text:
This document has been archived and replaced by NSF 13-603.
Ocean Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships
National Science Foundation
Full Proposal Target Date(s):
January 14, 2013
Second Monday in January, Annually Thereafter
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), NSF 13-1, was issued on October 4, 2012 and is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 14, 2013. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in NSF 13-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 14, 2013, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 13-1.
Please be aware that significant changes have been made to the PAPPG to implement revised merit review criteria based on the National Science Board (NSB) report, National Science Foundation's Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revisions. While the two merit review criteria remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts), guidance has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the criteria. Changes will affect the project summary and project description sections of proposals. Annual and final reports also will be affected.
A by-chapter summary of this and other significant changes is provided at the beginning of both the Grant Proposal Guide and the Award & Administration Guide.
Please note that this program solicitation may contain supplemental proposal preparation guidance and/or guidance that deviates from the guidelines established in the Grant Proposal Guide.
Significant Changes
Program Title:
Ocean Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships (OCE-PRF)
Broadening Participation
Synopsis of Program:
The Division of Ocean Sciences (OCE) offers Postdoctoral Research Fellowships to increase the participation of under-represented groups in the ocean sciences. Awards are intended to support the individual fellows' research and increase the diversity of the U.S. ocean sciences research community. In this solicitation, the term under-represented groups will refer to and include the following: women, persons with disabilities, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and Pacific Islanders. Fellowships are awards to individuals, not organizations, and are administered by the fellows.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
Larry H. Weber, telephone: (703) 292-7240, email: email@example.com
Gayle Pugh, telephone: (703) 292-7589, email: email@example.com
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Anticipated Type of Award: Fellowship
Estimated Number of Awards: 10 contingent on meritorious proposals and the availability of funds.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $850,000 Individual fellowships are expected to be $85,000 per year.
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
Only individuals may apply. OCE Postdoctoral Research Fellowships are awards to individuals; proposals must be submitted directly by the fellowship candidate to NSF. The proposal must include a letter(s) from the sponsoring scientist(s) and a letter(s) from the host organization(s). Fellowship activities may be conducted at any appropriate U.S. or foreign host organization, including colleges and universities, private nonprofit research institutes and museums, and government agencies.
To be eligible to submit a proposal to the OCE-PRF Program, an individual must, as of the full proposal target date, meet all of the following criteria:
- Be a U.S. citizen, national, or permanent resident;
- Have earned the doctoral degree, or expect to have earned the doctoral degree prior to the required start date of the fellowship;
- Not have worked for more than a total of 24 full-time-equivalent months in positions that require the doctoral degree. If more than 24 months have elapsed between conferral of the doctoral degree and the OCE-PRF proposal target date, the candidate must include specific language in their Biographical Sketch (discussed below) affirming that they meet this eligibility requirement;
- Present a project plan that falls within the purview of NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences; and
- Not have submitted the same project to another NSF program.
Proposals that fail to meet the above eligibility requirements will be returned without review.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Only individuals may apply. There is no limit on the number of fellowships that an organization may host.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
One fellowship application per solicitation.
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
January 14, 2013
Second Monday in January, Annually Thereafter
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is charged with ensuring the vitality of the nation's scientific and technological enterprise. In its 2020 Vision for the National Science Foundation Report (NSB 05-142), the National Science Board articulated a vision for the future of science and technology that includes tapping the talents of all citizens, particularly those belonging to groups that are under-represented in the science and research enterprise. In response to this report, the Division of Ocean Sciences offers Postdoctoral Research Fellowships intended to increase the number of scientists from under-represented groups pursuing research careers in the ocean sciences. In this solicitation, the term under-represented groups will refer to and include the following: women, persons with disabilities, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and Pacific Islanders.
The fellowship program described in this solicitation revolves around postdoctoral research and broadening participation of under-represented groups in ocean sciences. Early-career scientists have the opportunity to direct their efforts within and across traditional disciplinary lines, develop partnerships, and avail themselves of unique research resources, sites and facilities. The postdoctoral fellowship is meant to strategically prepare early career researchers for positions of scientific leadership.
The Division of Ocean Sciences (OCE) of the National Science Foundation (NSF) is sponsoring the Ocean Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships: Broadening Participation Program to provide research and education opportunities for scientists early in their careers and to increase the diversity of the U.S. ocean sciences research community.
A. Appropriateness for OCE Priorities
Fellowship projects must fall within the purview of OCE, which includes a diversity of disciplinary and cross-disciplinary areas. OCE supports research, infrastructure and education to advance understanding of all aspects of the global oceans and ocean basins, including their interactions with people and the integrated Earth system. OCE programs include Biological Oceanography, Chemical Oceanography, Physical Oceanography, Marine Geology and Geophysics, Ocean Drilling, Ocean Science and Technology, and Ocean Education. See the Division of Ocean Sciences website (https://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=OCE) for further information about division programs and priorities.
In addition, proposals must explain how the fellowship will increase or encourage the broader participation of under-represented groups in ocean sciences in the United States.
B. Host Organization(s)
The fellow must affiliate with a host organization(s). Appropriate organizations include U.S. and foreign colleges and universities, private nonprofit research institutes and museums, and government agencies. Multiple host organizations are permitted, and may be particularly appropriate to pursue interdisciplinary work, collaborative opportunities, and activities related to broadening participation. Regardless of the number of host organizations proposed, a primary host organization must be identified.
OCE and NSF's Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE) are cooperating to support OCE-PRF fellows who wish to pursue significant international research collaborations. When such collaborations involve the fellow being at the foreign location(s) for a combined total of 9 months or longer, extra travel and research expenses may be allowed. See OISE guidelines for details.
In general, NSF expects that the fellowship will support work at an organization(s) other than the fellow's graduate institution or organization of current affiliation. Consequently, candidates proposing to be hosted by their graduate/current organization must present strong justification and must clearly explain the benefits of this choice to their research and broadening participation goals. Such proposals will be evaluated in the context of the potential benefits of this choice versus benefits that might be expected from expanding professional contacts and diversifying professional experience at a new organization.
C. Sponsoring Scientist(s)
In addition to affiliation with a host organization(s), the candidate must identify a sponsoring scientist(s) who will provide mentoring and guidance for the research and broadening participation goals. If more than one sponsor is proposed, one must be named lead sponsor and the roles of the other sponsors must be clearly stated in the project description.
The candidate is responsible for making all arrangements with the host organization(s) and sponsoring scientist(s). An important basis for judging the proposal will be the degree to which the letter(s) from the sponsoring scientist(s) describes and offers research, broadening participation, and mentoring opportunities that could not be pursued without fellowship support.
Duration and Tenure:
Up to 24 full-time-equivalent months of support may be requested. Fellowship tenures must begin within 18 months of the full proposal target date (second Monday in January), and start on the first of the month.
Interruptions in tenure or extensions without additional cost to NSF are permitted only for extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the fellow and require NSF approval.
Within the fellowship period, one month per year of fellowship duration may be used for paid leave, including parental or family leave. The paid leave cannot be used to increase the level of NSF support beyond the duration of the fellowship. NSF enables career-life balance through a variety of mechanisms. Support to address dependent care issues may be available for awardees. For more information, please see https://www.nsf.gov/career-life-balance/.
Candidates selected to receive fellowships will be contacted by NSF and asked to provide additional information, such as acceptance forms and starting certificates. Successful candidates who have not completed the PhD at the time of proposal submission must provide certification of the completion of all PhD degree requirements before receiving their fellowship award. Normally fellowships will be held at organizations specified in the proposal, but under certain circumstances and with suitable justification, fellows may transfer during the tenure of the fellowship to a new organization upon approval by NSF.
Fellowships are not renewable.
During the period of the fellowship, no additional appointment or fellowship may be held without prior permission of the cognizant NSF program officer.
Stipend and Allowances:
The annual fellowship amount of $85,000 consists of two types of payments:
An additional allowance may be available for applicants spending 9 months or longer at a foreign location(s) through joint funding with NSF's Office of International and Integrative Activities.
The fellowship amount can be increased to include a Facilitation Award for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED). When requesting FASED funding, applicants should contact the OCE-PRF program officer prior to applying.
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
Only individuals may apply. OCE Postdoctoral Research Fellowships are awards to individuals; proposals must be submitted directly by the fellowship candidate to NSF. The proposal must include a letter(s) from the sponsoring scientist(s) and a letter(s) from the host organization(s). Fellowship activities may be conducted at any appropriate U.S. or foreign host organization, including colleges and universities, private nonprofit research institutes and museums, and government agencies.
To be eligible to submit a proposal to the OCE-PRF Program, an individual must, as of the full proposal target date, meet all of the following criteria:
- Be a U.S. citizen, national, or permanent resident;
- Have earned the doctoral degree, or expect to have earned the doctoral degree prior to the required start date of the fellowship;
- Not have worked for more than a total of 24 full-time-equivalent months in positions that require the doctoral degree. If more than 24 months have elapsed between conferral of the doctoral degree and the OCE-PRF proposal target date, the candidate must include specific language in their Biographical Sketch (discussed below) affirming that they meet this eligibility requirement;
- Present a project plan that falls within the purview of NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences; and
- Not have submitted the same project to another NSF program.
Proposals that fail to meet the above eligibility requirements will be returned without review.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Only individuals may apply. There is no limit on the number of fellowships that an organization may host.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
One fellowship application per solicitation.
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.
In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. Chapter II, Section D.4 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.
Special Instructions for Submitting Fellowship Proposals
Proposals submitted to the NSF Ocean Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships Program must be submitted electronically using the NSF FastLane system or Grants.gov. Only one proposal is permitted per individual. Candidates are advised to begin the proposal well in advance of the submission target date. Incomplete and non-compliant proposals will be returned without review.
Registration for Fellowship Candidates
Before starting proposal preparation, the applicant must be registered as an individual. To register as a new individual in FastLane go to: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/N1CheckROB. To register as a new individual in Grants.gov go to: http://www.grants.gov/applicants/individual_registration.jsp. Fellowship proposals must be submitted by the Fellowship applicant, not by the applicant's current or proposed organizational Sponsored Projects Office (SPO). The applicant serves as his/her own SPO and Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) for the purposes of any research administration functions in FastLane or Grants.gov. Therefore, you will need to submit the proposal twice: once as the Principal Investigator (yourself) and once as the Authorized Organizational Representative (yourself).
Proposals must include all of the following items. In cases where requirements given in this document differ from those given in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide, this solicitation takes precedence.
1. NSF Cover Sheet. FastLane Users: Select the OCE-PRF program solicitation number shown at the beginning of this solicitation from the drop-down menu. Grants.gov Users: The program solicitation number will be pre-populated by Grants.gov on the NSF Grant Application Cover Page. The title must start with the acronym "OCE-PRF", followed by the descriptive title of the research. If the project will involve international partners, check the "International Cooperative Activities" box and identify the country/countries involved.
2. Information about Principal Investigators/Project Directors.
3. Table of Contents. This form will be automatically generated by FastLane or Grants.gov.
4. Project Summary, not more than one page in length, that includes an overview of the project and separate statements that clearly address the intellectual merit and broader impacts. In addition, the Project Summary must also identify (in the overview section):
Proposals that do not contain the Project Summary, including an overview and separate statements on intellectual merit and broader impacts will not be accepted or will be returned without review.
5. Project Description, not to exceed 10 single-spaced pages, which must include the following:
Where experiments are proposed, explicit experimental details need not be given, but the plan should provide a clear statement of objectives and approaches to accomplish them, and the specification of hypotheses and ways to test them.
Special certifications and permits may be required when projects involve human subjects, vertebrate animals, endangered species, hazardous materials, collecting in foreign countries, or other elements. The research plan should provide general information on these matters and address feasibility. If selected, candidates must submit required documentation to the NSF program officer before a fellowship award can be processed.
6. References cited.
7. Biographical Sketch, not to exceed two pages. The Biographical Sketch must include identification of U.S. citizenship or permanent resident status, and the month and year when PhD was (or is expected to be) received. If more than 24 months have elapsed between the date that the doctoral degree was conferred and the OCE-PRF proposal target date, the Biographical sketch must include the following statement: "I affirm that I have not worked for more than 24 full-time-equivalent months in positions for which the doctoral degree was a requirement." Do not include personal information such as birth date or place of birth. Only the applicant's Biographical Sketch should be uploaded in this section. Biographical Sketches for sponsoring scientists must be included in the Supplementary Documentation section, together with their letters of support.
8. NSF Budget Page. The stipend and fellowship allowance should be entered in Participant Support Costs (Section F on the FastLane budget and Field E on the Grants.gov budget). Enter the $60,000 stipend in F.1 (FastLane) or E.2 (Grants.gov) and the $25,000 fellowship allowance in F.4 (FastLane) or E.5 (Grants.gov). If proposing to spend a total of 9 months or longer at a foreign site(s) and requesting the extra international allowance, add the amount (up to $10,000 per year) to the fellowship allowance. Enter (1) as the Total Number of Participants. An annual budget page must be submitted for each 12-month period. A budget justification of no more than two pages should list and justify estimated expenditures under the annual fellowship allowance and the international allowance (if requested). Any deviations from this typical budget scenario must be discussed in advance with the NSF program officer.
9. Current and Pending Support. Include current support for research and training. Under pending support, include this proposal, as well as pending and planned applications to other fellowship or research programs.
10. Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources.
The following must be submitted as Supplementary Documentation:
11. Abstract of the candidate's PhD thesis (limited to one page).
12. Data Management Plan, not to exceed two pages, that describes plans for data management and sharing of the products of research, or asserts the absence of the need for such plans. See OCE guidelines at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf11060.
13. Letter(s) of Commitment from the prospective host organization(s), signed by the department chair (or equivalent), certifying that adequate facilities and support will be provided for the fellow to accommodate the proposed activities. Should the candidate propose to hold the fellowship concurrently or sequentially at more than one organization during the two-year tenure, letters of commitment must be provided from all institutions.
14. A signed letter(s), not to exceed two pages, from the proposed sponsoring scientist(s) certifying that the fellowship proposal has been read and approved, and including discussion of:
15. A Biographical Sketch(es), not to exceed two pages and conforming to the NSF Grant Proposal Guide or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide instructions, of the sponsoring scientist(s).
16. For individuals who have not completed the PhD at the time of proposal submission, a signed letter from the graduate advisor confirming the expectation that the candidate will receive the degree within 18 months of the full proposal target date.
Letters of recommendation will not be considered. Letters from the proposed host institution(s), sponsoring scientist(s) and, as needed, the candidate's current graduate advisor, should not reflect a letter of recommendation and should make no subjective statements regarding either the candidate or their proposed activities. Signed letters should be scanned into Portable Document Format (PDF) and uploaded as supplementary documentation.
No other supplementary documentation or appendices are permitted.
Cost Sharing:
Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited
Other Budgetary Limitations:
Fellowship award amounts are $85,000 annually. If the international allowance is approved, award amounts can be up to $95,000 annually.
Budget Preparation Instructions: The stipend and fellowship allowance should be entered in Participant Support Costs (Section F on the FastLane budget and Field E on the Grants.gov budget). Enter the $60,000 stipend in F.1. (FastLane) or E.2 (Grants.gov) and the $25,000 fellowship allowance in F.4. (FastLane) or E.5 (Grants.gov). If proposing to spend a total of 9 months or longer at a foreign site(s) and requesting the extra international allowance, add the amount (up to $10,000 per year) to the fellowship allowance. Enter (1) as the Total Number of Participants. An annual budget page must be submitted for each 12-month period. A budget justification of no more than two pages should list and justify estimated expenditures under the annual fellowship allowance and the international allowance (if requested). Any deviations from this typical budget scenario must be discussed in advance with the NSF program officer.
January 14, 2013
Second Monday in January, Annually Thereafter
For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:
Detailed technical instructions regarding the technical aspects of preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail firstname.lastname@example.com. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides additional technical guidance regarding preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: email@example.com. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in the GPG as Exhibit III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/.
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Empowering the Nation Through Discovery and Innovation: NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2016. These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the core strategies in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students, and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the variety of learning perspectives.
Another core strategy in support of NSF's mission is broadening opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.
1. Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.
These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.
2. Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
In addition to the above criteria, the following factors will be used in the evaluation process:
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1); * or Research Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from firstname.lastname@example.com.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Special Award Conditions: The fellowship award is made to the individual, not the institution and payments are made directly to the fellow. Awards cannot be extended without prior NSF approval. Pre-award costs are not permitted.
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require more frequent project reports). Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for that PI. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on activities and findings, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system. Submission of the report via FastLane constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Additional Reporting Requirements: Fellows must file starting and termination certificates in addition to annual and final technical reports.
Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
Larry H. Weber, telephone: (703) 292-7240, email: email@example.com
Gayle Pugh, telephone: (703) 292-7589, email: firstname.lastname@example.com
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
The NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, National Science Foundation Update is a free e-mail subscription service designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail when new publications are issued that match their identified interests. Users can subscribe to this service by clicking the "Get NSF Updates by Email" link on the NSF web site.
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.
NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0023. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 12 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA


text:
Thank you for signing up for the ticket newsletter!
One more step: you will receive an email shortly. You must click on the link in that email to activate your subscription to the ticket
Congratulations on confirming your subscription to the ticket newsletter!
Enjoy the best sports stories of the day sent directly to your inbox.
You have been unsubscribed from the ticket newsletter.
Please check your email for one final email confirming your removal from the list.
How did Leicester City win the Premier League?
Aguero, Arsenal, Chelsea, Craig Gardner, England, EPL, Football, Fox, FOX Soccer, FOX Sports, FOX Sports 1, Leicester City, Liverpool, Manchester City, Nasri, Negredo, news, Premier League, Sports, Sunderland, Toure
Tweets by ThePostGame

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Technical Management Board
The technical work is carried out under the overall management of the Technical Management Board (TMB). The Technical Management Board reports to the ISO Council and its role is defined in the statutes of the organization.
Specifically, it is responsible for tasks such as setting up the various technical committees (TC), appointing TC chairs and monitoring the progress of the technical work. It is also responsible for the Directives, which are essentially the rules for the development of International Standards, and it deals with all matters of strategic planning, coordination, performance and monitoring of technical committee activities.
Access the complete Terms and References for the TMB.
TMB Communiqué
Information on the latest developments in technical policy and procedures can been found in the TMB Communiqué, issued after each Technical Management Board (TMB) meeting. The complete collection of TMB Communiqué is available online.


