[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71031-71033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22679]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To Establish an Information 
Collection

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, the 
National Science Foundation (NSF) is inviting the general public or 
other Federal agencies to comment on this proposed continuing 
information collection.

DATES: Written comments on this notice must be received by December 12, 
2023, to be assured consideration. Comments received after that date 
will be considered to the extent practicable. Send comments to address 
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance 
Officer, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 
E7400, Alexandria, Virginia 22314; telephone (703) 292-7556; or send 
email to [email protected]. Individuals who use a telecommunications 
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay 
Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, which is accessible 24 hours a day, 7 
days a week, 365 days a year (including federal holidays).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the Foundation, including whether the information will 
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Foundation's estimate 
of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on those who are to respond, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology.
    Title of Collection: NSF's Safe and Inclusive Fieldwork (SAIF) 
Pilot in Biological Sciences (BIO) and Geosciences (GEO) PI Survey.
    OMB Number: 3145-NEW.
    Expiration Date of Approval: Not applicable.
    Type of Request: Intent to seek approval to establish an 
information collection.
    Abstract: The National Science Foundation (NSF) on 8 February 2018, 
in Important Notice No. 144 (8 Feb 2018) to Presidents of Universities 
and Colleges and Heads of Other National Science Foundation Grantee 
Organizations, emphasized that the agency does not tolerate sexual 
harassment, or any kind of harassment, anywhere NSF-funded science and 
education are conducted. The memo elaborated that the NSF is committed 
to ``. . . promoting safe, productive research and education 
environments . . . ,'' including those outside the organization, such 
as at field sites or facilities. Two NSF-wide policy changes quickly 
followed the memo to make clear that the agency was committed to safe 
research and learning environments. The first was a new Term and 
Condition that required awardee organizations to notify the NSF of any 
findings/determinations of sexual harassment, other forms of 
harassment, or sexual assault regarding an NSF funded Principal 
Investigator (PI) or co-PI, or of the placement of the PI or co-PI on 
administrative leave, or the imposition of any administrative action 
relating to harassment or sexual assault finding or investigator. The 
second was a new requirement for all NSF supported conferences to have 
a policy or code-of-conduct that addresses sexual harassment, other 
forms of harassment, and sexual assault, and that includes clear and 
accessible means of reporting violations of the policy or code-of-
conduct. Proposers were not, however, required to submit that policy or 
code-

[[Page 71032]]

of-conduct for review. Additional policy changes have since followed, 
including this year (as of 30 January 2023) when all organizations 
submitting proposals to the NSF with off-site or off-campus research 
(i.e., fieldwork) were henceforth required to certify that they have a 
proposal-specific plan in place for safe and inclusive research 
(Chapter II.E.9 of the Proposal and Award Policy and Procedures Guide); 
however, the plan itself is not required to be submitted to the NSF or 
subject to review.
    Two of the NSF directorates [Biological Sciences (BIO) and 
Geosciences (GEO)] fund disproportinately large numbers of awards to 
researchers with significant fieldwork components, and because 
fieldwork is known to be particularly risky with respect to safety and 
inclusion (e.g., Clancy et al. 2014, Nelson et al. 2017, John and Khan 
2018, Giles et al. 2020), BIO and GEO initiated a pilot program to 
require Principal Investigators (PIs) of submitted projects involving 
fieldwork to include a 2-page Supplementary Document summarizing how 
the project team would ensure a safe and inclusive working environment 
for all associated personnel. This plan is called the Safe and 
Inclusive Fieldwork (SAIF) Plan and is required for several 
solicitations in BIO and GEO, but not all. Importantly the SAIF Plans 
are subject to merit review as part of the NSF Broader Impacts 
criterion.
    Recent research has repeatedly demonstrated that fieldwork can be 
especially challenging, and uniquely so, with respect to inclusion 
(e.g., Demery and Pipkin 2020, Marin-Spiotta et al. 2020, O'Brien et 
al. 2020, Ramirez-Castaneda et al. 2022; Yarincik et al. 2023), and 
without inclusion, attrition from the STEM workforce is accelerated 
(NASEM 2018, 2019). To ensure that the United States leads the world in 
discovery and innovation, it is critical to broaden participation and 
empower all STEM talent to fully participate in science, and in fact 
this is one of NSF's top stragegic goals (NSF 2022-2026 Strategic 
Plan), along with the corresponding strategic objective--to ensure 
accessibility and inclusivity. In addition, broadening participation/
inclusion is a key component of NSF's Broader Impacts review criterion.
    Because research proposals with fieldwork are common at the NSF, 
especially in BIO and GEO, the SAIF Pilot aims to (a) empower those 
scientific communities to develop promising practices and strategies to 
ensure safe and inclusive working environments, (b) collect and analyze 
the diversity of approaches used, and (c) speed culture change beyond 
what is accomplished by compliance (e.g., NASEM 2018). For 
solicitations participating in the SAIF Pilot, SAIF Plans will be 
associated directly with each submitted NSF proposal and subject to 
merit review. The lead PI of a submitted project that includes any off-
campus or off-site research (i.e., fieldwork) must (a) describe the 
unique challenges for their teams; (b) provide information on the steps 
that will be taken to nurture an inclusive environment; (c) outline the 
communication processes within the field team and the organization, and 
(d) list the organizational mechanisms to be used for reporting, 
responding to, and resolving issues of harassment if they arise. All of 
these steps are based on best practices from the literature (see 
Yarnick et al. 2023).
    For all of the aforementioned reasons, the NSF BIO and GEO 
Directorates request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval 
of this clearance to aid in the evaluation of NSF's Safe and Inclusive 
Fieldwork (SAIF) Pilot. The approval would cover PI surveys and 
interviews as described below.

--PI Survey. We seek approval to conduct a web-based survey of 
Principal Investigators (PIs) who have submitted proposals to the 
solicitations participating in the SAIF Pilot. The PI survey is to 
assess key information on the preparation of the plans (e.g., time and 
resources) and whether the NSF review criteria are clear. The survey 
data will help to enable the NSF to better assess the value of 
requiring PIs with proposals that have off-campus or off-site research 
(i.e., fieldwork) to include SAIF Plans as a Supplementary Document 
subject to merit review, in lieu of the PAPPG NSF 23-1 Chapter II.E.9 
requirement that requires only that the AOR certify that the 
organization has a plan in place for safe and inclusive research but 
does not submit that plan to the NSF for review.
--Interviews with PIs who have submitted and/or reviewed SAIF Plans. 
Interviews with PIs who have submitted proposals to solicitations 
participating in the SAIF Pilot, and/or have reviewed proposals that 
have included a SAIF Plan, are important to provide in-depth 
information about specific topics of interest to NSF (e.g., 
institutional support for the creation of the SAIF Plans; details on 
process and implementation; perceptions of value; etc.). The interviews 
will be conducted using a virtual meeting platform at a time convenient 
for the participants. An added purpose is to corroborate findings 
obtained through the PI surveys and to dive more deeply on selected 
areas that are of interest to BIO and GEO staff and other stakeholders.

    This data collection is necessary to provide NSF with timely and 
actionable information about the preparation, common strategies and 
activities, organizational involvement, clarity and value of merit 
review, and outcomes associated with SAIF Plans. We note that the U.S. 
Department of Energy now requires Promoting Inclusive and Equitable 
Research (PIER) Plans for every submission, regardless of whether the 
work is on- or off-campus. An early assessment of the NSF BIO and GEO 
SAIF Pilot will be important for understanding the (1) administrative 
burden required to write and review SAIF Plans, (2) their perceived 
value, and (3) promising strategies to creating safe and inclusive 
working environments.
    Use of the Information: Aggregate results from the survey and 
interviews will be summarized in reports. While the individual survey 
and interview responses will be identifiable to NSF staff, no 
information about individuals participating in the surveys and 
interviews will be released to anyone outside of the NSF. The data 
collected and reported on will be used for planning, management, and 
evaluation purposes only. These data are needed for effective 
evaluation and for measuring attainment of NSF's program and strategic 
goals, as identified by the President's Accountable Government 
Initiative, the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization 
Act of 2010, Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018, and NSF's 
Strategic Plan.
    Expected Respondents: The respondents are either Principal 
Investigators (PIs) and/or other key personnel (e.g., coPIs) on grants 
submitted to programs participating in the SAIF Pilot. As a control, 
and as a way to gather information on the views of PIs to the new PAPPG 
NSF 23-1 Chapter II.E.9 requirement, PIs submitting to solicitations in 
BIO and GEO that do not require SAIF Plans will also be included. The 
numbers of PIs who are likely to respond to the survey are estimated 
below under Estimate of Burden. The interviews will be a random subset 
of PIs.

