Introduction
This
report summarizes NCAR's expenditures of non-NSF funding in FY 1999
and the preceding four years. In
FY 1999, total NCAR spending for science and facilities amounted to
$92.9 million; NSF funds amounted to $59.7 million or 64.3% of the
total while non-NSF sources, almost exclusively other federal agencies,
accounted for the remaining $33.2 million or 35.7%.
That portion of NCAR expenditures supported by non-NSF funds
is described below in the three project categories used in past reports:
"major," "facilities," and "scientific."
The definitions of these categories can be found on page 5.
Criteria for Approval of Non-NSF Funding
Beginning
in mid-FY 1993, UCAR began using a more specific and extensive set
of criteria for assessing proposals seeking additional non-NSF funding
for the National Center. These
criteria are intended to ensure that non-NSF funded activities are
appropriate to the mission of NCAR, and that such funding is not obtained
through unfair competition with universities.
The
criteria have been incorporated into internal policies and procedures
for the development of NCAR proposals.
These policies, procedures, and guidelines regarding NCAR proposals
for non-ATM funding reflect requirements of the NSF/UCAR Cooperative
Agreement, improvements recommended by the University Relations Committee
(URC), and internal refinements. The
final criteria, approved by all reviewers, including NSF-ATM and the
URC, are listed below.
Criteria for Proposals for Non-NSF
Funded Activities
The
first two criteria must be met in all cases.
1. Explain why the proposed activity is appropriate
for the National Center and supports the mission of NCAR. This means that it must support the research,
facilities, education and/or leadership objectives of NCAR and be supportive
of and complementary to the university atmospheric and related scientific
community.
2. Explain why the activity does not compete unfairly
with the universities. An example
of unfair competition would be a proposal that takes advantage of NCAR's
facilities in a way that is not available, at NCAR or elsewhere, to
the typical university investigator.
At least
one of the next two criteria must be met in all cases.
3. Explain how the proposed activity would involve
significant and meaningful collaboration involving NCAR and university
colleagues, and/or provides direct support for students, visitors,
education-related activities, or community workshops. (If the proposed activity does not involve collaboration
with universities, explain why not.)
4. Explain how the activity would contribute to
the development or support of community facilities, community models,
or other community projects such as field programs, and as such would
have demonstrable benefit to the community.
The
next criterion must be met and described to justify proposed cosponsorship.
5. Explain how the activity would support and enhance
the regular NSF-sponsored NCAR program, thereby leveraging regular
NSF resources. (Be specific
about cosponsorship of facilities and describe whether the amount of
cosponsorship has already been allocated for the purpose described
in the proposal. Incremental facility use, specific to the proposal,
will be charged to the funding agency, unless the proposed activity
directly supports an ATM area of interest and ATM approves full
or partial cosponsorship.)
The
recent review panel for UCAR found these criteria to be an excellent
means for evaluating non-NSF projects.
URC Review of Non-Base Funded Proposals
Beginning
in FY 1993, a URC subcommittee was appointed to conduct a bi-annual
review of documentation for all NCAR proposals submitted within the
previous six months. This review
process has continued and provides a method by which the URC verifies
NCAR’s compliance with the criteria.
To date, various concerns have been voiced, but generally almost
all proposals have been found to be compliant with the criteria.
Trends in Non-NSF Funding at NCAR
Table
1 and Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate the trends in NSF and non-NSF funding
at NCAR from FY 1994 through FY 1999.
(Figures starting from FY 1978 are available upon request.)
The increase in NSF Funding beginning in FY 1995 is largely explained
by the implementation of the Climate Simulation Laboratory (CSL).
The decrease in FY 1997 of total Non-NSF funding flow-through
funding is primarily due to the transfer of the High Resolution Dynamics
Limb Sounder (HIRDLS) hardware program to the University of Colorado.
Although NCAR received a $4 million NSF budget increase in FY
1999, actual 1999 expenditures were down by a net of $4.3 million or
6.7%. The primary reason for this reduction is the
purchase of a $6.3 million IBM supercomputer delivered in 1999 but
not accepted for payment until after the end of the fiscal year. This $6.3 million commitment was carried over into FY 2000 instead,
influencing the ratio of NSF to non-NSF expenditures for FY 1999.


Classification of NCAR Non-NSF Funds
Table
2 and Figures 3 and 4 show trends in non-NSF funding based on the three
classifications of "major," "facilities," and "scientific"
projects. This classification
permits more direct comparison with university programs and consideration
of issues concerning support of the
community or competition.
In FY
1999, 60% of non-NSF expenditures were for major projects. These projects involve large field efforts
or the development of major hardware such as satellite instrumentation
or other large group efforts. Projects in this category in FY 1998
involve annual expenditures ranging from $10K for a program that may
be winding down to over $6M for the FAA Program.
Expenditures increased from last year by almost 9%, from $18.1M
to $19.7M. This change is primarily due to NCAR’s participation in the Indian
Ocean Experiment (INDOEX), supported by NASA.
In FY
1999, 19 programs were classified as major.
These include: