and ensuring the integration of all portions.
The goal is a final document that is a strong, accurate, and complete reflection of the
center’s activities and accomplishments during the year. The better the report and data
quality, the easier it is for the reviewers to understand a center’s achievements and plans
and for the ERC’s NSF Program Director to prepare a recommendation for the next
year’s funding or renewal approval recommendation. Additional information and
suggestions helpful to the Administrative Director can be found in Chapter 6,
Administrative Management, and Chapter 9, Multi-University ERCs, of the on-line ERC
Best Practices Manual at http://www.erc-assoc.org/manual/bp_index.htm.

6

2.1

Report Preparation Steps

The Center Administrative Director should review the important documentation that
establishes the ERC reporting requirements when planning for the Annual Report begins.
These include the following documents:
•

•
•

•

•

Center’s Cooperative Agreement. The center’s Cooperative Agreement is the
mechanism by which the ERC is funded and it is updated annually based on the
results of the previous year’s performance review. It includes the center’s
responsibilities and NSF’s responsibilities and describes annual reporting and
performance review procedures and requirements.
FY 2011 2012 Guidelines for Preparing Annual Reports and Renewal Proposals (this
document)
Performance Review Criteria. The criteria define the characteristics, behaviors and
results that describe high quality performance and low quality performance as a
function of the age of the center. The site visit review team and NSF staff use these
criteria to perform their evaluation of the center.
ERCWeb Annual Report Data Entry System contains data entry screens, associated
explanations and help screens. Available at https://www.erc-reports.org; log in using
userID and password, select Data Entry for your Center.
o Guidelines for ERCWeb Data Entry. The Guidelines for ERCWeb Data Entry
contains screen by screen instructions for data entry into the ERCWeb Annual
Report Data Entry System organized by data entry “tabs” as seen on the entry
screens. It also contains a complete glossary of terms that will supplement the
glossary contained in this document.
NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide

Table 2.1.1 summarizes the steps to be taken in preparing the Annual Report together
with the data submission.

7

Table 2.1.1: Annual Report and Data Submission Process

8

2.2

Requirements for New Centers:

2.2.1 Development of a Data Collection System
Each center must develop a data collection system and associated timeline to ensure that all
necessary data are collected from the lead, partner and collaborating institutions in time to
compile and enter it into the ERCWeb database. This is described more completely in the
Guidelines for ERC-Web Data Entry. The center inserts several tables produced by the ERCWeb
database, as well as center-created tables and figures, into the Annual Report as directed in this
document. The center needs to base its timeline on the end of its Reporting Year. It is important
to review the ERCWeb input screens and the Guidelines for ERC-Web Data Entry so that the
requirements for data are understood. The sources of data needed should be identified early in
the process and a system of collecting that data should be developed. Any changes in NSF
required data should be noted and adjustments/additions made to the data collection process.
A summary of the major changes to the Annual Report from 2010 to 2011 is provided at the
beginning of this document. A summary of the ERCWeb produced tables and the corresponding
data entry screens is provided in Section 3.1. Figure 2.2.1 gives a visual depiction of the
information and the data entry screens.

Personnel

Institutions
Academic institutions
executing ERC research

Demographic and
occupational data for ERC
personnel

Organizations
Industry Members;
Innovation Partners

Outputs
Publications, inventions,
degrees to students, etc.

Money
Sources of Support

Annual &
Site Visit
Reporting

Research
Thrust & Project
Information

Figure 2.2.1: ERCWeb input screens have six data entry screens to enter the required data

2.2.2

Financial Management System

One of the first things that new centers must contend with is establishing a financial
management system. As soon as the first year of ERC support reaches the lead institution, the
9

center must be ready to begin allocating and spending it. All cash support from NSF, industry
member fees and other sources along with sponsored project support awarded to the center
should be placed in an account(s) controlled by the center. A center’s sponsored projects office
may be able to split large awards from other sources in which the ERC is one of multiple
recipients so that the center’s funds go into the center’s account. This allows the center to get
“credit” for receiving the support and gives the ERC control over the funds. Given the
magnitude of NSF ERC Program support, all ERCs must have financial management systems
that can successfully survive an audit by NSF auditors from the Office of the Inspector General
(OIG), or the Division of Institution and Award Support (DIAS), which is connected with the
unit that oversees the awarding of ERC cooperative agreements. Any questions about financial
management may be posed to Charlie Zeigler, [email protected], 703-292-4578 from DIAS. He
has extensive experience helping ERCs improve their cost accounting and financial
documentation and is available to help.

3

CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF AN ANNUAL REPORT

The Annual Report consists of two separate volumes, aptly titled Volume I and Volume II.
Volume I provides the reviewers and NSF with an integrative summary of the evolution of the
vision and plans, activities, infrastructure, and impacts of the ERC. Volume I should
communicate the full scope of the ERC with sufficient technical depth that the reader fully
understands the breadth, depth, and value added of the ERC. It contains data representing the
impacts of the center, its personnel, sources of support, and expenditures. Volume II provides
further in-depth support to Volume I through brief summaries of the individual research and
education projects and other supporting information.
The Annual Report should be developed in a manner that best suits an individual center’s
strategic research plan and accomplishments within the structure outlined in this document. It
should describe how the support provided to the center has resulted in a synergy of research,
education, outreach, diversity, and industrial collaboration efforts (innovation ecosystem for
Gen-3) and their impacts that could not have been achieved by a collection of single awards.
This guidance represents the baseline information to be included; beyond that, the ERC may
include other pertinent information to yield an informative document that will communicate in
the best fashion for that center.
It is advisable for the Center Director to prepare the draft of the Systems Vision, Value Added,
and Broader Impacts section first to assure that the report has a high level, integrated summary of
its vision, structure and impacts. This will serve as a reference for those preparing the separate
sections. When those sections are complete, this first section should be finalized, accounting for
new findings and impacts.
•
•
•
•
•
•

Volume I has the following structure. Each component is described in further detail in
Section 4.
Cover Pages
Project Summary
Table of Participants
Table of Contents
Narrative
o Systems Vision and Value Added/Broader Impacts of the Center
10

•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3.1

o Strategic Research Plan and Overall Research Program
o University and Pre-college Education
o Industrial/Practitioner Collaboration, Technology Transfer and New Business
Development (Innovation Ecosystem for Gen-3)
o Infrastructure
 Configuration & Leadership
 Diversity Strategy and Impact
 Management
 Resources & University Commitment
References Cited
Budget Requests (NSF Form 1030)
Appendices
o Summary List of Appendices
o Appendix I: Glossary and Acronyms
o Appendix II: Agreements and Certifications
o Appendix III: ERCWeb Table 7
Volume II has the following structure and content. Each component is described in
further detail in Section 5.
Table of Contents
List of ERC Projects
Project Summaries
Associated Project Abstracts
Bibliography of Publications
Biographical Sketches
Current and Pending Support
Annual Report Tables and Figures

The Annual Report contains several tables and figures. Many of the required tables and figures
are generated within ERCWeb; however, there are several that are Center-generated. The
summaries below identify the ERCWeb and Center-produced tables and figures required in the
Annual Report. Please be sure to include all required tables and figures before submitting the
Annual Report.

3.1.1 ERCWeb-Produced Table and Chart Summary

Data Entry Tab in
ERCWeb
I. Organizations

Tables Produced

Data Based on

Table 4 Industrial/Practitioner Members, Innovation Partners, Funders of
Sponsored Projects, Funders of Associated Projects and Contributing
Organizations
Table 4a: Organization Involvement in Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Activities

11

Award Year

Reporting Year

Table 5: Innovation Ecosystem Partners and Support by Year
Figure 5a: Technology Transfer Activities

3.1.2

C
e II. Institutions
n
t
e
r
P III. Personnel
r
o
d
u
c
e
d
IV. Research

T
a V. Money
b
l
e
a
n
d VI. Outputs &
Impact

C
h
a
rt Summary

Award Year
Reporting Year

Figure 5b Lifetime Industrial/Practitioner Membership History

Award Year

Figure 5c Total Number of Industrial/Practitioner Members

Award Year
Award Year

Figure 5d Industrial/Practitioner Membership Support, by Year
Table 6 Institutions Executing the ERC’s Research, Technology Transfer,
and Education Programs
Figure 6a Domestic Location of Lead, Core Partner, Outreach, and REU
and RET Participants Institutions
Figure 6b Foreign Collaborating Participants’ Institutions (Gen-2) or
Location of Foreign Partner Institutions (Gen-3)
Figure 6c Country of Citizenship for ERC Foreign Personnel

Reporting Year
Reporting Year
Reporting Year
Reporting Year

Table 3b Ratio of Graduates to Undergraduates

Reporting Year

Table 7 ERC Personnel

Reporting Year

Table 7a Diversity Statistics for ERC Faculty and Students

Reporting Year

Figure 7b Women in the ERC

Reporting Year

Figure 7c Underrepresented Racial Minorities in the ERC

Reporting Year

Figure 7d Hispanics/Latinos in the ERC

Reporting Year

Figure 7e Persons with Disabilities in the ERC

Reporting Year

Table 7f Center Diversity, by Institution

Reporting Year

Table 2 Estimated Budgets by Research Thrust and Cluster

Award Year

Figure 2a Research Project Investigators by Discipline

Award Year

Table 8 Current Award Year Functional Budget

Award Year

Table 8c Education Functional Budget

Award Year

Figure 8a Functional Budget as a Percentage of Direct Support

Award Year

Figure 8b Functional Budget as a Percentage of Associated Project Support

Award Year

Table 9 Sources of Support

Award Year

Table 10 Annual Expenditures and Budgets
Table 11 Modes of Support by Industry and Other Practitioner
Organizations to the Center

Award Year
Award Year
Reporting Year

Table 1 Quantifiable Outputs
Table 1a Average Metrics Benchmarked Against All Active ERC's and the
Center's Tech Sector
Table 3a Educational Impact

Center-Produced Table and Chart Summary
Section 4.3 - Participants Tables
Partnering Institutions
List of the Leadership Team
Thrust Table
Non-University Partners
Scientific Advisory Board
Section 4.5.2.1 ERC’s Strategic Research Plan
Three-Plane Strategic Chart
Milestone Chart
Section 4.5.2.2 ERC’s Strategic Research Plan
Translational Research Partners Table
12

Reporting Year
Reporting Year

Section 4.5.3 University and Pre-College Education Programs
Education Activities Matrix
Section 4.5.4.3 Technology Transfer and New Business Development
ERC Intellectual Property Table
Technology Transfer Table
Technology Transfer Chart
Section 4.5.4.4 Innovation
ERC Start-Up Firms Table
Technology Translation Innovation Proposals Submitted by the Center
Section 5.3 - Management Effort
Table 8b: Portion of Current Award Year Budget, by Institution
Table 9a: History of ERC Funding of the Center
Table 9b: Cost Sharing by Institution
Table 9c: Funding by International Partner Universities (Gen-3)
Table 10a: Unexpended Residual in the Current Award and Proposed Award Year

