Supporting Statement A

Status: Original and derived artifacts are available for this document.

Download: docx | pdf | html

Supporting Statement PART A
A.1. Circumstances that Make Data Collection Necessary
Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of information.
The U.S. National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Directorate for STEM Education (EDU) administers the NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program. The NRT program is designed to encourage the development and implementation of bold, new, and potentially transformative models for STEM graduate education training. The NRT program seeks to ensure that graduate students in research-based master's and doctoral degree programs develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers. NRT is dedicated to providing effective training of STEM graduate students in high priority interdisciplinary or convergent research areas through the use of a comprehensive traineeship model that is innovative, evidence-based, and aligned with changing workforce and research needs. The NRT program also focuses on STEM learning and careers, creating opportunities for all Americans.
The NRT monitoring system was established following a practice successfully employed by the precursor program to the NRT, the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) data collection system (OMB Control No.3145-02261). Until 2021, NRT awardees provided NSF with information on their activities through periodic research performance progress reports (RPPRs, OMB Control No. 3145-0221). However, like the IGERT program preceding it, the NRT program requires awardees to report information beyond that requested/specified in the RPPR format. The program information beyond that required in RPPR format is collected for program management and assessment/evaluative purposes, as the additional and more finely grained information, including direct responses from trainees not possible through RPPR, which are critical to assessing program effectiveness. In 2021, the NRT monitoring system (also referred to as the NRT reporting system) was developed to replace these RPPR reports with a tailored program monitoring system that uses a web-based data collection system to collect, review, and validate specific data on NRT awards. This information is required for effective administration, communication, program and project monitoring and evaluation, and for measuring attainment of NSF's program, project, and strategic goals, consistent with the GPRA Modernization Act of 20102, the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 20183, and the NSF's Strategic Plan4.  Without data directly reported by trainees on their experiences, training and outcomes, for example, NSF is unable to document the full impact of implementation of NRT project activities and outcomes and to provide satisfactory responses to requests from the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Congress. The NRT monitoring system addresses these needs. In 2022, the NRT monitoring system (OMB Control No. 3145-0263) began collecting data to enable awardees to satisfy RPPR reporting requirements without additional administrative burden while also submitting this additional information critical for program management and accountability purposes. 
EDU is committed to ensuring the efficient and effective means for the reporting and analysis of data generated by funded projects within the NRT program. This request proposes to renew the data collection for the NRT monitoring system (OMB Control No. 3145-0263). Some modifications to the survey instruments are proposed to improve the quality of the data collection, to clarify alignment with agency priorities, and to improve the user experience. 
In 2026, the NRT program solicitation (pending publication) combines NRT award opportunities with additional award opportunities for projects that advance improvements in graduate education. The NRT solicitation5 alerts those submitting proposals that PIs will be required to submit annual and final project reports that differ from the standard reporting format contained in Research.gov. Instructions for preparing and submitting such reports will be provided to the PI. NRT PIs are required to submit their annual and final annual project reports through a special NRT web-based reporting system that standardizes the collection of information across NRT sites.” 
This renewal request proposes to continue the established practice of collecting information on an annual basis, according to the RPPR data collection schedule, using the NRT monitoring system.
A.2.	Purpose and Use of the Information evidence
Indicate how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.
Data collected under this request are required for effective program administration and to measure the attainment of the NRT program’s goals6. NSF will use the data from this collection for program planning, management, accountability, and audit purposes (e.g., to respond to queries from the Congress, the public, NSF's external merit reviewers who serve as advisors, the NSF's Office of the Inspector General, and as a basis for either internal or third-party evaluations of individual programs). 
This section describes how data to be collected under the clearance authority will be used for (1) internal program management and administration; (2) as a data source for NSF performance assessment activities, including Directorate and Office Advisory Committees; (3) for documenting the attainment of NSF’s program and strategic goals; and (4) as a foundation for rigorous assessment of the effectiveness of  the NRT program.7
The Foundation’s FY2026–2030 Strategic Plan describes three strategic goals: (1) Ensure American excellence and national security through investments in transformative research and innovation; (2) Advance American leadership in science and technology by empowering STEM talent; and (3) Accelerate NSF's impact by optimizing capability and modernizing operations.8 NRT contributes to the attainment of these goals through awards that:
    • advance cutting edge interdisciplinary and/or convergent STEM research, in high-priority areas, that aligns with the tenets of Gold Standard Science9;
    • increase the capacity of U.S. graduate programs to prepare STEM professionals with technical and transferable professional skills for a range of research and research-related careers, and
    • develop innovative approaches and generate knowledge that will inform improvements in graduate education, thereby
    • expand opportunities for all Americans to contribute to the STEM workforce and increase the capacity of U.S. institutions of higher education to prepare the STEM workforce of the future and to close achievement gaps in all STEM fields.10
The NRT monitoring system allows NSF to assess findings related to trainee preparation for careers in STEM, barriers to the implementation of a project, and strategies for improving recruitment and retention of trainees in the NRT program. Findings may inform future improvements to the program. 
