NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS CLOSEOUT MEMORANDUM 11 Case Number: A06060029 11 Page 1 of 1 11 An NSF employee1advised NSF OIG that an NSF grant proposal2 to the Biological Sciences Directorate was effectively, a duplicate of a pending NIH proposal3. Further investigation and the subject's response4 verified this allegation. The Biological Sciences Directorate has a long-standing policy against this practice which says in pertinent part: Research proposals to the Biological Sciences Directorate (not proposals for conferences or workshops) cannot be duplicates of proposals to any other Federal agency for simultaneous c~nsideration.~ This A-file was opened to determine if this was an isolated incident or part of a pattern of misconduct. The subject's response explains his history of NSF submissions and the circumstances that led him to believe his actions were within the guidelines for federal funding of research. The subject received one award6 from NSF in 1999. That application was for a and therefore, . The subject withdrew his NIH application upon receiving that NSF award. Within two months7 of submitting this NSF application, the subject proposed a substantially duplicative proposal to NIH. The subject failed to indicate a "submission planned in the near future" in the NSF proposal that generated this investigation. It appears that the subject was ignorant of the pertinent MCB policy regarding duplicate proposals. He fully answered each question in our inquiry, citing personal errors and confusion over conflicting rules in NSF and HHS policies. Conclusion The subject's response and past actions do not demonstrate a pattern of misbehavior. The subject admits that these proposals did not properly reflect the status of pending support. His response acknowledges his past inappropriate conduct and future responsibilities. Accordingly, this case is closed. NSF OIG Fonn 2 (1 1/02)
Published by the National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General on 2006-10-05.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)