13

4

VOLUME I REQUIREMENTS

Volume I contains the body of the report (or renewal proposal for centers in their 3rd or 6th year)
and is ideally 100 pages in length or less. This count excludes required NSF graphics and tables,
required NSF forms, appendices and budget pages. Volume I contains narrative interspersed with
required NSF tables and charts produced by ERCWeb as described in this section. The ERCWeb
tables and charts should be placed within the narrative after the first time they are discussed (they
are not to be collected and presented at the end of the document, except as noted in the
instructions) and must be sized and presented to be easily readable. All required tables must be
included in the Annual Report or the ERC funding will be withheld until the required tables are
submitted.
4.1

Cover Pages

The ERC’s own cover page should be the outermost cover page of the Annual Report. It should
include the title of the center, followed by “an Engineering Research Center” (if that is not in the
title). Next it should list the lead and any core partner institutions involved and the names of the
Director and Deputy Director. It should also indicate the following information:
(a) The year of the Annual Report, e.g. first Annual Report (or the year of the renewal
proposed, e.g., third or sixth-year renewal proposal);
(b) The due date of the report (i.e., day, month, year); and
(c) The cooperative agreement number.
The following page will be page 1 of the official NSF cover page (NSF Form 1207). The
appropriate certification boxes, e.g., Human Subjects and Animal Subjects, etc., should be
checked. If human and/or animal subjects are included in the ERC, the report or renewal
proposal must include Institutional Review Board Certifications in the appendices.
4.2

Project Summary

The Project Summary is a one-page summary of the goals, programs, and achievements of the
ERC. This summary must be prepared according to the instructions in the NSF Proposal and
Award Policies and Procedures Guide. The summary must provide specific reference and
information relevant to the NSF Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts review criteria. To do
this, the summary must contain headings marked “Intellectual Merit” and “Broader Impact”
where the respective information is reported. An Annual Report that does not include a project
summary with these references or does not address these criteria will be returned without
review. The summary should be written in the third person and in a style that will be easily
understood by an educated lay audience. NSF should be able to use the narrative in documents
for the public without having to rewrite it or request clarification from the center before using it.
NSF ERC program staff also use the Project Summary as part of the documentation taken
forward to NSF approval boards for renewal proposals so it is important that this page be
accurate and up-to-date.
4.3

Participants Tables

A required component that MUST be included in the report to assist the reviewers in determining
the team members, their disciplines and affiliations, and in determining conflicts-of-interest.
14

The ERC should develop Participants Tables with the following sections.
•

List of partnering institutions (domestic for Gen-2 centers, and domestic and foreign for
Gen-3 centers)
o Column Headings: Name, City, State / Country (if not U.S. institution)
o One institution per row, start with lead institution and bold lead institution’s name
Name of Institution
Lead Institution

•

City

State / Country

List of the Leadership team
o Column Headings: Position title, Name, Department (or ERC Staff), Institution
o One individual per row

Position Title

Department
(or “ERC Staff”)

Name

Institution

e.g. Director

•

List each thrust in separate thrust table.
o Title each table with the name of the Thrust
o Column Headings: Position title, Name, Institution, Department
o One individual per row (the first row should be the thrust leader)
o List all faculty members involved in that thrust
Thrust Name

Position Title
e.g. Thrust Leader
e.g. Faculty Researcher

•

Department

Institution

List of other non-university partners carrying out ERC’s mission such as pre-college
institutions, and, for Gen-3 centers, innovation partners (organization devoted to
promoting entrepreneurship and innovation) and small business partners carrying out
translational research. Create a separate table for each type of non-university partner
with the following features:
o Column Headings: Name of institution, organization or partner, City, State
o One institution per row

Name of institution / organization/
partner

•

Name

City

State

Scientific Advisory Board, Industrial Advisory Board, and other advisory boards, make
one table per board
o Column Headings: Name, Title, Organization
o One individual per row
15

Name

4.4

Title

Organization (Department
or Division)

Institution or Firm

Table of Contents

The Table of Contents should indicate the page numbers and titles of all the sections and
appendices. The Table of Contents should also list the title and page number for each ERCWeb
table or figure under the relevant section. Each section should be tabbed with text titles.
4.5

Narrative

The reference point for the narrative is the reporting year in the context of the age of the center.
There is a different level of expectations for centers in their first three years of operation than for
centers in their second three years or in their last years of NSF/ERC support. This can be seen in
the ERC performance review criteria that can be found on the library website link on the
ERCWeb log-in page http://www.erc-reports.org in the Performance Review section in the
Criteria and Protocol documents. The narrative text should provide information for NSF and the
reviewers to assess the extent and quality of the ERC’s progress and plans within the context of
the ERC performance review criteria.
It must be clear to the reader which results were made in the last year and which were made in
earlier years. This is especially true for renewal proposals where the prior three-year
performance period is assessed.
In addition, each section of the report must address future plans, including describing how any
requested growth in funding will be expended and how the project(s) to be supported by the
additional funds fit within the strategic plan and benefit the center overall.
ERCWeb charts and tables should be inserted into the report sections as indicated and discussed
in the text. The font must be a size that is easily legible when the report is printed. Except for
ERCWeb Table 7, which comprises Appendix III, they should not be grouped together at the end
of the report or in an Appendix.
Renewal Proposals. For renewal proposals, clear statements of any new directions proposed in
research, education, or industrial partnerships should be provided. In addition, trend charts, to
show progress over the previous years of funding, on diversity, total financial support, and the
number of industrial/practitioner members should be provided. Only data on member firms that
have signed a membership agreement with the ERC and provided the requisite membership fees
(these must be cash or in-kind support) should be shown in these trend charts. For third-year
renewal proposals, data for the current year and each of the two previous years should be
included in the trend charts; for sixth-year renewal proposals, data for the current year and each
of the five previous years should be included in the trend charts.
ERC Innovation Awards and/or ERC-SBIR Partnership Awards. Centers that have received
ERC Innovation Awards and/or ERC-SBIR and other ERC Translational Research Awards (e.g.
SECO awards) should report on the results of the awards in the appropriate section of the Annual
Report. For example, centers receiving testbed or translational research awards would report on
16

the progress in the Strategic Research Plan and Overall Research Program section; centers
receiving awards related to innovation or technology transfer would report on the progress in the
Industrial/Practitioner Collaboration, Technology Transfer and New Business Development
section. For each award, the goals and objectives should be summarized along with the progress
made toward achieving those goals.
The headings that follow throughout section 4.5 of these Guidelines should appear, in the order
shown, as the headings in the Annual Report.
4.5.1 Systems Vision and Value Added of the Center
This section should provide the reader with a clear statement of the center’s vision and the
historical evolution of the vision to the present, and impacts of the center through time. It is
important for our review and recommendation system that these impacts be presented in both
technical and quantitative terms as well, if appropriate. Summary information on actual and
potential economic impacts of the ERC’s research and technology should be presented, such as
the potential or actual market impacts, people impacted if the technology is realized, energy
saved, etc. as appropriate to the vision.
4.5.1.1 Systems Vision
The current systems vision statement should be short and clear, focusing the reader on the
systems-level goal(s) and potential impact. There should also be a statement of the systems
vision at the time of funding for new ERCs or provided in the latest renewal proposal for older
ERCs to show the evolution of the vision over time. A rationale should be provided as to why
the systems technology is transformational. The fundamental barriers that the center is
addressing should be discussed. This should be supported by an analysis of what is lacking now
without the achievement of the fundamental research and the systems-level goals, how
industry/practice has been or will be strengthened or transformed by its realization, and why this
is important for society in general. The theory and science underpinning the center’s research
and the evolution of the vision over time should be discussed in summary here with more detail
in the research section.
This section must also include direct actions actually taken (not just planned) by the ERC in
response to major weaknesses and any threats regarding the vision that were identified in the
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis of the prior annual or
renewal review site visit report.
4.5.1.2 Value Added and Broader Impacts
The overall goal of this section is to convey to the reader, in a summary form, the significant and
cumulative impacts that the center has made since its inception, including its impacts on
knowledge, education, technology and industry/practice (including impacts on innovation for
Gen-3 centers) society in general, and on the quality and diversity of the science and engineering
workforce. This section should deliver a clear message about the outcomes and impacts that have
resulted from or, for centers in their first year, are expected by the integrative construct of an
ERC as opposed to the type that would emanate from a series of single investigator awards.
The following specific areas should be summarized in the narrative of this section. More detailed
information should be presented in later sections of the report.
17

Research:
• Engineered Systems-level Approach and Advances. Indicate how the research program is
contributing (or, for newer ERCs, positioned to contribute) to systems-level advances.
Discuss the role of key systems level testbeds. Discuss the lessons learned and any
corrective measures taken.
• Research Productivity. Address the ERC’s research productivity using indicators such as
publications, patents granted, licenses issued, recognition awards to center faculty and
students, scientific breakthroughs in knowledge and technology (not just incremental
advances), front cover articles in journals, etc.
• Translational Research Awards. For Gen-3 centers and Gen-2 centers receiving translational
research awards or carrying out translational research in collaboration with innovation
partners and/or small businesses, summarize the translational research work and results to
date.
Education Outcomes:
• For Gen-2 and Gen-3 centers, provide evidence that the ERC has effectively developed a
culture that is developing ERC graduates who are more effective in industrial and
academic practice.
• In addition, for Gen-3 centers in their third year and beyond, provide evidence that the
ERC is developing engineers who are prepared to be more creative, adaptive, and
innovative in a global economy.
• Summarize any significant educational exchanges with industry and the external
community, including workshops, efforts to provide students with information about
regulatory bodies that impact the use of the ERC’s technology, etc. and the results of such
exchanges.
• Highlight interdisciplinary curriculum impacts.
• Summarize the ERC’s pre-college program efforts and results.
Industrial Collaboration and Technology Transfer Interactions (Innovation Ecosystem for Gen3):
• Summarize the role of industry/practitioners in the ERC as sponsors and participants.
• Summarize major technology transfer events including licenses for technology that are
being developed actively and/or have been commercialized, and spin off firms or product
lines that resulted from ERC research.
• If applicable, identify any workshops or other efforts focused on standards, regulatory
issues, or policy issues that impact the ERC’s technology.
Team and its Diversity:
• Describe the interdisciplinary makeup of the team.
• Summarize progress on the participation of underrepresented groups as members of the
leadership faculty, research faculty and student teams since the center’s inception.
The ERCWeb Table 1, “Quantifiable Outputs”, and Table 1a, “Average Metrics Benchmarked
Against All Active ERCs and the Center’s Tech Sector” should be inserted in this section. The
information in these tables should be used to support the center’s analysis of the impacts of the
ERC vis-à-vis those in the center’s technology sector and all ongoing ERCs.

18

4.5.1.3 Highlights of Significant Achievements and Impacts
Also required in this section of the Annual Report are specific “nuggets” or “highlights” of
significant achievement and impact that are a result of the integrative, interdisciplinary construct
of the ERC. NSF has placed a new emphasis on writing highlights for a broad public audience;
the targeted audiences for the requested highlights include Congress and other federal/state
policymakers; business and industry; the general public; and NSF (for internal briefings,
speeches, and websites). The NSF Office of Legislative and Public Affairs (OLPA) adapts these
highlights for the new public website "Science, Engineering, and Education (SEE) Innovation."
To preview the website, see: http://www.research.gov/seeinnovation .
In addition to a title, each highlight should include the following three sections in narrative form:
•

•

•

Outcome/Accomplishment. Describe the outcome using language anyone can understand;
all highlights should emphasize major impacts achieved because of the interdisciplinary
construct of the ERC, especially those things that could not have been achieved by a
single investigator type project alone;
Impact and Benefits. Describe the benefits to society, economy, industry, nation, region,
science & engineering in a style that is intended for the educated lay reader and tells a
story about what happened, why it is significant, what its impact has been or will be, and
why it took an ERC to achieve it; and
Explanation and Background. Provide additional explanation of the outcome and its
impact (e.g. the technical background).

Each highlight must include an image that illustrates the concept or shows the technology that
anyone can understand.
The better the examples and accompanying narratives are, the more effectively the center will
communicate its impacts to its reviewers and to NSF.
Additional Highlights Reporting Requirements
• The highlights reported should cover achievements made during the last year; and for a
renewal, during the last three years, with the year of achievement marked.
• There is no explicit requirement for, or limit on, the number of highlights, but they should
have the following characteristics: 1) be accomplishments of major significance; and 2)
have passed a significant milestone or have come to fruition during the reporting year—
and not be simply a report of incremental advancement of a “work in progress.”
• Highlights should be reported in the following categories: Research/Technology
Advancements, Education, Technology Transfer (including successful spinoff/start-up
companies), and Infrastructure (including large databases that function as a national
resource, large testbeds and new facilities).
• The highlights may be inserted into the report in a font less than 12 point (Times New
Roman) or 10 point (Arial), if they take up too much space, but they must be readable.
They must be included in this section, not in an Appendix.
• Highlights used in a previous report may not be repeated unless they provide background
for major recent advances or impacts that have taken place since the highlight was first
reported.

19

These highlights will be the principal source documents for ERC Program and NSF documents
and budget requests. When a center sends their Annual Report on a CD to the ERC Program’s
communications consultant, Mr. Courtland Lewis, (see section 6.2), he extracts selected
highlights for use in the required NSF reports. He may contact centers whose highlights are
chosen for inclusion in these reports for additional information. A selected number of highlights
from all the ERCs are posted on the ERC Association website (http://www.erc-assoc.org) in the
achievements showcase. A few are selected by the Director of EEC who recommends them to
the Assistant Director of Engineering, who in turn selects a few from across the directorate for
recommendation to the NSF Director for inclusion in NSF’s report to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). Excellent ERC highlights result in recognition of an individual center’s
achievements and the achievements of the ERC Program throughout NSF, at OMB and the
White House, and in Congress.
4.5.2

Strategic Research Plan and Overall Research Program

This section describes the ERC’s strategic research plan and provides summary information on
the research program that has been structured to achieve the goals of the plan. This section
should summarize results from the previous three years (fewer if the center is less than three
years old) with more detail for the last year. It should include a summary description of the
evolution of the strategic research plan since inception to communicate how the research goals
and deliverables of the ERC have changed over time in response to advances in the state of the
art and practice at the ERC and elsewhere. In addition, any major new research directions for the
proposed year(s), such as new thrusts and/or testbeds, should be described. Detailed projectlevel information is provided in Volume II.
4.5.2.1 ERC’s Strategic Research Plan
The ERC’s strategic plan must be represented using the ERC Program 3-Plane Strategic
Planning Chart. The Class of 2011 and later must use the revised ERC Program 3-Plane Strategic
Planning Chart (with barriers); older centers are encouraged to use the revised version.
Regardless of the version of the 3-Plane Strategic Planning Chart used, all centers must address
the key barriers that impede progress toward the realization of their vision. A template can be
http://www.ercfound
in
the
library
link
at
the
ERCWeb
website
reports.org/help/ann_rpt_guide.cfm under the section, “ERC Planning Information.”
Strategic Research Plan Reporting Requirements
• The ERC’s strategic research plan should be described in the context of the state of the
art, the center’s goals, and the fundamental knowledge and technological barriers that the
ERC is addressing.
• It should address significant and challenging barriers that can lead to breakthroughs in
knowledge; it should address breakthrough enabling technology needed to achieve the
systems goals; and it should address challenging systems level research and explorations
in enabling systems technology testbeds.
• The ERC’s customization of the ERC Program’s 3-plane strategic planning chart is
required. It will illustrate how the systems-level goals of the center motivate and drive the
research plan and how these goals integrate fundamental, enabling technology, and
systems-level research, as well as proof-of-concept testbeds, to address barriers and to
deliver discoveries, advances in knowledge, and new technology.
• Given the strategic research plan, a rationale should be provided for the structure of the
research program into thrusts or groupings of projects. Specific justification should be
20

provided for the inclusion of significant associated projects in the ERC’s strategic
research plan.
This section must also include a Milestone Chart that depicts major goals and deliverables over
the 10-year time frame of NSF support. Greater detail is expected within a 5-year time horizon.
The Milestone Chart should contain the following information about the research program of the
center:
• Deliverables and milestones as a function of the age of the center with more detail within a 5
year time horizon.
• An indication of the plane of the three plane chart in which the deliverable or milestone
predominantly resides (e.g. fundamental, technology or systems level).
• The discussion of the Milestone Chart should include a discussion of progress made on
previously identified deliverables and milestones including achievements as well as delays
and setbacks. Any changes to the original milestones and deliverables as the center matures
and new barriers or opportunities are uncovered should also be discussed.
• If the center’s budget is in the phase where there is a projected increase in the base budget in
the cooperative agreement, this section will include a plan for how the proportion of those
funds to be dedicated to research will be used. If the center’s budget is in the phase where
the projected budget is in phase-down, this section will include a plan for how the reduction
will impact research. A table summarizing this information should also be created.
Gen-3 ERCs. The center should discuss how the research of the foreign partner(s) adds value to
the research program. Specific foreign partner research results should be presented in the
appropriate thrust or testbed subsection.
4.5.2.2 Translational Research
Translational research is a relatively new area being conducted by the centers. For Gen-3
centers, translational research, funded through NSF’s translational research fund, in conjunction
with suitable small businesses is required when the center fundamental and technology research
projects reach the appropriate phase. Some Gen-2 centers are also exploring translational
research opportunities, some with supplemental funding provided by the joint SBIR-ERC
projects for translational research, the recent ERC Innovation Awards, or other funding for
translational research including partnerships with larger firms through sponsored project support.
Translational research bridges the gap between traditional university fundamental research and
innovation with transfer to industry. As such, translational research efforts span two portions of
the Annual Report: the Strategic Research Plan and Overall Research Program section, and the
Industrial/Practitioner Collaboration and Technology Transfer/ New Business Development
section. The philosophy for reporting is that translational research itself should be reported in
the Strategic Research section (this section) and the innovation and industry transfer results from
the translational research should be reported in the Industry and Innovation section.
Gen-3 ERCs. More specifically, for Gen-3 ERCs, the center should discuss the planned role of
small firms in translational research in preparation for the time when the ERC research reaches
the appropriate phase. For Gen-2 or Gen-3 centers that are currently pursuing translational
research efforts, the center should name the firm(s) involved and describe the role of their
translational research in the ERC and how it contributes to the ERC’s innovation goals. The
center should also create a table listing the firms by name, project title(s), thrust title, funding
levels and sources. An example is shown below.
21

Translational
Research Partner
Firm

Project Title

Funding Level

Funding Sources

Translational Research Partners Table, created by the Center

To bring the reader up to date on the progress from the last site visit, this section must include
actual (not just planned), direct actions taken in response to major weaknesses and any threats
regarding the strategic research plan resulting from the SWOT analysis in the prior annual or
renewal review site visit report.
The ERCWeb Table 2, “Estimated Budgets by Research Thrust and Cluster,” should be inserted
at the end of this section. This table is used by reviewers to understand the staffing/funding
strategy for the allocation of direct support to center projects and the indirect support derived
from associated projects. Table 2 can be used to gauge the level of support in terms of personnel
and cash devoted to the different research and technology efforts needed to achieve the Center’s
mission. Table 2 includes data on the disciplinary make up of the team as well as allocation of
people and funds to each project receiving direct support and indirect support. It also enables the
reviewers to understand the roles of the different institutions in the ERC’s research. The data in
Table 2 should be reported in such a way that it aggregates projects devoted to the same goal so
that the result shows interdisciplinary teams conducting cluster-level research. It should not show
a list that represents the budgetary allocation of funds to individuals. Table 2 shows the current
year budgets at the project, cluster, and thrust levels; and the proposed budget at the thrust level
only. Proposed growth or reduction in funds will have been justified earlier as discussed above.

The ERCWeb Figure 2a, “Research Project Investigators by Discipline,” should also be inserted
in this section. This is a disciplinary wheel for the ERC produced by ERCWeb from the
information provided in Table 2.
4.5.2.3 ERC’s Research Program (by Thrust)
This section should be organized by research thrust area. Each subsection describing a particular
research thrust or testbed should begin with a brief table that shows the names of faculty
participants, their institutional and departmental affiliations, and identifies the thrust leader. (This
may be the same table as developed for the Participants Tables as described earlier in section
4.3.)
ERC Research Program (by Thrust) Reporting Requirements
• The construct of the thrusts derives from the strategic plan. For each thrust, the center
should present a discussion of how that thrust, through its constituent clusters of projects,
and testbeds as appropriate, executes the goals of the ERC. The discussion should
include how specific knowledge gaps and barriers guide the selection of the specific
research projects and testbeds.
22

•

•
•
•
•
•

The narrative should summarize the theoretical and scientific research carried out to
provide the needed fundamental knowledge, and should indicate how these achievements
contribute to realizing the center’s goals and their broader impacts on knowledge and
technology advancement. A state of the art analysis should be provided comparing center
goals with the results from other leading research groups worldwide in similar research
areas. Specific project level examples should be given for key projects that serve an
integrative role in the thrust so the reviewers can understand both the technical
methodologies used and how the project plays an integrative role within the thrust and
with another thrust.
The role of any testbeds within the thrust should be described along with how the
research and testbeds contribute to other thrusts and to the ERC’s goals for enabling
systems technology testbeds.
Major achievements in transformational and incremental knowledge and technology
should be discussed, including technology transferred to industry/practitioners and its
impact in those sectors, as appropriate to age of the ERC.
The specific goals and deliverables of translational research work should also be included
in this section.
The discussion should also include how any associated projects augment the thrust’s
ability to achieve its goals.
At the end of each thrust section, include only those references mentioned in the
narrative. A complete list of publications published since the last Annual Report should
be provided in Volume I as a bibliography at the end of Volume I and grouped by
Thrust/Testbed. These are manuscripts published in peer-reviewed print or web journals
only and should not include any manuscripts in preparation, under review, or approved
but not published.

Each thrust’s section must include actual (not just planned), direct actions taken since the last site
visit by the ERC in response to major weaknesses and any threats regarding the thrust resulting
from the SWOT analysis in the prior annual or renewal review site visit report; in the case of
new ERCs, in the pre-award site visit report and subsequent reviews.
ERC Innovation Awards and/or ERC-SBIR Partnership Awards. Centers that have received
ERC Innovation Awards and/or ERC-SBIR Translational Research Awards (e.g. SECO awards)
in a fundamental or technology research area should report on the specific results of that award
in the appropriate thrust or testbed subsection. The goals and objectives should be summarized
along with the progress made toward achieving those goals.
4.5.3 University and Pre-college Education Programs
This section should be organized into two sub-sections: one covering the center’s universitylevel education (both undergraduate, graduate, and practitioners) program and another covering
the center’s pre-college education program.
A matrix that displays your university and pre-college education activities for the lead and
partner universities that indicates the involvement of each university in each cell must be
provided in this section. An example of a matrix is provided below.

REU

RET

Young
Scholar
23

Pre-College

General
Community

Lead
Institution
Partner
University 1
Partner
University 2
Partner
University 3
Education Activities, to be created by the Center

= In Place

=New This Year,

= Future Year

4.5.3.1 ERC’s University Education Program
This section should present the center’s university education strategic plan to produce graduates
who are successful leaders in technology advancement in industry. For Gen-3 ERCs, it is
augmented by an additional section explaining how the ERC will be developing graduates who
are also creative, adaptive, and innovative engineers who can succeed in a global economy.
(Gen-2 ERCs who wish to take on this additional educational role are free to add this dimension
to their education program.)
Gen-2 and Gen-3 University Education Program Reporting Requirements
• The discussion should include the educational activities designed to achieve the goals of
the education strategic plan and an overview of the development and progress of the
education program over the previous three years and plans for the future.
• Points of interface and integrating mechanisms between the center’s research activities
and education programs including curriculum development should be identified.
• Examples of how Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) students have been
integrated into center research activities should be included. The discussion should
include the level of funding and sources of funding (base budget, university funds, and/or
an NSF REU site award, etc.), and the number of REU students supported during each
year of the center.
• The goals and impacts of the ERC’s alliances with NSF Diversity Awardees should be
discussed in this section, if applicable.
• Examples of benefits to the students’ overall educational experience due to the
interdisciplinary and cross-university research/education culture of the ERC should be
noted.
• A discussion of the ERC’s efforts to provide students knowledge of industrial practice
should be included.
• A summary of assessment results or future plans for assessment work should be
presented.
Gen-2 ERCs: Also, for Gen-2 ERCs, this section should also include a table of a few (3-5)
exemplary graduates of the ERC with information about their course of study, their year of
graduation, their current employment, and their contributions to the field.
Gen-3 ERCs: In addition to producing graduates who are successful leaders in technology
advancement in industry, this section should present the ERC’s guiding hypothesis for how to
develop creative, adaptive and innovative engineers who can succeed in a global economy.
24

The strategic plan for education should also present the student programs and activities that the
ERC has designed to test that hypothesis and the assessment methodology(ies) being used to
determine its effectiveness, and discuss how the ERC will provide educational expertise to test
the hypotheses and assessment plans. The formative and summative assessment plans should be
discussed and results provided as time progresses. The section should include a discussion of the
role of collaboration between the domestic and foreign partner(s) and how it contributes
educational value to both domestic and foreign students.
This section must include actual (not just planned) direct actions taken since the last site visit by
the ERC in response to major weaknesses and any threats regarding the thrust resulting from the
SWOT analysis in the prior annual or renewal review site visit report; in the case of new ERCs,
in the pre-award site visit report and subsequent reviews.

4.5.3.2 ERC’s Pre-College Program
Gen-2 Pre-College Program Reporting Requirements
• The center should provide a summary of the pre-college education strategic plan in this subsection. The discussion should include an overview of the development and progress of the
pre-college program over the previous three years and plans for the future.
• Successes and challenges of the pre-college education work should be noted along with
assessment results or future plans for assessment.
• The center should also provide a discussion of the Research Experiences for Teachers (RET)
program including the number of participating teachers during each year of the center, the
level and source of funds (base budget, university funds, and/or an NSF RET site award,
etc.).
Gen-3 ERCs Pre-College Reporting Requirements.
• The center should present the strategic plan for long-term partnerships in pre-college
education with partner middle and high schools. The narrative should include a discussion of
the goals, activities and expected impacts on the inclusion of engineering concepts in precollege classrooms through involvement of teachers and students in the ERC pre-college
program.
• The center’s RET program and Young Scholars Program should also be discussed. The
discussion of the Research Experiences for Teachers program should include the number of
participating teachers during each year of the center, the level and source of funds (base
budget, university funds, and/or an NSF RET site award, etc.), and the nature of teacher
activities, including research projects, follow-on plans, and how the research experience will
be translated to classroom practice.
• For the Young Scholars Program, the discussion should include the number of participants
and the research topics being addressed.
• The narrative should also include information about the current domestic partner universities’
faculty and student involvement in the pre-college program and plans for developing and
expanding participation through time to impact all the partner domestic universities.
• The formative and summative assessment plans should be discussed and results provided as
time progresses. This is necessary to gauge the impact of the program on the inclusion of
engineering concepts in the pre-college classroom and on stimulating pre-college students to
choose engineering as an educational major at the community college or university level.
25

This section must include actual (not just planned) direct actions taken since the last site visit by
the ERC in response to major weaknesses and any threats regarding the thrust resulting from the
SWOT analysis in the prior annual or renewal review site visit report; in the case of new ERCs,
in the pre-award site visit report and subsequent reviews.
All ERCs: The ERCWeb Table 3a, “Educational Impact,” and the ERCWeb Table 3b “Ratio of
Graduates to Undergraduates,” should be inserted in this section. Table 3b, “Ratio of Graduates
to Undergraduates,” will show both non-REU undergraduates and REU students, taken from
Table 7 data. The center should strive for a Graduate to Undergraduate (non-REU students) ratio
of 2 or less of Center funded students by Year 3 (note: the ratio in Table 3b is calculated using all
Center students, including those funded by associated projects). If the academic year ratio is
significantly more than 2, the center should explain steps being taken to increase the
participation of undergraduates in center research.
4.5.4

Industrial/Practitioner Collaboration, Technology Transfer and New Business
Development (For Gen-3, Innovation Ecosystem)

In this section, the center should discuss the industrial/practitioner collaboration portion of its
strategic plan. This narrative should summarize results from the previous three years (fewer if
the center is less than three years old) with more detail for the last year regarding
industrial/practitioner collaborations and partnerships and plans for the future.
Industry/Practitioner members are defined as those who have provided membership fees to the
center, to be used at the discretion of the center director, in the form of cash or in-kind support
according to the center’s membership agreement. Industrial firms or practitioner organizations
who only provide associated or sponsored project support are not considered members under the
cooperative agreement terms.
The narrative should contain information on the following topics as described below: (i) vision
goals and strategy; (ii) membership; (iii) position of member firms in the industry “value chain;”
(iv) technology transfer and new business development; (v) innovation; (vi) future plans, and
(vii) response to most recent site visit SWOT analysis.
4.5.4.1

Vision, Goals, and Strategy

The Center should present the vision and goals of the industrial/practitioner program including
membership goals, technology transfer goals, and innovation goals if appropriate (required for
Gen-3 Centers). This should also include the strategies the Center is pursuing to achieve its
goals.
4.5.4.2

Membership

In the area of membership, both Gen-2 and Gen-3 ERCs should indicate their target goals for
membership in terms number of firms, composition of firms of different sizes (e.g. percentages
of large corporate, medium firm, small or startup) and cite the strategy for developing their
industrial membership. The Center should include an identification of the relevant industry
sectors that are targeted for participation by members. Once this is established, the ERC’s
strategy for developing and strengthening its membership should be discussed. For example,
defining the avenues of communication used to keep industry members engaged in the Center,
the frequency of contact, and the nature of contact (i.e. advisory to ERC or dissemination of
information from ERC).
26

The membership discussion should also include the following information:
• A summary of the tiered membership structure of the ERC and the membership rights
accorded at each level (the full agreement and IP policy will be provided in Appendix II);
• A summary of the policy for handling ERC generated IP;
• A description of the roles of the members, the Industry Advisory Board, other industry
boards or focus groups and/or stakeholders;
• A summary and discussion of trends of Industrial/Practitioner Membership and Support
by Year, supported by the following QRC tables and figures: Table 4,
“Industrial/Practitioner Members, Innovation Partners, Funders of Sponsored Projects,
Funders of Associated Projects and Contributing Organizations,” Table 4a,
“Organization Involvement in Innovation and Entrepreneurship Activities (Gen-2)
Innovation Partner Involvement/Activities,” (Gen-3 only) Table 5, “Innovation
Ecosystem Partners and Support by Year” Figure 5a, “Technology Transfer Activities,”
Figure 5b, “Lifetime Industrial/Practitioner Membership History,” and Figure 5c, “Total
Number of Industrial/Practitioner Members,” and Figure 5d, “Industrial/Practitioner
Member Support, by Year.”
4.5.4.3

Technology Transfer and New Business Development

In the areas of technology transfer and new business development, the Center should discuss
their strategy to move ERC-developed technologies to market and their progress and results to
date. To facilitate this discussion, the Center should create two tables and one chart, described as
follows.
First, a table of all patents and licenses derived from the ERC’s research over the lifetime of the
Center, including their titles and numbers, should be included. An example is shown below.
IP License
Number or
Name

IP License
Title or
Name

IP
Brief
Owner of Year
Category:
Description of IP
Awarded
FP, PP, C, Technology
T

FP= full patent; PP = provisional patent; C= copyright; T= trademark
ERC Intellectual Property Table, to be created by the Center
Second, a table should be created by the Center entitled “Technology Transfer” with the format
shown below that includes technology used by both established firms and start-up firms. All
technologies transferred from the Center to industry and other users over the last three years and
their impacts should be inserted in this table. The discussion regarding this table should include
information specifically about market impact or the benefits to society of the technologies that
have been transferred. To the extent that industry is willing to release the information, quantified
examples, such as productivity gains in terms of man-hours saved or production costs in terms of
dollars saved, or market impact should be provided in the table.
Adopting
Company

Technology

Industrial Application
When
Use in Company
transferred
(date)

27

Impact (e.g., cost savings;
productivity gain, market
impact, etc.)