At the time of renewal submission, four rounds of data collection have been completed under OMB Control No. 3145-0263. These data enable the program to describe the number and demographic characteristics of trainees that received stipends from the NRT awards. Common project activities related to interdisciplinary training, career preparation, and recruitment and retention are becoming apparent. In addition, the feedback collected directly from trainees regarding their experience with the NRT provides program staff with rich insight into how the program is received from the trainee perspective and potential program improvements to optimize impact on developing the future STEM workforce. 
The NRT monitoring system includes four surveys completed by key project participants:
    • Project Survey: Completed by PI. This instrument collects information on project activities, accomplishments, participants, and products for a single reporting year. A subset of data, including participant lists, is carried over in subsequent years to reduce burden. Information collected from participants (e.g., name and email) is used to initiate account set up for access to PI, trainee and faculty/Co-PI surveys. In the case of Project Coordinators (PCs), contact information is entered by the PI, solely for the purpose of initiating an account for Project Survey access. 
    • PI Survey: Submitted by PI and completed by PI, in collaboration with the PC and/or Co-PI(s) at the PI’s discretion. This instrument collects basic contact and demographic data on the PI. All information carries over in subsequent years to reduce burden.
    • Faculty/Co-PI Survey: Completed by Co-PIs and other Faculty named as participants in the Project Survey. This instrument collects basic contact and demographic data. All information carries over in subsequent years to reduce burden.
    • Trainee Survey: Completed by trainees identified as participants in the Project Survey. This instrument collects demographic data, education and research background, future plans, as well as information on trainee activities, accomplishments, and experiences in the program. A subset of information carries over to subsequent years to reduce burden for trainees that are active across multiple reporting years. 
This renewal of the existing OMB Control No. 3145-0263 collection, with minor modifications, requests information on (1) staff and project participants; (2) project implementation characteristics; and (3) project outputs. Collection of these data will continue to satisfy RPPR requirements to provide program and project-level monitoring of grant award progress and outcomes annually. These data will continue to satisfy participant reporting requirements for Federal STEM education investments to address requirements of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. The NRT program is part of the inventory11 of Federal STEM education programs. In addition, these data may be used to provide the necessary foundation to determine individual-level treatment and control groups for future third-party study or for internal evaluation, to identify well-matched comparison groups, and to measure baseline for pre- and post-NSF-funding level impacts. 
NSF uses data from the survey to inform improvements to the effectiveness and efficiency of the NRT program. Since this collection is primarily used for program monitoring and management, a census of projects and key project participants, rather than sampling design, is necessary. 
Unless otherwise provided for in the original award notice, each increment of a continuing grant will be funded at the level indicated in the original award notice without a formal request, subject to NSF’s judgment of satisfactory progress, availability of funds, and receipt and approval of the required annual report. NSF makes every attempt to honor continuing grant commitments12.
A.3.	Use of Information Technology and Burden Reduction 
Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also, describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.
 The NRT monitoring system is administered entirely online via the web. NSF favors web-based systems because they facilitate respondents’ data entry across computer platforms. One innovative feature of the web system is the thorough reviewing and editing of all submitted data for completeness, validity, and consistency. Editing and validation are performed as data are entered. Invalid data cannot be entered into the system, and questionable or incomplete entries are called to the respondents’ attention before they are submitted to NSF.
The NRT monitoring system employs user-friendly features such as data entry with controls like checkboxes and radio buttons, data verification with error messages for easy online correction, standard menus, and tooltips for questions requiring additional, clarifying information. To further reduce burden, programmed skip patterns will allow respondents to only answer questions relevant to them and their experiences. In addition, the system carries over any data that can be pre-populated after the initial award year to further reduce burden in subsequent years. The surveys also allow respondents to save their progress at any point, allowing them to return to continue the surveys at their convenience.  These features facilitate the reporting process, provide useful and rapid feedback to the data providers, and reduce the burden for the respondents. 