text:
What we do
Hello, Workday. Goodbye status quo. Workday's enterprise cloud applications for finance and HR are disrupting the global software industry. Our applications are infinitely flexible, extremely intuitive, and incredibly powerful. Workday is aimed squarely at replacing legacy on-premise systems that can't keep pace with innovation.
But that's only part of the story.
The rest of the story is about our values, our people, our passion, and our way of running a business. Read on to learn more about what Workday is all about.


text:
Find information on common issues.
Ask questions and find answers from other users.
Suggest a new site feature or improvement.
Check on status of your tickets.
More tags
Aluminum-Rich Bulk Alloys: an Energy Storage Material for Splitting Water to Make Hydrogen Gas on Demand
The two major barriers to realizing a viable large-scale hydrogen economy are hydrogen storage and economically viable "green" hydrogen production. The current two preferred methods of hydrogen...


text: Hello All, I have followed the "The Perfect Server – CentOS 6.3 x86_64 (Apache2, Dovecot, ISPConfig 3)" tutorial, and have successfully installed ISPConfig 3 on a Centos 6.3 KVM. I have used kloxo for a bit and took a little bit to get my ways around ISPConfig, but so far I like it. I noticed that Centos is not one of the recommended OSes, but since I am more familiar with it, I would like to stick with it. So, naturally I have a couple of questions that would help me make the choice to stick with or steer clear from Centos + ISPConfig combo and try Debian or Ubuntu. 1. what are the ISPConfig3 features that are sub-optimal or not fully functional on Centos 6.3? 2. If there are missing features, is there a plan/desire to implement those at some point in the future? (any ideas of timings?) Kind Regards, GeorgeG


text:
Don't see your question? Visit our help section.
Get access to great in-store deals and local pick-up
Sign up for our email deals newsletter!
Donkey Kong's smash-hit return to platforming is being rebuilt from the ground up and optimized for portable play on the Nintendo 3DS system. Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D will bring all of the ground-pounding, barrel-rolling, platforming action of the original brought to life with stunning 3D visuals.
Rated 8.5 out of 10 by Game Informer.
Pro Price


