- CLOSEOUT FOR M93020008 ~n(.~ebruary 1993 a program officer1told OIG that he had received a proposal2 from four PIS that contained inaccurate Current and Pending Support forms. The program officer said l), 1- (subject I 2), - \ subject 4) had also submitted other proposals to NSF that did not truthfully state their current and pending support. OIG reviewed 27 NSF proposals submitted by the subjects (either collaboratively or individually) between 1987 and 1996 as well as 3 awards by. other federal agencies to subjects 2 and 4. OIG found that many of the proposals contained Current and Pending Support statements that failed to declare that subjects 1, 2, and 3 received support under two of the awards from other federal agencies and that seven of these NSF proposals resulted in awards. Subject 4 had not misstated his Current and Pending Support on the proposals in this review. NSF's Grant Proposal Guide (NSF 95-27) states that the a'pplicant is to provide information about all current and pending support for ongoing projects and proposals, including subsequent funding in the case of continuing grants. All current project support from whatever source (e.g., Federal, State or local government agencies, private foundations, industrial or other commercial organizations) must be listed. The proposed project and all other projects or activities requiring a portion of time of the PI and other senior personnel should be included, even if they receive no salary support from the project@). The number of person-months per year to be devoted to the projects must be stated, regardless of source of support. Similar information must be provided for all proposals already submitted or submitted concurrently to other possible sponsors, including NSF.[~] (subject 3). ' Similar explanations of NSF's requirements for reporting current and pending support are found in each of the successively issued Grantsfor Scientifc Research and Education, NSF's application guide, that were in force during the period spanned by this case. Page 1 of 2 CLOSEOUT FOR M93020008 In response to OIG's request for information, subjects 1 and 3 said they thought they were to list only those grants on which they were named as the PI. They did not realize that they were to submit information about grants from which they received support but were not named as the PI. Subject 2 said the information in his Current and Pending Support Statements reflected his knowledge of what his support would be during the period for which NSF support was requested, not his current and pending support at the time he submitted his proposals. In response to OIG's request, the three subjects submitted to the cognizant NSF program officers corrected Current and Pending Support Statements for their currently active NSF awards. Each of the subjects has demonstrated that they are aware of the type of information that is to be provided on a Current and Pending Support. statement when a proposal is submitted to NSF. OIG considers these new submissions and corrections to be a satisfactory resolution to this case. This inquiry is closed and no further action will.be taken in this case. cc: Staff Scientist, Deputy AIG-Oversight, AIG-Oversight, IG Page 2 of 2
Applicant/Grantee/PI False Certification
Published by the National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General on 1997-09-18.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)