NSF reduces burden with the use of application programming interfaces (APIs) to allow respondents to retrieve data stored elsewhere and to import it into the relevant sections of the NRT data collection. For example, respondents can retrieve a product’s information by entering a product’s digital object identifier (DOI). A DOI is a unique, persistent identifying number for a document published online. By entering the DOI for their products, respondents can quickly complete this section with minimal effort; the burden reduction is significant. The system also works with BibTeX, which streamlines reference formatting and management for citations, hence minimizing burden of data entry. Respondents can enter DOI or BibTeX information one at a time or do a bulk upload to import multiple products at one time.   
All data collected for the NRT program under this clearance will continue to comply with Section 508, the 1998 amendment to the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which mandates that the electronic and information technology used by federal agencies be made accessible to all people with disabilities. An NRT Tech Support team is available to provide users with brief annual training and general guidance on completing surveys as well as assist via periodic office hours with that require additional support to access and/or complete the surveys.
A.4.	Efforts to Identify Duplication and Use of Similar Information
Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purpose described in item 2 above.
The NRT program monitoring clearance will not duplicate efforts undertaken by the Foundation, other federal agencies, or other data collection agents. The data collected under the NRT program monitoring clearance are not duplicated in the NSF RPPR system except to the extent that completed reports will be associated with the award in the RPPR system. The data collected via the NRT monitoring system will satisfy the RPPR requirements.  
A.5.	Impacts on Small Businesses or Other Small Entities
If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe any methods used to minimize burden.
NSF has determined that the requirements for this information collection do not adversely impact small businesses or other small entities. The respondent populations do not include these entities.
A.6.	Consequences of Collecting the Information Less Frequently
Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.
The information collection proposed for this study consists of four surveys, including one Project-level survey and three surveys tailored for specific respondent populations [principal investigators (PIs), faculty including co-PIs, and trainees). Respondents will complete surveys annually throughout the period of performance that will be used to satisfy RPPR requirements. If these data were collected less frequently, it would not satisfy the conditions of receiving a NSF award, which requires annual reporting on progress and activities. If these data from specific respondent populations were not collected at all or were collected less frequently, NSF would: 
    • be unable to adequately document the implementation of NRT project activities and outcomes to inform program improvements. 
    • be unable to provide satisfactory responses to requests from OSTP, CoSTEM, and Congress that require counts of beneficiaries with demographic details.  
    • lack critical information needed to inform NRT program improvements, including about trainee satisfaction with the NRT program, variation of experiences across critical population subgroups, recruitment and retention activities, and whether satisfaction, quality, and fairness have improved over time. 
    • have difficulty verifying that it has met its accountability requirements under the ‘‘Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018’’ or assess the degree to which projects and programs, such as NRT, are meeting their goals.   
    • lack the ability to compare outputs and outcomes across various government agencies. 
A.7.	Special Circumstances Relating to the Guideline of 5 CFR 1320.6 – Public Protection
Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner:
There are no special circumstances for the proposed data collection. The collection of information will be conducted annually in a manner consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6. 
A.8.	Comments in Response to the Federal Register Notice and Efforts to Consult Outside Agency
If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number of publications in the Federal Register of the agency’s notice, soliciting comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in response to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these comments.
Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting form, and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.
    a. Federal Register Notice and Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the public was given an opportunity to review and comment through the 60-day Federal Register Notice, published on January 30, 2026 (Vol. 91, No. 20, pages 4113-4114).  One comment was received, but it was not relevant to the collection as it called for NRT program support that already exists, so we propose to proceed with the request for renewal of this data collection (OMB Control No. 3145-0263).
    b. Consultations Outside of the Agency
During the initial development of the NRT monitoring system, NSF consulted with Creative Business Solutions, Inc. (CBS) on the survey content and design, administration of the survey, and the final online user interface. Due to the similarities between the NRT program and its precursor program (IGERT), survey content was adapted from and modeled after many of the IGERT survey items (OMB Control No. 3145-0226). 
Prior to receiving initial clearance for the NRT monitoring system data collection, the collection was pilot tested to obtain user feedback to ensure that the questions could be answered in a reasonable amount of time (i.e., that the burden estimates are accurate) and that the directions and question content were easy to understand and follow. The pilot test involved nine individuals who were either PIs or PCs. Members from the contracting team and NSF moderated video call “Think Aloud” exercises with two of the nine pilot testers so they could watch them use and reflect on the data collection in real time. Data obtained from both the system comments and the Think Aloud exercises were used to guide system development. 