text:
Aims & Principles
Revolutionary Organization
Workplace Organizing
List Protocol
Online Voting
This is the archival website for the Common Struggle Libertarian Communist Federation / Lucha Común Federación Comunista Libertaria. Common Struggle merged with other anarchist groups to form Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra.
Common Struggle was also once known as the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists (NEFAC) /Fédération des communistes libertaires du Nord-Est.
The current Black Rose Anarchist Federation / Federación Anarquista Rosa Negra can be found at: blackrosefed.org
'The colonized subject discovers reality and transforms it through his praxis, his deployment of violence and his agenda for liberation' 1
We are writing to express our unconditional support of the Rebellion in Ferguson, MO, a working class city of 67% Black residents and 94% white police force. On Saturday August 8, 2014 Michael 'Mike Mike' Brown, an unarmed 18 year old Black teenager, was executed by an unnamed police officer. Following the execution by multiple gunshots, the people of Ferguson— friends, neighbors, and family of Michael Brown— converged to mourn their beloved and express their rage in a uprising that began with powerful, documented analysis and agitation.1
We support the rebellion and uprising of the people of Ferguson, MO because, in the words of DeAndre Smith2, this type of response is "exactly what's supposed to happen when injustice is happening in your community."
We want to be perfectly clear that we believe resistance to police is always justified. The police exist to protect and serve whiteness, an ideology of supremacy that needs to be abolished in order to obtain freedom. Ferguson has given us evidence of this straight from the horse's mouth, as police with riot gear and barking dogs yelled to demonstrators: "All you fucking animals, bring it."
We reject the notion that the unnamed officer who shot dead Mike Brown was a bad apple, a case to be reviewed. The problem is not of a rogue police officer acting out of line; the problem is the police. The modern police force evolved from slave patrols in the 1700s and continue to systematically control, assault, and murder Black communities. As DeAndre Smith recognized, this is a problem rooted in economics. This country was built by enslaved Blacks on the plantation and made possible by the theft of Indigenous land, and continues to thrive in the neoliberal present day with more Blacks now in prison or confined in ghettos, being killed by police. Indeed, as Frantz Fanon says, 'the colonist derives his validity, i.e., his wealth, from the colonial system.'
Furthermore, we reject the bourgeois myth of respectability that claims Michael Brown's life is not worthy of being mourned unless he was in some way 'innocent', when our racist society has systematically stripped Black bodies of innocence and marked them as 'criminal'. We celebrate each existence and mourn the death of every Black life lost. We stand against the ideology of whiteness that allows for the devaluing of Black lives.
The government response in Ferguson has been to create a barbaric, militarized police state working to sustain itself and quell the people. They have been trained by the Israeli Defense Force which maintains an Apartheid state and a genocidal program of forced removal of Palestinians from their historical land.3 Media blackout, rubber bullets and teargas deployed on assemblies of people and directly into residential neighborhoods, warzone gear, ear piercing crowd control tactics, cancelling the first day of school. These responses are the direct responsibility of the police, and we strongly reject media claims that state otherwise. Police declared a no fly zone in Ferguson for the reason of "providing a safe environment for law enforcement activities" —- they have made their interests clear. That is why the people of St. Louis and Ferguson have not backed down. They militantly retain their dignity and continue to fight back with efforts resulting in St. Louis Police having been pulled from the ground in Ferguson.
How many more black lives? — Michael Brown, shot dead by police on 8/8/14; Ezell Ford, shot dead by police 8/11/14; John Crawford, shot dead by police 8/7/14; Eric Garner, killed in a chokehold by police on 7/17/14: lives stolen, Black August.
Renisha McBride, Islan Nettles, Trayvon Martin: killed in the name of white supremacy, misogyny and transphobia. Lives stolen, Black August.*
The lines have been drawn, we refuse to turn down in the face of racist, capitalist violence. The people of St. Louis are standing up, this rebellion is part of an agenda for liberation— and through organizing, rebellions can become revolutions. Communities everywhere are working against violence, criminalization, and displacement of working class people; this is the time to build connections in struggle. Once again we look to DeAndre Smith, "I mean, I don't think it's over, honestly. I think they just got a taste of what fighting back means."
1) Quote from Frantz Fanon's "Wretched of the Earth". Photo of Ferguson protestor returning a teargas canister to sender
2) Link to video of pre-riot agitation
3) Link to video of Smith's analysis & transcription
"I'm DeAndre Smith. And this is exactly what's supposed to happen when injustice is happening in your community. When you have kids getting killed for nothing, when they're out here minding their business… you can lock 'em up, you can teach them, you can mold them, at the same time, you ain't got to kill them. He ain't got no gun in his hands. Why you kill him? You said Trayvon had a hoodie on, you didn't know what was going on with him. He didn't have no hoodie on. His hands was up when you shot him! So what's your excuse?"
"I was here, I was out here. That's all I can say. I was out here with the community. That's all I can say. I was out here standing side-by-side with the community. I mean, I don't think it's over, honestly. I think they just got a taste of what fighting back means. I think they got a taste of… (other voice inaudible) … IN St. Louis. The last state to abolish slavery. And they think they still have power over certain things? I believe so, cuz they doing stuff like this, and getting away with it. People ain't sayin nothing! They not doing nothing, across the country. They not going for it here! Saint Louis ain't going for it!
"This is how they eat here. This is how they receive money. Businesses. Taxes. Police stopping people. Giving 'em tickets, taking 'em to court, locking 'em up. That's how they make money in St. Louis. Right? Traffic…everything is all about money in St. Louis, right? So when you stop their flow of income. When you stop their…their, their, whole everything, their business, what they organized, they have certain things in a certain way. Right, (making quotation marks with fingers) "secret society" type of deal, right? We're gonna eat and you guys are gonna starve. Gentrification, put you in a certain neighborhood by yourself, and see if you can starve in a proper way. It's not gonna happen, not in St Louis."
4) Report on St. Louis Police Department visit to Israel
5) Sentence structure referencing Marilyn Buck's poem 'Black August'
http://commonstruggle.org/sites/default/files/chants consignas movil.pdf
IWW / Black Rose Study Group -- Fight 4 $15
Sun, April 6, 1pm – 3pm
Join us to discuss the Fight for $15, fast food and other service workers' organizing efforts, and the potential role of radicals. Please bring friends and coworkers.
Saturday March 1 2014
1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
Community Church of Boston
565 Boylston Street, Copley Square, Boston, MA
Facebook Event Page
Wheelchair Accessible / Childcare & Spanish Interpretation Upon Request
Sábado, 1 de marzo, 2014
1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
Community Church of Boston
565 Boylston Street, Copley Square, Boston, MA
Página de Facebook
Accesible para silla de ruedas / Cuidado de ni?os e interpretación al espa?ol disponibles bajo pedido
By Lyudmila
"The hallmark of La Alzada, unlike other feminist spaces, it was initially designed as an organization that conceives feminist work from concrete practice."
Texto Original
A LAS PERSONAS DE BUEN CORAZóN.
El día 24 de octubre alrededor de mil colonos y vecinos de Santa Cruz Huatulco (integrantes del Comité Ciudadano en Defensa de los Derechos de la agencia municipal de Santa Cruz Huatulco A.C. y del Comité de Defensa de los Derechos Indígenas – CODEDI-) víctimas de un fraude de más de 16 millones de pesos por parte de la empresa de Alfonso Mireles y del presidente municipal del 2005 José Humberto Cruz Ramos, decidieron ocupar un predio de 11 hectáreas para exigir solución inmediata y asignación de lotes de terreno a familias defraudadas por desarrolladores turísticos y Autoridades municipales. [1]
Saturday, November 16th
6-8:00PM (Followed by social)
Community Church of Boston
565 Boylston Street, Copley Square, Boston, MA
Facebook Event
Study Group: Fast Food Workers, Recent Strikes, and "Alternative" Labor
Photo: Jenny Brown Originally posted on Labor Notes
Saturday September 21st: 6-8 PM
Community Church of Boston
565 Boylston Street, Boston, MA (Copley Square)
This Summer, fast food workers across the country have launched strikes and pushed for unions and better jobs. SEIU has played a large role in this movement, utilizing a "new" or "alternative" labor model, supporting smaller, independent workers' initiatives, organizing symbolic strikes, and pushing for a higher national minimum wage. Locally, workers at Insomnia Cookies recently launched a strike and joined the Industrial Workers of the World.
The Northeastern Anarchist


text: It's a sad truth that many of today's children are carrying the health problems of the middle-aged.High cholesterol, high blood pressure and diabetes all are linked to the nation's high rates of overweight and obese children. With that in mind, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute said late last year that all children should have cholesterol tests. Earlier advice was to screen children believed to be at high risk. The new recommendation was met in some circles with cheers and in others with concern about the possibility that doctors would be quick to prescribe adult medications to children, not knowing what the long-term effects might be. What everyone agrees on is that high cholesterol in children is a concern and one that has been under-recognized in the past. And experts say that screening for it likely will open the door to more-productive conversations about lifestyle changes for youngsters facing a future that could include illness and early death. Reversing high cholesterol before children reach their teen years or early adulthood is imperative, said Dr. Robert Murray, a professor of human nutrition at Ohio State University. "Pediatric cardiologists have been beating this drum for a while," he said. "The obesity epidemic has become a big enough problem that we should be screening 10-year-olds." The new advice, part of broader guidelines on reducing cardiovascular disease in children, says that everyone should undergo screening once between 9 and 11 years old and once between 17 and 21 years old. It also provides other advice to doctors caring for children with cholesterol problems. High cholesterol can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks and stroke. That risk increases the longer a person lives with the problem, said Dr. Ihouma Eneli, the medical director of Nationwide Children's Hospital's Center for Healthy Weight and Nutrition. Some children are born with genetic abnormalities that lead to extremely high cholesterol that can cause early heart attack and even death. In those cases, medication can be necessary, said Dr. Peter Vande Kappelle, a pediatric cardiologist at Akron Children's Hospital. But in children who have high cholesterol because of poor diet and inactivity, lifestyle changes are usually enough, he said. "It's pretty easy to make a few changes if they're drinking sodas every day and juices and eating fast food all the time," he said. "And exercise is the best way to bring up your good cholesterol." An LDL (bad cholesterol) level of 110 or higher is a red flag in children, Vande Kappelle said. When looking at total cholesterol, more than 170 is considered high. Triglycerides should ideally be less than 100, he said. About a quarter of overweight children and about 4 in 10 obese children have high cholesterol, according to one recent study, Vande Kappelle said. "We really are missing a lot of kids with cholesterol problems," said Dr. Bryan Ghiloni, who practices with the Mount Carmel Medical Group in New Albany. Routine screening will give doctors more opportunity to talk about weight loss and how it relates to medical problems, Ghiloni said. Murray said he often counsels pediatricians that they should be careful when discussing weight with parents. Just telling them their children are obese or overweight is not particularly useful without explaining how this contributes to disease that might stick with the children throughout their lives, he said. A doctor with a cholesterol number on hand might well have an easier time conveying that information and find the child's parents more receptive. One challenge is that insurance rarely pays for nutritional counseling. In Ghiloni's office, a nurse works with families trying to improve their child's health through lifestyle changes, he said. He has not prescribed statins, cholesterol-lowering medications usually used for adults, to children, he said, and is unlikely to do that except in extreme circumstances. Little is known about the long-term effects of high cholesterol that starts in childhood because the problem has become pervasive only in recent decades. It's clearly damaging, Eneli said, but some argue that not enough is known about how severe the risk is. Many of those arguments come from experts worried that doctors will be too quick to prescribe medications to children. Eneli said there are clear recommendations about when to consider statins in children, and it shouldn't happen often. firstname.lastname@example.com @MistiCrane (c)2012 The Columbus Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) Visit The Columbus Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) at www.dispatch.com