Technology Transfer Table
Finally, the Center should create the Technology Transfer Chart (see figure below) to depict
major technologies or methodologies that the ERC expects industry/practitioners to adopt over
the 10-year time frame of NSF support. The technology transfer chart is a qualitative chart that
plots the maturity level of a particular technology or methodology on the x-axis and the expected
type of impact of the technology or methodology on the y-axis. The technology maturity level
range is from “idea stage” to “technology transferred to industry” (this is similar to the NASA
Technology Readiness Level, TRL, scale, see http://esto.nasa.gov/files/TRL_definitions.pdf and
the technology impact range is from “incremental impact” to “breakthrough technology.” The
center should place a marker on the chart for each major technology or methodology expected to
be transferred, and include a brief description of the technology or methodology in the narrative
or refer the reader to the appropriate Project Summary reference in Volume II.
Breakthrough
Technology

T2A
T2B

Technology
Impact

T1A

Incremental
Impact
Idea Stage

T1C
T1B

Technology Maturity Level

Technology
Transferred to
Industry

Figure 4.5.4.1: Technology Transfer Chart Example (T1A=Thrust 1, Project A, etc)

4.5.4.4 Innovation
Innovation activities are required of Gen-3 Centers and in many cases, Gen-2 Centers also have
activities in this area as well. If applicable, Gen-2 Centers should also discuss their innovation
activities as described in this section. Some examples of innovation activities include events that
educate Center personnel about entrepreneurship or technology transfer, and events that link
researchers with industrial users or potential investors.
One requirement of Gen-3 ERCs is the development of a culture that links discovery to
innovation (e.g. an innovation ecosystem) to achieve the Center’s vision and this section should
describe the Center’s strategy for developing such an ecosystem. The concept of the innovation
ecosystem stresses that the flow of technology and information among people, enterprises, and
institutions is key to an innovative process. It contains the interaction between the entities who
are needed in order to turn an idea into a process, product, or service for the market. In this
context, the entities will include the innovation partners and may include the IAB, state and local
governments, and university or other organizations devoted to entrepreneurship and innovation.
The intent of such an ecosystem is to speed the translation of ERC developed knowledge into
innovation and then to the market; and if developed properly, should continue to support the
28

Center’s vision after graduation.
applicable):

This discussion should include the following points (when

• The strategy for translational research by engaging membership in translational research
through sponsored projects and, if member firms fail to license new IP, working with nonmember firms within the ERC’s research program with the intent of developing and
translating Center generated innovations;
• The strategy for deciding when it is appropriate to launch new firms and a description of
the process for launching them should also be discussed in detail here, and should be
consistent with NSF’s translational research guidelines;
• The strategy for developing the people (graduate students, post docs, or faculty) who take
on the role of championing 1 the innovations to be translated;
• The strategy for speeding technology translation through the establishment of formal
partnerships with state and local government, university, or other organizations devoted to
entrepreneurship and innovation;
• The communications strategy for insuring that all ERC team members are aware of the
technology translation processes available to them;
• The identification of any critical tools or other resources that are specifically developed
within the innovation ecosystem nexus to help speed the translation of ERC developed
innovations to the market (e.g. testbeds, incubators, etc.);
• The discussion should include any activity by advisory boards or focus groups that has a
particularly high impact on the innovation capability of the ERC (e.g. technology roadmap
development).
• The narrative should indicate any concrete accomplishments and impacts that specifically
enhanced the ERC’s innovation ecosystem and its impacts during the prior year.
One aspect of innovation is the creation of new businesses. Both Gen-2 and Gen-3 Centers
should create a table entitled “ERC Start-Up Firms.” This table should show all start-up
companies that have spun-off based on ERC research. In addition to the table, the narrative text
within this section should include more detailed information about start-up firms based on ERC
research such as growth since inception, number of employees, funding and sales. An example is
shown below.

Name of
Firm

Contact
Information
at Firm

Date
Established

Name of Principle &
Relationship to ERC
(e.g. faculty, student,
graduate, if any)

Funding
status
(SBIR, 1st
round,
positive tax
income,
etc.)

Technology

Market
Impact or
Societal
Benefit (in
terms of
value added)

ERC Start-Up Firms Table, to be created by the center.

1

Champion—the person who takes on the responsibility of championing an innovation through the translation
process to insure that it will be commercialized. Often, the champion is not the same person as the inventor.

29

Volume I, Appendix 2 must include a description of the ERC’s and lead university’s Conflict of
Interest (COI) policies regarding start-up firms where ERC faculty are involved in the firms. See
Section 4.5.5.3 for the specific requirements, and Section 4.9.2(6) for the specific requirements.
Both Gen-2 and Gen-3 Centers should discuss any partnerships that were formed in the prior
year, or are under negotiation, for the purpose of translating ERC technology; this will include
sponsored projects, ERC-SBIR funded collaborations, and other NSF-funded translational
research partnerships. Specific activities initiated with innovation partners or the initiation of a
formal program that encourages teaming between the ERC participants and a business school to
develop innovation should also be reported here. A table in the format shown below should be
used to summarize the technology translation innovation proposals that ERC personnel
submitted or won during the award year, with a status column indicating awarded, declined, or
pending. Results from these collaborations, such as the impact on new product development,
should be reported in the narrative.

Proposal
#

Innovation Proposal Title

Status

Technology Translation Innovation Proposals Submitted by the Center

4.5.4.5 Future Plans
The Center should discuss future planned actions and activities for the upcoming year(s) to
further progress to their stated industry/practitioner, technology transfer, and innovation goals.
Finally, the Center must include actual (not just planned) direct actions taken by the ERC in
response to major weaknesses and any threats regarding industrial collaboration and technology
transfer resulting from the SWOT analyses prepared by the IAB and in the prior annual or
renewal review site visit report. For new ERCs this section should update the reviewer on
progress in response to the pre-award site visit report and subsequent reviews of the ERC.
4.5.5

Infrastructure

This section should provide the reader with information on the institutional configuration of the
ERC, its team and their diversity, organization and management, sources of and deployment of
resources, facilities and equipment, and university commitment to achieve the ERC’s vision,
goals, and strategic plan. The four subsections of this section match the four subsections of the
ERC performance review evaluation criteria under the Infrastructure heading.
There are several required ERCWeb tables that should be included in this section. Additionally,
the ERCs are encouraged to use any extra figures, tables, charts, pictures, etc. to communicate
useful quantitative information. Analyses of the data and trends in the data should be presented
in the narrative at the point where the corresponding table or figure is presented.
In addition, included in this section must be direct actions taken by the ERC in response to major
weaknesses and any threats regarding the resource planning and management resulting from the
SWOT analysis in the prior annual or renewal review site visit report and also the most recent
IAB and Student Leadership Council SWOT. For new centers, this section should update the
30

reviewers on major infrastructure changes resulting from the pre-award site visit report and
subsequent reviews.
4.5.5.1 Configuration and Leadership Effort
Given the ERC’s vision and goals, the institutional configuration and its rationale should be
justified. For Gen-3 ERCs, this section would include the rationale for the foreign university and
innovation partners. The disciplinary configuration of the team, significant changes, and plans
for hiring key personnel should be included. The role of the leadership team in developing and
implementing the center’s various strategic plans, as well as making major decisions, should be
presented.
The ERCWeb Table 6, “Institutions Executing the ERC’s Research, Technology Transfer, and
Education Program,” should be inserted in this section. The roles of the different types of
organizations listed in Table 6 should be explained. Changes since the last Annual Report or
pre-award review should be noted. A description of collaborations with other ERCs or other
centers not previously mentioned should be included. This includes both those funded by center
funds and those collaborations that do not involve any transfer of funds across centers.
Figure 6a, “Domestic Location of Lead, Core Partner, Outreach, and REU and RET
Participants’ Institutions” and Figure 6b, “Foreign Collaborating Participants’ Institutions” (for
Gen-2), and “Location of Foreign Partner Institutions” (for Gen-3 ERCs) should be inserted in
this section. These figures show maps of lead, core partner and outreach institutions, foreign and
domestic, and institutions of REU and RET participants. Figures 6a and 6b cannot be produced
automatically by the ERCWeb system but will be produced on your behalf by QRC. Please email
QRC at [email protected] once you have marked the "Organizations and Institutions" tab complete
and they will produce these maps for you. Figure 6c, Country of Citizenship for ERC Foreign
Personnel will also be produced by QRC in a fashion similar to 6a and 6b and should be inserted
in this section. Figure 6c will show a world map with the countries of citizenship of the foreign
personnel marked. The process of producing the maps will take about a week from request
to delivery. A center may also produce Figures 6a, 6b, and 6c locally if preferred.
4.5.5.2 Diversity Effort and Impact
This section will present a summary of the diversity portion of the ERC’s strategic plan and
progress in the past year in relation to the milestones in the diversity plan. The role of the
education program in the overall center’s diversity plan should also be discussed in this section.
The ERC’s diversity plan should include the center’s diversity goals and tactics used to increase
diversity, and report quantitatively on results benchmarked against engineering wide academic
averages. Plans are not allowed to have quantitative targets according to guidance from the NSF
Office of the General Counsel. The plans will include the partnership between the ERC and its
supporting Deans and Department Chairs to increase diversity at all levels. It should be noted
that in FY 2007, the cooperative agreements of ERCs were revised to assure inclusion of persons
with disabilities within the ERCs’ diversity strategic plans. Therefore, the centers should be sure
to address the current involvement and the plans to increase the involvement of persons with
disabilities in their ERCs.
ERCWeb Table 7, “ERC Personnel”, should appear in Appendix III of Volume I and not in this
section. However, the summary table and figures, Tables 7a and 7f and Figures 7b through 7e,
should be presented in this section.
31

ERCWeb Table 7a, “Diversity Statistics for ERC Faculty and Students” should be inserted in
this section. It will show the diversity statistics at the center level for women, underrepresented
racial minorities, Hispanics/Latinos, and persons with disabilities for the leadership team,
faculty, doctoral students, master’s students and undergraduate students. There will be two
sections of this table: one for U.S. citizens and permanent residents only and the other for foreign
nationals.
Next, four figures produced by ERCWeb should be inserted that represent the information of
Table 7a in a bar chart format. These are ERCWeb Figure 7b, “Women in the ERC,” ERCWeb
Figure 7c, “Underrepresented Racial Minorities in the ERC,” ERCWeb Figure 7d,
“Hispanics/Latinos in the ERC,” and Figure 7e, “Persons with Disabilities in the ERC.”
Finally, the ERCWeb Table 7f, “Center Diversity, by Institution” should be inserted.
4.5.5.3 Management Effort
The organization and management system of the ERC should be discussed and an organizational
chart presented. The Center is reminded that the Center Director must report to the Dean of
Engineering.
Management System Reporting Requirements
• The roles of its advisory boards, including project review and assessment, and the role of
the Student Leadership Council should be explained.
• This section should also include discussion of the ERC’s methods for: (1) determining
which projects are needed to achieve the center’s strategic plan; (2) determining funding
allocation to implement the strategic plan; (3) assessing the quality and impacts of the
projects; (4) identifying associated projects awarded to center faculty members’
departments that are needed by the center to achieve the strategic plan; (5) forming the
research team, including research outreach; (6) integrating the REU and RET Programs
into the research program; and (7) a description of the mentoring activities for any
postdoctoral researcher that is currently or will be supported by the Center.
• The statement of mentoring activities for postdoctoral researchers is required in annual
reports and renewal proposals. In addition, it is extremely important in any renewal
proposal because the proposal will be returned without review if the Center shows a
budget for postdoctoral researchers but does not have a statement of mentoring activities.
Likewise, in the Annual Report, if the Center has shown support for a postdoctoral
researcher over the reporting period, a statement of mentoring activities must be provided
or the Annual Report will be returned for correction. This is NSF policy in accordance
with the America COMPETES Act.
Financial Support Reporting Requirements
• Describe the financial management system of the ERC -- its financial support, budget
allocation, expenditure and fiscal planning systems. The required tables below will be
used as a basis for an analytical discussion of trends in financial support and budget
allocations and the reasoning behind them.
• Information on major sources of cash and in-kind support such as facilities, buildings or
shared equipment should be provided. Major expenditures in the past year (three years if
this is a renewal proposal) that are not discussed elsewhere in the Annual Report should
be discussed here.
32

•
•

Additional charts, tables or figures may be added if the ERC feels it is necessary to
present the full financial picture of the center.
Growth requested in the proposed budget for the following year/three years should be
briefly justified with a reference to the appropriate earlier sections of the Annual
Report/Renewal proposal that contain the more detailed explanation of activities to be
funded by the requested growth.

Conflict of Interest Reporting Requirements
•

In addition to the university policy Conflict of Interest (COI) information to be included
in the Appendix (see 4.9.2 (6)), the Center should provide specific information about the
policies and procedures the ERC follows regarding potential COI situations between
ERC faculty and his or her firm(s) and the source of these policies and procedures (e.g.
internally developed or from the lead university, etc). Faculty who are in ERC leadership
positions, and therefore are responsible for allocations of ERC funds, may be in the
position of making decisions that could financially impact their firm(s). For example, a
certain decision may result in support of their firms’ projects, or result in sole source
purchases from their firm(s). Conversely, a decision might result in unjustified exclusion
of projects or products from competing firms. The Center should provide a description of
how this type of situation would be handled. For example, a member of the ERC
leadership team who is involved with a start-up firm could recuse him- or herself from a
funding decision which might be beneficial (or detrimental) to his or her firm(s). The
Center should have a formal oversight process in place to handle these types of situations.

Strategic Self-Sufficiency Business Plan Reporting Requirements
•

•
•

Starting in the fifth year, the Annual Report must include a strategic business plan for
self-sufficiency as a subsection of this section, up to five pages in length. If the full
strategic business plan exceeds five pages, it may be added as an Appendix and a five
page (maximum) synopsis of the plan should be placed here. It will include the
envisioned features of the post-graduation ERC, cost and income projections, plans for
gaining sources of support and plans for expenditures. Cost projections will include
support for planned core staff, such as the AD, ILO, and/or Education Director. This plan
will be updated in the 6th year renewal proposal and in each subsequent Annual Report.
Centers in years eight and nine in which a change in the center’s configuration upon
graduation is under consideration or already decided should describe the reconfiguration
plans and provide an explanation of the changes.
All centers should discuss their strategy and any actions associated with obtaining
increased support from industry and other sources after the ERC Program funds cease.
Also, the long-term commitments from lead and core partner institutions to help ensure
the continuation of the Center’s administrative, industrial, and education components and
retention of the research and office space should be presented.

The following tables should be inserted and discussed:
ERCWeb Table 8a, “Current Award Year Functional Budget.” should be presented in this
section. Table 8a should cover Current Award Year data only.

33

Table 8b, “Allocation of Current Award Year Budget, by Institution, FY 2010,” should be
developed and presented by the center (it is not an ERCWeb table) according to the format
shown below. This table shows the portion of direct cash (unrestricted and restricted) and
associated project support in the current year budget by institution. This includes the lead, core
partner(s), and, collectively, all other institutions reported in Table 6 receiving direct center cash
and associated project support.
Institutional Distribution of Current Award Year Budget
Institution

Direct Cash

Associated
Projects

Total Cash and
Associated
Projects

Percent of
Total Direct
Cash

Percent of Total
Associated
Projects

Lead
Core Partner 1
Core Partner 2
etc.
All Other
Institutions
Grand Total
Sample Table 8b Portion of Current Award Year Budget, by Institution, FY 2010,
to be created by the center

Table 8c, “Education Functional Budget,” is an ERCWeb table and should be inserted here by
the center In Table 8c, the REU and RET budgets are shown separately from the rest of the
Research and Education and Outreach program. As a minimum, each ERC is expected to budget
$42,000 annually for an RET site and $42,000 annually for an REU site for FY 2010, not
including overhead.
ERCWeb Table 9, “Sources of Support”, should be presented next. For Gen-3 ERCs, the
amount of money contributed to the center’s mission from the foreign university partners should
be displayed in the appropriate “foreign university” row. For example, projects conducted at the
foreign university that support the ERC should be reported as associated projects funded by a
foreign university. As such, they should also be reported in Volume 2, see Sections 5.3 and 5.4.
Table 9a, “History of ERC Funding of the Center,” should be developed and presented by the
center (it is not an ERCWeb table) according to the format shown below. This table
chronologically lists every separate award from the ERC Program: base award, each increment,
renewal award, and supplement (e.g., REU, RET, diversity program support, etc., Graduate
Research Supplement (GRS) Award, ERC/SBIR Translational Research Award), and special
purpose awards (e.g. connectivity, equipment, Innovation etc.) In addition, this table should also
include the NSF RET and NSF REU site awards that have been made to the center outside of the
ERC Program. (Starting in FY 2007 the RET and REU awards were not made through the ERC
Program, rather they were awarded as part of a broader solicitation; and if the ERC received one
of these site awards, they should be included in the table.) The table below provides some
examples.
Award
Number
0111111

Award Type
Base

Award
Title
Center for
Widget
Systems

Award
Duration
5 years

Amount

Status

$15,000,000

In progress

34

Final Report
Approved?
N/A

012345

REU
Supplement

Research
Building
Widget
Systems

2 years

Total

$70,000

Completed

Yes

$XX,XXX,XXX
Sample Table 9a History of ERC Funding of the Center, to be created by the center

For Gen-2 ERCs, the Iowa State University Gen-3 ERC, and the Class of 2011 Gen-3 ERCs,
Table 9b, “Cost Sharing by Institution,” should be developed and presented (it is not an
ERCWeb table) according to the format shown below to include each year of the center. Table
9b and the university cost sharing amount placed on line M of the NSF budget form (NSF form
1030) in the Budget Request section should reflect the center’s university cost sharing
requirements specified in the center’s cooperative agreement. The purpose of this table is to
show the committed cost sharing, based on the original proposal or the last renewal proposal and
the cooperative agreement, for the lead and core partner institutions for the current year and all
prior years of operation. The cost sharing commitment does not apply to RET/REU supplements
or other special awards funded by the ERC Program, but it does apply to other supplements and
the 2007 growth supplements required for the Class of 2006. All cost sharing must be provided
from non-Federal sources, including both university and non-university sources. If the projected
annual university cost sharing has not been met, a plan should be provided that explains how it
will be met by the end of the current award period. For Gen-2 ERCs, the Iowa State University
Gen-3 ERC, and the Class of 2011 Gen-3 ERCs, a certified copy of Table 9b must also be
submitted in Appendix II. For more information, the cost sharing reporting terms in the present
cooperative agreement template should be consulted along with the NSF requirements in the
Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide
Renewal Proposals. (Centers in Year 3 or Year 6), Table 9b should be extended to show the
proposed university cost-sharing commitments for the extension of the support requested. Thus
for a third-year renewal, the cost sharing table would be extended to show the proposed
university cost-sharing commitments through year 8, and for a sixth year renewal, the cost
sharing table would be extended through year 10.

Institution

Award Year 1…
Amount
Committed
transferred to
ERC Account

… Current Award Yr
Amount transferred
Committed
to ERC Account (to
date)

Cumulative Amount
Transferred to ERC
Account

Lead
University
Core
Partner #1
Core
Partner #2
…
TOTAL

Sample Table 9b Cost Sharing by Institution, to be prepared by the center

Class of 2008 Gen-3 ERCs, except the Iowa State ERC. Table 9b should be entitled “University
Financial Support by Institution” with the same format as shown above. This will show the noncost sharing financial support proposed and provided by the lead and some or all of the partner
35

institutions. For Gen-3 ERCs, except the Iowa State ERC, a certified copy of this table is not
required.
Gen-3 ERCs also need to create another funding table, Table 9c, “Funding by International
Partner Universities” to show the amount of funding provided by the foreign university partner
institutions toward the foreign institution’s projects that are associated with the Center’s mission.
An example is shown below.
International
Partner University

Helsinki
University of
Technology
Hannover Medical
School

Foreign Funding
Entity

Finnish
Government

Current Award Year
Funding for
International Partner
Associated Projects
Cash
Rec’d
Promised
US
US
$250,000 $100,000

Industry
Consortium

US
$20,000

Funding type

Role of
Partnership
(Research or
Student
Experience)

Cash Support

Student Exp.

In Kind Support

Research

Sample Table 9c Funding by International Partner Universities

ERCWeb Table 10, “Annual Expenditures and Budgets,” and ERCWeb Table 11, “Modes of
Support by Industry and Other Practitioner Organizations to the Center,” should be presented
next. An analysis of these tables should be provided in the narrative that discusses their
implications for the financial health of the ERC, especially for centers in their sixth year or later
as they plan for graduation.
Table 10a, “Unexpended Residual in the Current Award and Proposed Award Year,” should be
developed and presented by the center (it is not an ERCWeb table) according to the format
shown below. This table presents information regarding unexpended (residual) funds that were
moved into the current award year at the end of the preceding award year. In the event that the
center is planning to move residual cash at the end of the current award year into the proposed
award year, the center should distinguish between (1) residual funds that are committed,
encumbered, or obligated for specific uses from (2) residual funds for which the center has no
plans. The current year spending plans for the residual funds moved into the current year at the
end of the preceding year shown in Tables 8, 9, and 10 should be discussed in the narrative. A
certified copy of Table 10a must also be submitted in Appendix II.
Previous Award Year
Current Award Year

to

Current Award Year to Proposed
Award Year

Total Unexpended Residual Funds
Committed, Encumbered, Obligated
Funds
Residual Funds Without Specified
Use
Sample Table 10a: Unexpended Residual in the Current Award and Proposed Award Year

36

4.5.5.4 Resources and University Commitment
The headquarters space, its facilities for research and collaboration, and its proximity to the lead
institution’s ERC research space should be described. Communications equipment to facilitate
cross-campus communication should be presented. A discussion of how the lead university and
the core partner universities support the ERC’s interdisciplinary, team culture should be
presented. This should include a description of factors considered for tenure; for example, how
the center encourages and supports young investigators in interdisciplinary research in light of
concerns about how tenure and promotion committees view it.
Gen-3 ERCs. This section should include information on how the participating partner
universities are rewarding faculty and students for their efforts in mentoring university faculty,
students, and postdocs, and pre-college students and teachers. ERC cross-university partnership
agreements facilitating collaboration in research and education also will be explained.
4.6