The current NRT monitoring system (OMB Control No. 3145-0263) allows for feedback and comments from users used to improve the user experience and reduce respondent burden. Users may provide feedback through comment boxes, through reaching out to technical support by phone or email, or by contacting NSF program staff.  Additional approaches to gather feedback for improvement purposes include collecting feedback from PIs during meetings and conferences; comprehensive reviews by NSF staff; and testing performed by the system developers.  
Any input on the system received from users is reviewed by NSF and CBS staff during regular check-ins. Where appropriate, the feedback has been used to improve the guidance provided to users and/or system functionality and features. In addition, this feedback has informed the revised data collection. For example, prior to the first renewal some respondents to the Project Survey noted that the Professional Skills Activities and Trainee Preparation sections appeared duplicative; therefore, the last renewal reorganized the question order and removed questions to reduce the perception of duplication in data that was collected in the former Professional Skills Activities and Trainee Preparation sections. This led NSF and CBS staff to evaluate the sequence and content of the survey questions in these sections and to propose, in this renewal, to modify the sequence of these questions and to remove some checklist responses, thus providing clarity and further reducing burden. 
A.9.	Explanation of Any Payment or Gift to Respondents
Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.
No payment or gift will be offered to survey respondents. 
A.10.	Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents
Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
All respondents are shown the following survey privacy notice when logging in to the system: 
Privacy Act Statement
Purpose: The NRT Reporting System is a monitoring and reporting web application designed to collect, review, and validate specific data on NRT awards. It will be used by NRT awardees to report on the project’s progress, participants, and to generate annual and final project reports. Data collected under this request are required for effective program administration and to measure the attainment of the NRT program’s goals. This system is used to fulfill Research Performance Progress Reports (RPPR) requirements of the NRT program awards. NSF will use the data from this collection for program planning, management, accountability, and audit purposes. 
Authority: The NSF Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. § 1861 et seq.)
Routine Uses: The information requested on this form may be shared externally as a “routine use” to certain other Federal agencies as well as to NSF contractors, consultants, and other individuals who perform work for NSF when the information necessary for their specific duties. A complete list of the routine uses can be found in the system of records notices associated with this system: NSF-50, Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records (79 Fed. Reg. 76,398, Dec. 22, 2014) and NSF-69, Education and Training Records (63 Fed. Reg. 264, Jan. 5, 1998). 
Data in highly aggregated, de-identified form or data explicitly requested "for general use" may be made available to anyone outside of NSF for research purposes
Consequences of Failure to Provide Information: Providing this information is voluntary. For recipients of NSF Research Traineeship Program awards, it is used to fulfill RPPR requirements of the program. For students, there are no consequences to a lack of response to this data collection. For institutions who have received an NRT award, this data collection fulfils the RPPR requirements for the award, and thus consequences of non-response are the same as those for not completing RPPR requirements. 
https://info.orcid.org/what-is-orcid/ 
A.11.	Justification for Sensitive Questions 
Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.
Questions of a sensitive nature have been kept to an absolute minimum in the proposed collection. The only data that are sensitive in nature relate to respondent demographics (e.g., race, ethnicity, biological sex, disability, veteran status) and date of birth. Respondents may choose not to provide information they deem privileged, e.g., for 'required' items by selecting the 'Do not wish to provide' item response category.
Demographic information requested is based on government-wide standard categories currently in use on a variety of forms such as the U.S. Census and would only pertain to the people who have directly worked on the award. To align with the January 2025 Executive Order on Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government and other NSF data collections (e.g., Survey of Earned Doctorates OMB 3145-0019), this renewal request proposes to modify one demographic question and remove two others. The modification of the existing biological sex question will involve adding an option “I prefer not to answer” and will require response to the question.  This approach is consistent with the question presentation in prior years and may improve item response rates. In the 2024 collection cycle, 29% did not respond to the biological sex and gender questions when they were not required and there was no “I prefer not to answer” option for respondents. In the initial years of collection (2021-2023), "I prefer not to answer" was included as an option and item nonresponse rates were between 4-6%. The two questions that follow biological sex regarding gender identity and sexual orientation are removed in this collection. Demographic data will be used for data analysis and reporting, not as part of the progress report evaluation.  The data will be collected, maintained, and used in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, and any other applicable OMB and agency policies and practices. These demographic data support NSF’s efforts to understand or address participation in STEM and to create opportunities for all Americans.
Respondents are also asked to provide their names, an email address, institutional information, and funding information, and (as noted above). 
Respondents may also submit their Open Research and Contributor ID (ORCiD) if they wish. NRT asks for an ORCiD rather than sensitive information such as an SSN. Beginning with the 2023 data collection, the survey began collecting date of birth (DOB) as an optional field from trainees only, in order to support future matching with other data sources, such as the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC), to track student educational outcomes. This renewal proposes to continue that practice. The ORCiD is a public, digital identifier used by academics and researchers to distinguish themselves from others who might share the same name. This id remains with the scholar or academic for their entire career. The ORCiD is also tied directly to publications and other academic products that they have produced.13  
All other survey questions are limited to asking respondents to report their behavior (i.e., involvement in STEM activities, professional development activities and training) and their perceptions of their experiences (i.e., benefits, professional impact) as relates to the NRT program.  
Trainees will be notified at the beginning of the web survey that their responses will not be accessible by their PIs or other project personnel; however, a PI will be able to see if Trainees have or have not completed and submitted a section of their survey. Any individual-level data that are collected are provided only to program staff and contractors conducting studies using the data as authorized by NSF. Any public reporting of data is in aggregate form.
A.12.	Estimates of Hour Burden Including Annualized Hourly Costs 
Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement should:
    • Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour-burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.
    • Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories.
As shown below in Table A.12.1 the NRT monitoring system consists of a set of five surveys. 
Table A.12.1 – Surveys and Burden Comprising the NRT Monitoring System
Survey 
Respondent Responsible
Response Frequency
Burden Estimate
Number of Respondents
Total Annual Hour Burden
Project Survey
PI*
Once annually
30 hours
130
3,900 hours
PI Survey
PI
Once annually
10 minutes
130
22 hours
Faculty Survey (includes CoPIs)
Faculty/Co-PI
Once annually
10 minutes
1560
260 hours
Trainee Survey
Trainee
Once annually
90 minutes
1300
1,950 hours
Total



3,120
6,132 hours
    • And/or delegated PC and co-PI
The burden estimates provided in Table A.12.1 are based on the burden hours for RPPR respondents (OMB 3145-0221). The burden estimated for RPPR ranges from 2-16 hours. The NRT project survey respondents’ burden is higher than the RPPR burden, as NRT projects involve coordination of a complex set of activities beyond research (e.g., professional development, research training, internal and external partnering, outreach) and the survey collects additional information beyond the scope of RPPR. The burden for the PI, Co-PI/Faculty, and Trainee surveys were initially based on the burden reported by IGERT respondents. The NRT respondents’ burden was considered similar in scope to the IGERT respondents’ burden as the scope of the data collections are similar. Feedback from NRT respondents that was directly collected by the contractor over the past four collection cycles have been used to update the burden tables for this renewal. The estimates indicated in the table reflect the burden for new participants. However, respondent data collected by the contractor indicates that returning respondents spend less time completing the instruments in subsequent years. For example, the average estimated time reported by PIs to complete their PI survey in the initial year of the collection was ~16 minutes whereas in Year 2 it declined to ~7 minutes. NRT award duration is typically five years, so the burden displayed is estimated for initial reporting years. For later reporting years (Years 2-5), less time is expected to complete the surveys. 
Estimates of annualized cost to respondents are shown below in Table A.12.2, with appropriate wage rate categories used and identified. 
Table A.12.2 – Estimates of Annualized Cost to Respondents Using the NRT Monitoring System
Survey 
Respondent Responsible
Burden Estimate (hours)
Hourly Wage
Annual Cost Per Respondent
Number of Respondents
Total Annual Burden (hours)
Total Annual Cost 
Project Survey
PI*
30 hours
$40.3813
$1,211.40
130
3,900 
$157,482
PI Survey
PI
0.17 hours
$40.3813
$6.86
130
22 
$892
Faculty Survey
Faculty/
Co-PI
0.17 hours
$40.3813
$6.86
1560
260
$10,702
Trainee Survey
Trainee
1.5 hours
$17.7914
$26.69
1300
1,950
$34,697

For the NRT program, it is expected that all faculty respondents (including PIs, Co-PIs, PCs, and Faculty) will be working at an academic institution, likely in a teaching and/or research capacity.  Therefore, for the purpose of cost estimates for Faculty, the annual mean wage for postsecondary teachers from Bureau of Labor Statistics has been used, which is $83,98014. Assuming a 40-hour workweek over the course of 52 weeks annually, the hourly wage for this occupation is approximately $40.38. 
