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.
for Approval of Non-NSF Funding
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
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.
for Proposals for Non-NSF Funded Activities
first two criteria must be met in all cases.
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.
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.
least one of the next two criteria must be met in all cases.
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.)
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.
next criterion must be met and described to justify proposed cosponsorship.
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.)
recent review panel for UCAR found these criteria to be an excellent means
for evaluating non-NSF projects.
Review of Non-Base Funded Proposals
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 NCARís 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.
in Non-NSF Funding at NCAR
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.
of NCAR Non-NSF Funds
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.
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 NCARís participation in the Indian Ocean Experiment
(INDOEX), supported by NASA.
FY 1999, 19 programs were classified as major.These
FY 1999, 11% of non-NSF expenditures were for facility projects.These
are projects directed toward the development, acquisition, or deployment
of community facilities - either observational or computational.Efforts
in this category in FY 1998 involve annual expenditures ranging from $1K
to $550K.Total expenditures increased
from $3.0M in FY 1998 to $3.6M in FY 1999, primarily due to an Air Force
project to fabricate a multi-channel GPS dropsonde data system in ATD.
FY 1999, 29% of non-NSF expenditures were for scientific projects.These
projects typically involve smaller efforts, often directed toward specific
scientific questions or approaches.These
projects usually involve smaller amounts of funding, ranging from $25K
for a workshop to $382K for MMMís Mesoscale Model 5 (MM5) Model Improvement
Support Project.The projects typically
augment the Base Program of NCAR and NSF through support staff, visitors,
and equipment and support the community through instrumentation development,
participation in community field programs and community model development
Submitted in FY 1999
3 examines the benefits provided to universities and the community in the
74 proposals submitted in the Science category in FY 1999.One
primary benefit was counted per proposal and additional benefits were counted
as secondary.Benefit categories
were numbered 1 through 6.If the
proposal indicated there was a university co-investigator in an NCAR proposal
(category 1), it was counted as primary in line 1 and all additional benefits
were listed as secondary.However,
if the first category was not mentioned, but the second category was, it
was counted as primary on line 2, and any additional benefits were listed
as secondary.If the first and second
categories were not listed, but the third was, it was counted as primary
on the third line and so on.The
secondary benefits of a single proposal may be counted in more than one
area.Of the 74 science proposals,
57 included either a university co-investigator, direct university collaboration
or were for NCAR participation in a university-led program.
4 presents a five-year history of NCAR proposal submissions by category.
The science category includes proposals that benefit the community through
participation in and support of community field programs and as members
of science teams.This category also
includes projects that support community model development and validation,
such as the MM5, CCM3, CSM and TIME-GCM, and Earth System Modeling as well
as projects that support instrumentation development.
of NCAR Non-NSF Funds
supported programs provide funds to augment NCAR's research programs and,
in some cases, also provide direct support of a university research program.Within
NCAR, non-NSF funds support research staff, equipment or facility purchases,
travel and indirect costs.
of the non-NSF funded programs at NCAR within the "science" category support
NCAR-university research collaborations, as indicated earlier in Table
3.Development of the NCAR Community
Climate Model, the MM5, and the TIME-GCM has been supported with outside
funds.Facility development and acquisition
have been possible with the use of non-NSF funds in the Atmospheric Technology
Division and the Scientific Computing Division; in FY 1999, $3.6M was expended
for this purpose.
criteria described earlier are intended to provide assurances that non-NSF
funded activities at NCAR are appropriate and do not compete unfairly with
universities.It is intended by the
NCAR Director and UCAR policy that proposals be evaluated and proposed
cosponsorship be justified very early in proposal development.This
evaluation begins with the investigators and the respective divisions.If
the division director considers a prospective program appropriate, a completed
Advance Notice form that indicates how the criteria are met is submitted
to the NCAR Director's Office for review and approval.The
proposal process continues to include evaluation by peers, approval by
the respective NCAR division director, and careful evaluation of the program
by the NCAR Director, Associate Director, and the Budget and Planning Office.Finally,
when determined to be consistent with the criteria, the proposal is submitted
and simultaneously reported by the NCAR Director to the NSF/ATM Program
Official for review and approval.