text: See-Thru film (or "One Way Vision" film) for static applications and mobile advertising on glass surfaces. Window graphics onto flat glass surfaces showing advertising on one side and allowing for « see through » view on the other side. Designed for solvent based inkjet printing on most wide-format printing equipment.


text:
The hyperlinks to these Internet sites are provided solely as a convenience to the users of the Berkshire Bank Internet site. The Bank has made a limited effort to determine that these links function properly. However, linked sites are not under the control of the Bank, and the Bank is not responsible for the contents of any linked site, or any link contained in a linked site. You are responsible for confirming the identity and authenticity of any site you visit and transact business with online. The inclusion of a link does not imply or constitute an endorsement by the Bank, its ownership or management, the products or services it offers, or any advertisers or sponsors appearing on these web sites.
You can click the Return to Berkshire Bank button now to return
to the previous page or you can use the Back button on your browser after you leave.
Do not use email to send us confidential or sensitive information such as passwords, account numbers or social security numbers. If you need to provide this type of information, contact us by phone, fax or regular mail.
Berkshire Bank has taken reasonable measures to ensure that the information and data presented on this web site is accurate, current and subject to change. However, Berkshire Bank makes no express or implied warranty regarding such information or data, and hereby expressly disclaims all legal liability and responsibility to persons or entities who use or access this site and its content, based on their reliance on any information or data that is available through this web site. The information available on this web site is not intended to constitute and should not be considered as legal advice, nor is it intended to substitute for obtaining legal advice from competent, independent, legal counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.
Berkshire Bank products and services are offered to residents and businesses of Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Insurance and investment products: (1) are not deposits of Berkshire Bank; (2) are not insured or guaranteed by the FDIC or any other government agency; (3) are not obligations of, or guaranteed by, any financial institution; and (4) involve investment risks, including the potential for fluctuations in investment return and the potential loss of principal. BerkshireBanc Investment Services Inc. securities are offered through Commonwealth Financial Network, member NASD/SIPC a registered investment advisor.
The Berkshire Bank, Berkshire Hills Bancorp, BerkshireBanc Investment Services, Inc. and Berkshire Insurance Group, Inc. name, logo and tag lines, in addition to other phrases contained in the Berkshire Bank website, are trade and service marks. Photographs and artwork are the sole property of the bank and may not be reproduced in any form.
The content of this web site is not designed or intended to provide authoritative financial, accounting, investment, or other professional advice which may be reasonably relied on by its readers. If expert assistance in this area is required, the services of a qualified professional should be sought.
Reference to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacture, or otherwise does not constitute an endorsement, a recommendation, or a favoring by Berkshire Bank.
The Berkshire Bank web site provides links to other web sites for convenience and informational purposes only. Users should be aware that when they select a link on the Berkshire Bank's web site to an external web site, they are leaving the Berkshire Bank's site. Linked sites are not under the control of Berkshire Bank, and Berkshire Bank is not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. Berkshire Bank is not responsible for any transmission received from a linked site. The inclusion of a link does not imply endorsement by Berkshire Bank of the site, its content, advertisers or sponsors. External sites may contain information that is copyrighted with restrictions on reuse. Permission to use copyrighted materials must be obtained from the original source and cannot be obtained from the Berkshire Bank.
We employ software security programs to monitor network traffic to identify unauthorized attempts to upload or change information, or otherwise cause damage. Such attempts are strictly prohibited and may be punishable under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 and the National Information Infrastructure Protection Act. Except for authorized law enforcement investigations, no other attempts are made to identify individual users or their usage habits.
This general disclaimer is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other disclaimers found on pages, applications or programs within this site. In addition, the terms of this disclaimer extend to Berkshire Bank, its directors, officers, and employees.
© Berkshire Bank. All Rights Reserved.
Berkshire Bank, 24 North Street, P. O. Box 1308, Pittsfield, Massachusetts 01202-1308, 1-800-773-5601


text:
Friday Night Football–November 4
This is it. It is the last week for high school football here in East Texas (excluding playoff games of course). It is also senior night for the home teams. It has been a great season for football in East Texas and if you are regretting not going to any game this season, this final game will be the best to go to.
Friday, Nov. 4
- DeSoto at Longview
- Tyler Lee at N. Mesquite
- Marshall at Pine Tree
- Hallsville at Nacogdoches
- Jacksonville at John Tyler
- Kilgore at Whitehouse
- Denison at Mt. Pleasant
- Spring Hill at Carthage
- Gilmer at Pittsburg
- Gladewater at Henderson
- White Oak at Tatum
- Jefferson at New Diana
- Sabine at Harmony
- Winona at Frankston
- Ore City at Harleton
- Elysian Fields at Waskom
- Hughes Springs at L-Kildare
- Paul Pewitt at DeKalb
- West Rusk at Arp
- Union Grove at Joaquin
- Daingerfield at Prairiland
- Big Sandy at James Bowie
- Maud at Carlisle
- Overton at Hawkins
- Tenaha vs. Dallas Christian (at Mesquite)
- Levertt's Chapel at Oakwood


text:
- Publish date:
- Updated on
- Year
- 1965
1st Cavalry Division commences operations
In the first major operation since arriving the previous month, the U.S. 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) joins with South Vietnamese Marines to strike at 2,000 North Vietnamese troops 25 miles from An Khe in the Central Highlands.
The 1st Cavalry Division was a new kind of division, which was built around the helicopter and the airmobile concept. The division contained 434 helicopters and had the capability to move one-third of its combat power at one time into terrain inaccessible to normal infantry vehicles. During its first major mission, faulty U.S.-South Vietnamese coordination prevented their forces from entrapping the North Vietnamese Army 325th Infantry Division, but they managed to reopen Route 19, between Pleiku and An Khe, the main east-west supply route in the region. During the course of its employment in South Vietnam, the "First Team," as the 1st Cavalry Division came to be known, would prove to be one of the most effective U.S. combat units in the war.


text: These dagger shaped glass Peacock Beads measure approximately 17mm long. The colour of these beads is hard to define except to say they sparkle wonderfully, and have the characteristic 'peacock spot'. These Peacock Beads are drilled from side to side at the top of the bead, and are suitable for many different types of bead stringing as well as being striking as pendants or focal beads. They are available as either packets of 20, or packets of 100 (pay for 95). If ordering the bulk quantity, to avoid delay on your order, please ensure you choose the relevant delivery option for postage.


text:
Miranda Kerr Fills Out a Wonder Woman Costume Nicely [VIDEO]
While we've been happily visualizing Rachel Bilson as Wonder Woman for the last few years, we're certainly not going to kick 'Victoria's Secret' Angel Miranda Kerr out of our fantasies for donning the red, white and gold costume for this Grazia Magazine cover shoot.
Although we do have to say we were at first a bit perturbed to see such an iconic American character draping herself in an Australian flag. Then we watched a behind the scenes video of the photo shoot, and now we are just jealous of the Australian flag. See why below.


text:
Hello all I just wanted to get feedback about this electric sample roaster . And know many cringe with the term electric. Just wanted to get thoughts and impressions from people who use them and others thoughts?
Thank you and cheers
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


