R&D RFP FAQs

What ID number should we use in our proposal documents and file designations? The number we received during the RPA or the RFP number?

Please use the RFP ID number with which you are issued (in the 10-XXX format).

Can national laboratory personnel, whose salary is being paid by the federal government, be paid to act as a consultant on a NEUP project?

Yes. They will be paid through a subcontract from the university. It is very important to remember that if the consultant's time is being used on a NEUP project, you must account for their total cost in your budget form. DO NOT assume that their salary will be paid for by the federal government.

We are not sure we know how to fill in the PROC-3204 form. Who is going to fill in the form, the leading institution or all the participating institutions? What is the “Prime Contractor’s Subcontract No.”?

All university participants should fill out this form. Partners from National Laboratories are not required to fill this out. The Prime Contractor's Subcontract No. will be provided with the issuance of an award, so that can remain blank for your submission.

What is the page limit for the technical narrative of the R&D RFP proposal?

The page limit for the technical narrative is 10 pages.

How do I address the QA requirements in my proposal?

Please follow this link to an example of how to address QA requirements.

Can the names of the lead university & PI and the national laboratory collaborator & PI be cited on the proposal?

You may place any applicable paper citation in the bibliography, but we ask that you respect the intent of the call to have this knowledge remain blind and not circumvent the process by identifying team members in this fashion.  For example, do not state within the narrative something like "in our teams previous work published in citation A "This type of circumventing language can disqualify a proposal from consideration or necessitate redaction of the proposal.  For page limits, see FAQ, the email guidance memo, RFP application or the website.  

Is the two-page vita a requirement for only the lead PI or do the co-PIs need to provide one as well?

RPA: The two page vita is on the lead PI for the project.  Other collaborators are listed within the 3-page narrative.

RFP: The two-page CV is required for both the PI and any collaborating partners. On the submission form, the CVs for the partners can be uploaded in the "Technical Expertise and Qualifications" section. Any additional CVs beyond the four that can be uploaded in ths section can instead be attached in the "Supplementary Information" of the submission form.

Should we submit a full budget or only an estimation? What should be the form of the estimation, e.g. just a number for the whole proposal period, yearly costs, or something else?

Budgets at the RPA phase are estimates only, but should be inclusive of all expected costs for the entire project - i.e. all collaborator costs over the timeframe of the proposal.

Is there any info regarding the anticipated funding breakdown between the 3 identified areas (FCR&D, GENIV, and LWRS)?

The funding will follow the appropriations bill which has not yet been passed. The current language would indicate approximately $44 million in primarily GENIV and AFCI with less than $2 in LWRS. MR-IIR may be approx. $6M under this funding level.

What types of people review full proposals?  Do they come from the national laboratories and industry?  What is the mix?

We try to get a diversity of expert reviewers for each submission: 2 from universities, and 1 from either a national laboratory or industry for a total of at least three reviewers.   At the Request for Full Proposal (RFP) phase, we will be asking you to provide names of suggested reviewers and names of those people you would prefer not review your proposal. You can suggest the same reviewer on more than one proposal.

Can the reviewers review more than one proposal?

Yes, many review 2-3 proposals.

Would it be viewed favorably if a proposal had a primary technical work scope and one or more secondary work scopes, or should the proposal focus exclusively on one predefined technical challenge?

One workscope/technical challenge is preferred, though PI's may make more than one submission.