References

In this section of the Annual Report, the source for any citations should be listed. The center
may choose the exact formatting of the references.
4.7

Bibliography of Publications

A bibliography of center publications should be included, grouped by Thrust/Testbed. These
must be complete listings that include only publications in print at the time of submission of the
report and do not include manuscripts in preparation, in review, awaiting publication, or
previously reported in an Annual Report. Education publications should also be included. Also
include a note in Volume II directing the reader to the new location in Volume I.
4.8

Budget Requests

In this section, the Summary Proposal Budget, provided on the official NSF budget form
available in FastLane, is required. For an Annual Report, the budget request is required for the
following Award year. Growth along the prescribed trajectory up to $4.0M must be justified in
the appropriate section of the Annual Report by explaining how the additional funds will be used
and how they would benefit the strategic plan and the center overall. Any forward funding listed
in an annual report received in the prior award year must be deducted from subsequent annual
budget requests.
All classes of ERCs begin at the base level of support provided for year one. The projected level
of annual growth that may be requested is $250,000 until the annual level of support is
$4,000,000. Occasionally, the ERC program will add extra money to the base for new thrusts,
etc so the maximum limit might be $4,200,000 depending upon the base level to which the
increment is added. Once that limit is reached, assuming successful 3rd and 6th year reviews,
funding is flat until the base support is reduced by 33 percent in both years 9 and 10. Thus, the
budget request for year 9 will be 67% of year 8 and the budget request for year 10 will be 67% of
year 9. These are budget requests; the actual level of support will depend upon performance and
availability of funds. As stated in the previous paragraph, plans for expending the growth funds
must be discussed.
37

Subaward budgets do not need to be submitted for current subawards in Annual Reports, unless
the amount allocated to one of the subawardees has increased or decreased significantly (20
percent if the original subaward is over $100,000). If the center wishes to add a new subaward
that is over $100,000, the center must provide a subaward budget and the NSF Division of
Grants and Agreements will incorporate the subawardee into the center’s cooperative agreement
through an amendment after the center’s Program Director has approved the addition. If the
subawards are added after the submission of the Annual Report, the request must be submitted
through FastLane.
Renewal Proposals. An NSF Budget Form is required for each of the years of support requested
along with a summary of the total support requested (years four through eight for a third-year
renewal and years seven through ten for a sixth-year renewal). FastLane will calculate the
summary or cumulative budget. All annual subawardee budgets must be provided, regardless of
size, and all budgets must be signed by the AOR at each institution For sixth-year renewal
proposals, the request for the last two years of support should reflect a phased down level at the
rate of 67 percent of the prior year. The actual level of phased-down support will depend upon
performance and availability of funds.
Gen-2 ERC’s, the Iowa State Gen-3 ERC’s, and the Class of 2011 Gen-3 ERCs. For annual
report budget requests and renewal proposals, the lead university cost sharing amount placed on
line M of NSF form 1030 must reflect the center’s university cost sharing requirements specified
in the center’s cooperative agreement. Budgets for core partner institutions should include their
individual portion of the total cost sharing on line M of their individual NSF forms 1030.
4.9

Volume I Appendices

There are three required appendices in Volume I for FY 2011. The center may add additional
appendices if it is necessary to better explain their operations and/or achievements. The
appendices should be tabbed in text for easy access by the reader. The required appendices and
their descriptions are given next. The name of each appendix and the pages it covers should be
provided in the table of contents. In addition, a list of all the appendices, and corresponding page
numbers, should be provided at the beginning of the Appendix Section.

4.9.1

Volume I, Appendix I – Glossary and Acronyms

Appendix I is the glossary of acronyms and special terms used in the Annual Report.
4.9.2

Volume I, Appendix II – Agreements and Certifications

Appendix II is the Agreements and Certifications portion of the Annual Report and it contains
the following documents. The certifications listed here (items 4,5,6,7) must be certified by an
Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) in the sponsored projects office of the lead
institution. The lead institution is responsible for reporting and obtaining certifications for the
entire center.
1. ERC’s Current Center-Wide Industrial/Practitioner Membership Agreement.
2. ERC’s Intellectual Property Agreement (if not part of the Generic Industrial/Practitioner
Membership Agreement).
38

3. A copy of the Animal and/or Human Subjects approval from the relevant Institutional
Review Boards (IRBs). This must be obtained prior to the submission of the Annual
Report/Renewal proposal. The appropriate box on the cover page of the report should be
checked if there is a project(s) supported that involve animal or human subjects. If data
are collected on the performance of ERC’ students (REU or regular and the impact of
pre-college programs on students) and these data are presented to the public through a
publication or talk at a conference, an IRB Human Subjects approval is required.
4. Certification of the Industry/Practitioner Membership list that includes the total number
of memberships paid since the last Annual Report, certified by an AOR. The private
sector firms should be separated from the non-private sector organizations. Similar to
ERCWeb Tables 4 and 5, firms or agencies that have not signed the membership
agreement or have not paid their membership fee may not be included in the list, even if
they have satisfied one but not all of the industrial/practitioner membership requirements.
5. Certification of Cumulative and Current Cost sharing (Table 9b), certified by an AOR. In
addition to reporting the certification here, the AOR must submit the cost sharing
certification via the standard Notifications/Requests portion of FastLane prior to the
submission of the ERC Annual Report in FastLane. If the submission of the certification
is delayed, the processing of annual funding increments or renewal awards will also be
delayed. If there is an error in a prior year cost-sharing amount, FastLane will not allow
correction of the amount. Instead, the Center should adjust the current year amount so
that the cumulative total cost sharing is accurate. The certification requirement does not
apply to the Class of 2008 except for Iowa State University.
6. The ERC Lead Institution’s Conflict-of-Interest Policy, certified by an AOR. The ERC
should collect and maintain on file certified copies of COI policies from all of the partner
institutions.
• Specific COI policy information from the ERC lead institution regarding ERC
faculty or student involvement in start-up firms or small businesses. In particular,
the lead university’s oversight policies with respect to COI for the following
circumstances should be explained:
• Situations where ERC faculty or students spin-out start-up firms
• Situations where it is necessary for the ERC to purchase products from a firm for
which ERC faculty have fiduciary interests
7. Certification of Unexpended Residual Funds (Table 10a), certified by an AOR.
4.9.3 Volume I, Appendix III – Table 7
Appendix III is the ERCWeb-produced Table 7, “ERC Personnel.” Table 7 lists personnel at
both the center-wide summary level and the institutional levels. The table should be sized so that
it can be easily read.
5

VOLUME II REQUIREMENTS

Volume II contains supporting documents and must be a separate document from Volume I. It
should include project descriptions, a bibliography of center publications, and faculty and
leadership team biosketches. Only renewal proposals require current and Pending Support
documentation, NSF Form 1239, for the Director, Deputy Director and any Associate Directors,
the Research Program Thrust Leaders, the Education Program Director, and for any faculty
receiving $80,000 or more from the ERC. Volume II should be assembled as follows. As with
Volume I, the headings that follow should appear, in the order shown, in Volume II.
39

5.1

Table of Contents

The Table of Contents should include page numbers.
5.2

List of ERC Projects

The center will provide a list of all projects (research, education and outreach, and technology
transfer, ERC innovation) in the center’s strategic plan that are funded by direct support from the
center and all associated projects that are supported by indirect support. The center should
provide on this list the names of the projects, the names and departmental/institutional
affiliations of the faculty members, and the names of the sponsoring organization(s). The
research projects should be listed by thrust, then by the education and outreach projects, and then
by the technology transfer projects. This project list should cover all the research projects listed
in the ERCWeb-produced Table 2 plus the education and outreach projects, translational
research projects, and ERC Innovation and/or Translational Research projects regardless of the
source of funds. Within each section, the projects should be grouped by the type of support—
direct or indirect, and then grouped by content.
If listing an associated project would
compromise the sponsor’s interests, the project should be listed by title if possible with no
mention of source of support.
5.3

Project Summaries

Three- to five-page project summaries for all projects with direct support, organized by Research
Thrust and Education/Outreach Program should be provided. Although potentially challenging, it
is expected that centers will adhere to the requested page limit for the project summaries; in fact,
three page summaries are strongly encouraged! Project summaries do not have to be included
for proprietary projects where such a summary would compromise the sponsor's interests. A
project summary should also be included for each ERC Program supplementary and specialpurpose award such as ERC-SBIR Translational Research awards, ERC Innovation Awards,
Graduate Research Supplements (GRS), etc. In general, project summaries do not have to be
included for associated projects; rather an abstract of the project should be included as instructed
in Section 5.4. However, although some Innovation Awards and ERC-SBIR and other NSFfunded Translational Research awards may be considered associated projects because the award
was not made directly to the center or the center PI, full project summaries are required for these
projects in Volume II. For Gen-3 ERCs, foreign partner associated projects may include a
project summary rather than only an abstract if the project is of particular importance to the
achieving the vision of the center.
Each project summary should include:
• Project title;
• Names of ERC team members involved with the project (project leader, other faculty and
their departments, students from undergraduate through postdoctoral) and industrial
participants;
• A statement of the project goals (what the work is intended to accomplish);
• The project's role in support of the strategic plan;
• A discussion of fundamental research or technology advancement barriers and the
methodologies used to address them;
• A short description of achievements in previous years with more detail on
accomplishments in the past year;

40

•
•
•
•
•
5.4

Summary of other relevant work being conducted within and outside of the ERC and how
this project is different;
Plans for the next year (for an Annual Report), or the next five years (for a renewal
proposal);
Expected milestones and deliverables for the project; and
Member company benefits.
If relevant, commercialization stuff
Associated Project Abstracts

Project abstracts for all projects reported as “associated” should be provided in the relevant thrust
areas along with the project summaries above.
5.5

Data Management Plan

The NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 11-1) contains a
clarification of NSF's long standing data policy. All proposals must describe plans for data
management and sharing of the products of research, or assert the absence of the need for such
plans. FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Data Management
Plan. The Data Management Plan, submitted in the "supplementary documents" section of the
proposal and limited to two pages, will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit or broader
impacts of the proposal, or both, as appropriate. Links to data management requirements and
plans relevant to specific Directorates, Offices, Divisions, Programs, or other NSF units are
available on the NSF website at: http://www.nsf.govbfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp. See Chapter II.C.2.j
of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.
ERC Program proposers must follow the ENG Directorate specific data management guidelines
available at http://nsf.goveng/general/ENG_DMP_Policy.pdf, and also refer to the ERC Program
solicitation for additional details in Sec. 11), "Supplementary Documents, Data Management
Plan." While there are no specific ERC Program Guidelines with respect to the Data
Management Plan, proposers must follow the ENG Directorate specific data management
guidelines.
Specifically, the basic level of digital data to be archived and made available includes (1) the
analyzed data and (2) the metadata that define how these data were generated. These are data that
are or that should be published in theses, dissertations, refereed journal articles, supplemental
data attachments for manuscripts, books and book chapters, and other print or electronic
publication formats.
•

•

Analyzed data are (but are not restricted to) digital information that would be published,
including digital images, published tables, and tables of the numbers used for making
published graphs.
Necessary metadata are (but are not restricted to) descriptions or suitable citations of
experiments, apparatuses, raw materials, computational codes, and computer-calculation
input conditions.