text:
Monday, September 01, 2008
"Hello, Newman." Or, "What's the Deal With This Mojave Experiment, Anyway?"
The "Mojave Experiment," if you haven't seen it already, is a new Microsoft ad campaign intended to spiff up Vista's poor image. You can find a link most days on the Wall Street Journal web site.
If you follow that link, you'll find a "Mojave Experiment" video in which a Proctor & Gamble-style hidden camera captures the reactions of "regular people" when they are shown cool stuff they can do on "Mojave," which they have been told is a new Microsoft operating system.
The camera then shows their embarrassed reactions when they are told that "Mojave" is actually "Vista."
It is straight out of the Proctor & Gamble soap-selling playbook, which should be no surprise, because Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer started his career at P&G.
Unfortunately, the fundamental premise of the "Mojave Experiment" and those video clips is flawed. Only 43% of Microsoft Vista users call themselves "very satisfied" with it. And only 46% of Microsoft Vista users say they are "very likely" to recommend Vista to a friend or family member.
We are not making those numbers up, by the way: they're right there on Microsoft's own "Mojave Experiment" web site, in the footnotes.
As for the hidden camera video itself—well, anybody can videotape a bunch of people reacting with delight to product demos run by highly competent computer engineers from the company that created the program.
What they should videotape is a bunch of people attempting to load Vista on a computer and start doing stuff themselves, which is where the trouble has been, and show that to Microsoft engineers.
Years ago, Ford Motor's advertising slogan was "Quality is Job One." The slogan didn't actually mean anything, but it sounded great. Unfortunately for Ford, consumers didn't care about the slogan, they cared about the cars. Eventually consumers stopped buying Ford cars to the point where Ford is now being forced to actually do something about quality, instead of advertising about it.
Microsoft is looking more like Ford Motor every day.
But they're not stopping with hidden camera laundry detergent-type web videos. They're reportedly paying Jerry Seinfeld $10 million to appear in ads for Vista, presumably to counteract the devastating "Mac vs. PC" ads.
We've tried to imagine what will happen when Microsoft's clunky, acronym-laden and user-unfriendly technology is combined with Seinfeld's "What's the deal with airplane peanuts?" schtick.
The first Seinfeld ad might go something like this.
Seinfeld stands at a microphone on stage in a nightclub setting: "What's the deal with the 'iPhone' anyway? I mean, Apple didn't release an 'a'-phone and a 'b'-phone and a 'c'-phone…so why do they have an 'I' there? What's the deal with that?"
[Modest laughter.]
He holds up an iPhone for the audience: "And how does it have "phone" in the name? I mean, come on, people—there's no antenna, is there? [He mimes pulling an antenna out of the phone, as he always did on his TV show.] Hey, I don't hear a dial-tone either. [He holds it up to his ear and shakes his head.] What's the deal with that?
[Some chuckles.]
Seinfeld starts playing with Google Maps on the iPhone: "And have you seen how you move around these web pages? You move them around with your finger. [He touches the map, makes it bigger, smaller. Zooms in on a satellite image from Google Earth] I mean, hasn't Apple ever heard of a mouse with a sophisticated interactive touchpad? What—are they afraid of mice now?
[No laughs.]
Seinfeld plays with the phone interface and notices he has a voice mail. "Hey, this thing actually tells you who's left a voice-mail?" [Under his breath.] "I like that." [Taps the phone and holds it to his ear, then says in a stage voice.] "Hello, Newman. I see you called me."
[Laughter, applause.]
Seinfeld smiles, acknowledging the applause, then speaks sternly. "You know, Newman, this thing actually isn't so bad. I just looked at my house in the Hamptons on this screen, and then I found out you can actually see who left you a voice mail. I can't do that on Vista. You know what I think, Newman? I think you tricked me. Hello? Hello?"
[Scattered laughter, some confused murmers.]
Seinfeld clicks off the phone and starts scrolling through software programs: "And what's with this 'Apps Store' anyway? I guess you can download these software applications…just incredible stuff here…"
[Newman enters the stage from behind the curtain with a team of Microsoft security men.]
Seinfeld, reacting as expected: "Oh, hello, Newman."
[Some laughs.]
Newman, mechanically: "Hello, Jerry. Let's make this easy for both of us. Just give us the iPhone and leave."
Seinfeld: "I want my $10 million first, Newman."
Newman, sweating, pulling at his collar as the audience begins to boo: "No chance, Jerry. You—shall we say—strayed too far from the script."
Seinfeld, surrounded by Microsoft men, picks up the microphone stand and starts swinging it like a sword. "I want my $10 million, Newman! I'll finish the script! Don't take this iPhone!"
Newman makes a sign and the security men back off. Sweetly, he says: "Anything you say, Jerry. Just finish and you'll get your money."
Seinfeld resumes reading from the offscreen cue cards, unenthusiastically: "So what's the deal with the 'iPhone' anyway. It's not a phone…."
Newman: "That's not good enough, Jerry!" He grabs for the iPhone.
Seinfeld, keeping it away from Newman: "All riiiiiiiiiiiiiight, keep the $10 million. I just want this iPhone, Newman!"
[Now other Seinfeld characters begin to appear on stage from different angles.]
Kramer: "Giddyyup, Jerry. You need that $10 million. Your career isn't what it used to be. Just hand over the iPhone, buddy."
Elaine: "Hello, Jerome. How's about you giving that old phone to little old Lainy?"
George: "Jerry, is hanging onto that piece of plastic really worth giving up $10 million? You give it to Newman and I'll tell you what happened in The Contest"
Newman, giggling: "You haven't got a chance, Jerry."
Seinfeld, seeing someone else in the audience, shouts: "Uncle Leo! Help me!"
Uncle Leo comes up on stage, shouting: "Jerry! Hellooooooooo!" He viciously grabs for the iPhone.
Seinfeld falls to his knees, clenching it in his fist as they try to tear it away. He scrunches up his face and hisses: "Microsoft!"
The screen goes black.
Jeff Matthews
I Am, In Fact, Making This One Up
© 2008 NotMakingThisUp, LLC
The content contained in this blog represents the opinions of Mr. Matthews.
Mr. Matthews also acts as an advisor and clients advised by Mr. Matthews may hold either long or short positions in securities of various companies discussed in the blog based upon Mr. Matthews' recommendations. This commentary in no way constitutes investment advice. It should never be relied on in making an investment decision, ever. Nor are these comments meant to be a solicitation of business in any way: such inquiries will not be responded to. This content is intended solely for the entertainment of the reader, and the author.
9 comments:
- whydibuy said...
The rip into Vista is warranted, but you fail to mention that lots of folks, myself included, still use and like XP. Yes, the upgrade cycle flopped for MSFT but its older version is still alive and well. I see lots of ads for new pc's that come preloaded with XP still. I do enjoy the mac vs pc ads though. Very clever schtick there.
- Frank Shaw said...
Jeff, FWIW it's "mojave" with a "j" and not an "h".
Also worth noting that it's pretty unlikely today for somebody to install Windows Vista on a PC -- that was a scenario when the product was first out and people where upgrading, but today people tend to get the PC already running Windows Vista.
- fatbear said...
Jeff, nice try, but keep the day job.
- Gone to the blogs said...
Ouch...hearing crickets after that one.
The point of "Mojave" was not to tout the operating system per se, but instead to point out that public opinion can often differ substantially from reality. Not to say that Vista is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but the incessant blogosphere kvetching (and the predictable herd behavior of the media) about device driver incompatibilities shortly after launch created perceptions and biases that were blown way out of proportion.
And what does the painful iPhone riff have to do with Vista, anyway?
- Mark said...
Personally, I'd rather see a scenario starring Seinfeld's (much funnier) co-creator. It would go something like this:
Larry finds out that Bill Gates is about to offer the $10 million to Jerry, so he immediately intervenes to get the deal for himself. He calls Bill Gates's office, and Bill tells him what an incredible fan he is, and says sure, he'd love to talk to him about using him instead of Jerry...
The problem is that being a "creative type", Larry actually uses an Apple machine, and doesn't own anything that runs on Windows. So Larry, cheapskate that he is, buys a bare-bones machine with no operating system, then downloads a BOOTLEGGED copy of Windows from a server Microsoft itself sets up to catch the bootleggers. He then rushes out to the meeting with Gates, takes out the computer to impress Gates with how much he loves and uses his product, boots it up, and gets the following message on his screen: "Warning: You are using a STOLEN, ILLEGALLY DOWNLOADED version of Windows on this computer."
Needless to say, the failure to spend $99 winds up costing Larry $10 million... And then, to add insult to injury, Bill sues Larry for an ADDITIONAL $10 million, in order to make a "celebrity case example" out of him!
(If Larry or his producers are readers of this blog, you can contact me through my agent.)
- Jeff Matthews said...
I like Mark's better.
- buzz said...
It's interesting that Seinfeld used to prominently position a Mac on his show. I think Apple got a better deal out of that than MSFT will get out of this.
- MightBWrong said...
The Jerry & Bill (Gates) commercial is even worse than yours. Jerry and Bill meet in a discount shoe store - and it goes down hill from there. Really lame. The photo on the discount card is Bill's actual mugshot from his DUI.
- jb said...
Just a small footnote about the ad's use of the reaction shot:
Jeff said: "anybody can videotape a bunch of people reacting with delight to product demos run by highly competent computer engineers from the company that created the program."
Madison Avenue has started adapting one of the sickest memes on the internet. The ultimate reaction shot was created using the video "2 Girls 1 Cup." It became viral last October. Google it and start at the Wikipedia story before venturing forth.
The ad would have been 'edgier' if MS had actually shown unsuspecting users (like grandmothers) reacting to a "2 Girls 1 operating system" video.


text: I made it to Bloom today. Got some really good deals, and some okay ones. Here's what $21.61 bought me: Considering the toilet paper was $11 of that, not a bad deal for the food. My favorite deals: Oscar Mayer Bacon (BOGO) reg 5.49 use coupon (08-30-09 SS) for $1.50/2 (doubled to $3), final priceRead More