Estimate of Burden

Estimates of Annualized Cost to Respondents for the Hour Burdens

    The overall annualized cost to the respondents is estimated to be 
$21,712.

[[Page 71033]]

The following table shows the estimated burden and costs to 
respondents, who are PIs or coPIs of NSF proposals to the BIO and GEO 
directorates. This estimated hourly rate is based on a report from the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment and Wages, May 
2022.\1\ According to this report, the mean hourly rate is $46.38 for 
biological scientists (code 191020), and $42.96 for geoscientists (code 
192040). We used $46 as the amount to calculate burden. Estimated 
numbers are based on FY22 # of submissions to each of the participating 
solicitations and then estimating the % with field work for each 
solicitation, using advice from Program Officers familiar with each 
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes251021.htm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Number of                                Burden                 Estimated
                          Directorate                           Solicitation   submitters    % with     ~# PIs with   hours per   Total hour    annual
                                                                                in FY22     fieldwork    fieldwork    respondent    burden       cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIO...........................................................        23-580          147           7            10           .5         5.2         237
BIO...........................................................        23-578           84           7             6           .5         2.9         135
BIO...........................................................        23-547          444          40           178           .5        88.8       4,085
BIO...........................................................        23-559           98          50            49           .5        24.5       1,127
BIO...........................................................        23-548          394           5           197           .5        98.5       4,531
BIO...........................................................        23-542          109         100           109           .5        54.5       2,507
BIO...........................................................        23-549          318          75           239           .5       119.3       5,486
GEO...........................................................        23-572          211          67           141           .5        70.7       3,252
GEO...........................................................        23-540           14          75            11           .5         5.3         242
GEO...........................................................        23-539           16          30             5           .5         2.4         110
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Number of Responses (given ~85% response rate) for PI 
Survey: We will survey approximately 800 individuals, given the 
information in the table above, which includes the estimated number of 
submissions to each of the solicitations in the SAIF Pilot, and the % 
of those proposals with fieldwork.
    Estimated Number of PI Interviews: We will interview approximately 
70 individuals, with sampling aross all of the solicitations 
participating in the SAIF Pilot.

    Dated: October 10, 2023.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.

Citations

Clancy, K.B., H., R.G. Nelson, J.N. Rutherford, and K. Hinde. 2014. 
Survey of academic field experiences (SAFE): Trainees report 
harassment and assault. PLoS ONE 9:e102172.
Demery, A.C., and M.A. Pipkin. 2021. Safe fieldwork strategies for 
at-risk individuals, their supervisors and institutions. Nature 
Ecology and Evolution 5:5-9.
Giles, S., C. Jackson, and N. Stephen. 2020. Barriers to fieldwork 
in undergraduate geology degrees. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 
1:77-78. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0022-5.
John, C.M., and S.B. Khan. 2018. Mental health in the field. Nature 
Geoscience 11:618-620.
Marin-Spiotta, E., R.T. Barnes, A.A. Berhe, M.G. Hastings, A. 
Mattheis, B. Schneider, and B.M. Williams. 2020. Hostile climates 
are barriers to diversifying the geosciences. Advances in 
Geosciences 53:117-127. https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-53-117-2020.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. 
Sexual harassment of women: Climate, culture, and consequences in 
academic sciences, engineering, and medicine. The National Academies 
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24994.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. The 
science of effective mentorship in STEMM. The National Academies 
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25568.
Nelson, R.G., et al. 2017. Signaling safety: Characterizing 
fieldwork experiences and their implications for career 
trajectories. American Anthropologist 119:710-722.
O'Brien, L.T., H.L. Bart, and D.M. Garcia. 2020. Why are there so 
few ethnic minorities in ecology and evolutionary biology? 
Challenges to inclusion and the role of sense of belonging. Social 
Psychology of Education 23:449-477.
Ramirez-Castaneda, V., E.P. Westeen, J. Frederick, et al. (+30) 
2022. A set of principles and practical suggestions for equitable 
fieldwork in biology. Proceedings of the National Academy of 
Sciences 119e:2122667119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122667119.
Yarincik, K., A. Kelly, T. McGlynn, R.M. Verble. 2023. Best 
practices to promote field science safety. Integrative and 
Comparative Biology 63:145-161.

[FR Doc. 2023-22679 Filed 10-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P