For the purpose of cost estimates for Trainees, the current minimum stipend rate for NRT Trainees has been used, which is $37,00015. Assuming a 40-hour workweek over the course of 52 weeks annually, the hourly wage for this occupation is approximately $17.79.
A.13.	Estimates of Other Total Annual Cost Burden to Respondents or Record Keepers
Provide estimates of the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of information, (do not include the cost of any hour burden shown in items 12 and 14). The cost estimates should be split into two components: a) a total capital and start-up cost component annualized over its expected useful life, and b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase of services component.
There is no overall annual cost burden to respondents or record-keepers that results from the NRT program monitoring other than the time spent responding to the online survey.  It is usual, customary, and expected that individuals involved in education and training activities in the United States keep descriptive records, and the information being requested is from records that are maintained as part of normal educational or training practices. In order to receive funding, institutions must follow the instructions in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is cleared under OMB 3145-0058.  The PAPPG requires that all applicants submit requests for NSF funding and that all active NSF awardees do administrative reporting via Research.gov. Thus, the PIs, faculty members including Co-PIs, and trainees, who are the primary respondents to the individual data collections within the NRT program monitoring clearance, make use of standard office equipment (e.g., computers) and internet connectivity that is already required as a startup cost and maintenance cost under OMB 3145-0058, and free software (e.g., Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge or other web browsers) to respond.
A.14.	Annualized Cost to Federal Government
Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of information.
The total annual cost to the Federal Government of the NRT data collection is currently estimated to be $1,018,952. Computing the annualized cost to NSF for the NRT data collection was based off anticipated budget for the current contract period of performance and estimating that the percent of the budget will be the same for the next three years, given the estimated decrease in development time. The total three-year cost is estimated to be $3,056,857. 
The annualized cost was computed as one-third of the total three-year cost; thus, the annualized cost to NSF for the NRT data collection is $1,018,952. 
A.15.	Explanation for Program Changes or Adjustments
Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-1.
The increase in burden hours reflects an increase in the number of respondents to the survey. In the previous request, the program estimated ~120 awards per year. Respondent numbers have been increased to align with the current active NRT award volume of ~130 awards per year. The estimated annualized costs to the Federal Government and to respondents have also increased, due to wage increases and increased number of respondents. 
 A.16.	Plans for Tabulation and Publication and Project Time Schedule
For collections of information whose results are planned to be published, outline plans for tabulation and publication.
Typically, recurring studies generate information that NSF uses as inputs to other reports, and therefore NRT cites no specific publication plans other than internal or general use to meet reporting requirements. 
The data collection that is the subject of this request will be utilized for multiple purposes that are described in sections A.1 (Circumstances Requiring the Collection of Data) and A.2 (Purposes and Use of the Data).  The data that the NRT monitoring system collects are not published as a stand-alone product. The data are an input to how NSF manages, documents, evaluates, and measures its performance as an agency. Aggregate reports on NRT participants may be shared with Directorate and NSF leadership and with the NRT Coordinating Committee (NCC), which includes representative program officers from the other NSF Directorates. Aggregate reports may also be shared publicly, on NSF websites, or in presentations. When these data are shared outside NSF, NSF staff will comply with Federal restrictions on sharing of non-public information.16 For data included as part of an evaluation, the evaluation activities will be aligned with the NSF Evaluation Policy17. 
The data collection effort included under this request is administered by a third-party contractor that will deliver analytical reports and the raw data from the collection.  This third-party contractor has an Authority to Operate (ATO) provided by NSF or another federal agency at the level of control required for the class of data being collected/processed. NSF holds all vetting rights, and third parties are contractually forbidden from publishing results unless NSF has made a specific exception.  All products of the collection are the property of NSF; after the products are delivered, NSF determines whether the quality of the products deserves publication.
When reports on studies that employ monitoring data or documents presenting analyses of monitoring data are approved for publication, distribution is likely to be electronic in nature. 
A.17.	Reason(s) Display of OMB Expiration Date is Inappropriate
If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.
The agency plans to display the expiration date of OMB approval on all forms/questionnaires associated with this information collection.
A.18.	Exceptions to Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions
Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19 “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act.”
There are no exceptions to the certification statement.