41

5.6

Biographical Sketches

Two-page Biographical Sketches of each member of the ERC's faculty and leadership team
should be included per instructions specified in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and
Procedures Guide, Part I: Proposal Preparation and Submission Guidelines
5.7

Current and Pending Support (Only required for Renewal Proposals)

The Current and Pending Support documentation, NSF Form 1239, for the Director, Deputy
Director and any Associate Directors, the Research Program Thrust Leaders, the Education
Program Director, and for any faculty receiving $80,000 or more from the ERC should be
included.
6

FORMATTING AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1

Formatting

The center should comply with the following guidelines when preparing the Annual Report.
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

Standard letter-sized paper with one-inch margins.
Times New Roman font size 12, Arial font size 10, or equivalents:
o Tables, the list of participants, the highlights of significant achievement and impact,
references, biosketches, and non-narrative text may be provided one font size smaller
but must be readable.
Single-line spacing for the narrative.
One-or two-column text.
Insert tables, figures, photos and charts in appropriate places in the text, not at the end of
a section or the end of the report.
Tabs to mark the different sections of the report (including the subsections of the
Infrastructure portion).
Label the tabs with the names of the sections, not numbers.
Use both sides of a page when producing copies.
o If a color illustration bleeds through the page, a one-sided page may be used.
Do not alter the numbering of the required data tables and make sure all required
tables/charts are submitted:
o For additional tables and charts, retain the numbers of the required tables and number
the extra tables in a logical manner corresponding with the section number. Graphics,
photographs, etc. may be numbered and labeled as the center wishes.
Submit the original copy as an unbound, one-sided copy, held together with a binder clip.
All additional copies should be spiral bound and double-sided in two separate volumes:
Volume 1 and Volume 2. Do not bind both volumes together and do not submit the
Annual Report or Renewal Proposal in a 3 ring binder.
Include the first page of NSF form 1207 in the printed copies of the report, but include
the signature page only in the one unbound original.
Keep the Information About the Principal Investigators/Project Directors (NSF Forms
1225, one for each Principal Investigator / Project Director) with the original, unbound
copy and do not include it with the other copies.
Make sure that all tables and charts are legible and size the ERCWeb-produced ones
appropriately.
42

•
•
6.2

Make sure all specified tables and charts are included in the report. Funding for the ERC
will be withheld until all specified tables and charts are submitted.
Do not alter the content of ERCWeb-produced tables; however, the font size can be
increased so that the tables are readable.
Submission

The center should comply with the following guidelines when submitting the Annual Report or
Renewal Proposal. It must arrive at NSF at least five weeks before a scheduled site visit.
•
•
•

Make 5 paper copies and 6 CD copies with PDF versions of the Annual Report, all Volumes;
Place the name of the center and the calendar year of the annual report or renewal proposal
on all CDs; and
Mail 5 copies of the report, 5 of the CDs, and the original unbound signed copy of the report
in a package to:
Mr. Marshall Horner, Program Assistant
Engineering Research Centers Program
Division of Engineering Education and Centers, Suite 585
National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Phone: (703) 292-2308
Facsimile: (703) 292-9051
Email: [email protected]
•

Mail the remaining CD to Mr. Courtland Lewis, the ERC Program’s Communications
Consultant, at the following address. Court uses it to prepare reports and documents for
the ERC Program on outcomes and impacts.
Mr. Courtland S. Lewis
310 Meadowview Lane
Unicoi, TN 37692

For ERCs that cost share, the lead institution’s AOR must submit the cost sharing
certification via the Notifications/Requests portion of FastLane prior to submission of the
ERC Annual Report or Renewal Proposal in FastLane. Delaying submission of the
certification holds up the processing of annual funding increments or renewal awards and
prevents the ability to submit the Annual Report or Renewal Proposal into FastLane. This
must be done 90 days or less prior to the award date. FastLane will not accept submission
earlier than 90 days but a delay in submitting the cost sharing certification will delay the
incremental or renewal funding.
•

Submit the Annual Report or Renewal Proposal to FastLane:
o Insert all of Volume I and Volume II in the body of the FastLane Annual Report
template:
 Enter the award number and PI name.
 Insert Volume I and Volume II of the Annual Report in the “Activities and
Findings” section of the template. There is no need to include any additional
information or data in this template.
43

o Again, FastLane will not accept submission earlier than 90 days prior to the award
date but the Annual Report should be submitted as soon as possible within the 90 day
limit because the requested funding cannot be processed until this is done.
o A separate interim report in FastLane is required for each supplement received by the
ERC and for an ERC Innovation award received by the ERC or any member of the
ERC.
Table 6.2.1 summarizes the renewal and increment submission protocol.

44

End of
Award
Year

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Report Due in
FastLane*, under
original Award Number

Renewal /
Increment
Due

Submit Cover
Sheet &
Budget in
FastLane **

Action to
submit in
FastLane

Wording for "Project
Summary" field within
FastLane

Wording for
"Justification for
Supplement" field
within FastLane

Wording for
"Biographical
Sketch" field
within
FastLane

Cost Sharing
Certification
under
notifications
and requests
in FastLane
under original
Award
Number

Updated IRB
approvals for Human
subjects or
Vertebrate Animals
submitted in
supplementary
documents section of
Supplement or
Renewal Request, as
applicable

Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 2 budget

supplement

"This action is to request the 2nd
yr increment"

"This action is to request
the 2nd yr increment"

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 3 budget

supplement

"This action is to request the 3rd
yr increment"

"This action is to request
the 3rd yr increment"

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

RENEWAL
(yrs.4-8)

Yes; yrs 4-8
budget

renewal

n/a

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Annual Report due 90
days before anniversary
date *
Final report due 90 days
after expiration date (or
center must request a nocost extension, see Final
Reporting Guidelines)

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 5 budget

supplement

"This action is to request 3rd year
renewal and 4th year increment.
See annual report for annual
report and renewal documents"
"This action is to request the 5th
year increment"

"This action is to request
the 5th year increment"

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 6 budget

supplement

"This action is to request the 6th
year increment"

"This action is to request
the 6th year increment"

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

RENEWAL
(yrs. 6-10)

Yes; yrs 7-10
budget

supplement

Yes

if applicable

Yes; yr 8 budget

supplement

"This action is to request
the 6th year renewal and
year 7 increment"
"This action is to request
the 8th year increment."

"No Bio Data
Provided"

CAGR
Increment

"This action is to request the 6th
year renewal and year 7
increment"
"This action is to request the 8th
year increment."

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 9 budget

supplement

"This action is to request the 9th
year increment."

"This action is to request
the 9th year increment."

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

CAGR
Increment

Yes; yr 10
budget

supplement

"This action is to request the 10th
year increment."

"This action is to request
the 10th year increment."

"No Bio Data
Provided"

Yes

if applicable

end of
award

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Table 6.2.1 ERC Renewal and Increment Submission Protocol

*If anniversary date is July 1, the Annual Report is due April 1.** Budget should include budget justification and explanation for any dollars
placed in budget line item G6; also subcontract budgets if dollars entered on line G5

45

7

GLOSSARY

The complete glossary of ERC terms can be found in the Guidelines for ERCWeb Data
Entry. If there is a discrepancy between the definition in the Annual Reporting
Guidelines and that given in the Guidelines for ERCWeb Data Entry, the Data Entry
document takes precedence.

8

RESOURCES

8.1

NSF Documents

1.

The NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide
(http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=papp ).
The Guide to Programs, which lists and describes all of NSF’s programs:
(http://www.nsf.gov/funding/browse_all_funding.jsp)
NSF-wide REU Program Announcement can be found at:
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5517&org=NSF
RET program information:
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5736&org=EEC&from=h
ome

2.
3.
4.

8.2

ERCWeb
8.2.1

ERCWeb Technical Assistance

ERCWeb Technical assistance: toll-free phone 1-800-981-2852; e-mail: [email protected]
8.2.2

ERC Planning Information
Strategic Implementation Planning Guidelines (Revised: September 2008) (PDF:
149K)
Project Selection Guidelines (Revised: September 2008) (PDF: 92K)
Three-Plane Chart (Revised: September 2009) (PDF: 80K)
ERC Highlights Briefing (Revised: February 2011) (Powerpoint File: 181K)

8.2.3

Annual Report
FY 2008 Final Reporting Guidelines (MS Word File: 199K)
FY2011 Annual Reporting and Renewal Proposal Guidelines (Revised: February
2011) (PDF: 379K)
FY 2011 Guidelines for ERCWeb Data entry (Revised: November 2010) (MS
Word File: 330K)
Sample Output Tables (Revised: February 2009) (MS Excel File: 877K)

46

Sample Figures 6a, 6a-1, 6b, and 6c (Revised: May 2009) (Powerpoint File:
3,888K)
Diversity Statistics (Revised: July 2011) (MS Excel File: 37K)
NASA Technology Readiness Levels (PDF: 15K)
8.2.4
•

Performance Review
Criteria
Gen-2 Performance Criteria (Revised: February 2009) (PDF: 122K)
Gen-3 Performance Criteria (Revised: February 2011) (PDF: 117K)

•

Protocol
Gen-2 ERC Annual Review Protocol (Revised: January 2009) (PDF: 432K)
Gen-2 ERC Renewal Review Protocol (Revised: January 2009) (PDF: 426K)
Gen-3 ERC Annual Review Protocol (Revised: February 2011) (PDF: 172K)

8.2.5
•

Site Visit Information
Guidelines
Annual (Revised: January 2011) (PDF File: 74K)
Renewal (Revised: January 2011) (PDF File: 64K)

•

Site Visit Team Review Briefing
Years 1-2 (Revised: July 2011) (Powerpoint File: 548K)
Year 3 Renewal (Revised: April 2011) (Powerpoint File: 283K)
Years 4-5 (Revised: February 2011) (Powerpoint File: 461K)
Year 6 Renewal (Revised: June 2010) (Powerpoint File: 354K)
Years 7-9 (Revised: April 2011) (Powerpoint File: 420K)
Sample Summative Review (Yr 10) Briefing (Revised: April 2008) (Powerpoint
File: 161K)

•

Site Visit Team Report Template
Year 1-2 (Revised: February 2009) (MS Word File: 115K)
Year 3 (renewal) (Revised: March 2011) (MS Word: 36K)
Year 4-5 (Revised: February 2009) (MS Word File: 107K)
Year 6 (renewal) (Revised: February 2009) (MS Word File: 106K)
Year 7-9 (Revised: April 2011) (MS Word File: 31K)
Year 10 (celebration) (MS Word File: 59K)

47

8.2.6

Relevant ERC and other Engineering Program Studies
List of Studies (MS Word File: 31K)
ERC Program-Level Evaluations (Powerpoint File: 122K)

8.2.7 ERC Association Web Site
ERC Association Web Site

48