Marine Mammal Commission 2009 Request for Proposals
Scope
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, in partnership with the
U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, announces the availability of grant
funding in the following five research and conservation areas:
- Marine Mammals and Climate Change in the Arctic Ocean and Bering
Sea
- Calibration of New Methods for Surveying Marine Mammals
- Alternative Observer Coverage for Marine Mammal Species at High Risk
from Fishery Interactions
- Building Capacity for Marine Mammal Research and Conservation in the
Caribbean Region
- Assessment and Conservation of Sirenians
Applicants should select one—and only one—topic for
each proposal. Funding is provided by the U.S. Marine Mammal
Commission.
Eligibility
All persons, organizations, and agencies are eligible to apply,
including parties within and outside the United States. Applications for
funding for land or easement acquisition, political advocacy, lobbying,
or litigation will not be considered.
Proposal Topics
Marine Mammals and Climate Change in the Arctic
Ocean and Bering Sea
The Commission seeks proposals that synthesize climate change
information with marine mammal biological data. Successful proposals
will not merely speculate on outcomes or propose action plans based on
assumed outcomes but will generate hypotheses about the consequences of
anticipated climate change effects and then develop plans for data
collection to test those hypotheses.
Changing spring and summer ice cover in the Arctic and Bering Sea has
been the major focus of Arctic climate change concerns (e.g., Wang and
Overland 2009), but the Commission is equally interested in proposals
pertinent to changes in ocean physical processes, such as currents or
ocean acidification, plankton community composition, or marine mammal
prey abundance and distribution. Similarly, the species of greatest
interest to date have been species considered ice-dependent, such as
polar bears, walruses, and ringed seals. However, the Commission is
equally interested in proposals that address climate change effects on
sub-Arctic species that may be experiencing a northward shift in their
habitats (e.g., fur seals, harbor seals, Steller sea lions, Dall’s
porpoise, and gray whales) or those species that may be less dependent
on ice but still may respond to seasonal patterns of ice coverage or
other climatic effects (e.g., beluga whales).
Wang, M., and J. E. Overland. 2009. A sea ice free summer Arctic
within 30 years? Geophysical Research Letters L07502,
doi:10.1029/2009GL037820.
Calibration of New Methods for Surveying Marine
Mammals
The Commission seeks proposals that will reduce the uncertainty in
marine mammal surveys by integrating data from new survey technologies
into population assessment protocols; for example, by calibrating two or
more methods against one another or combining multiple survey procedures
into a single survey. Combining data from multiple methods generally
requires that they be calibrated against one another or a common
standard. New methods might involve passive and active acoustics, radar
or infrared sensing, remotely operated aerial or underwater vehicles
carrying cameras or other sensors, and mark-recapture methods such as
tagging and photo-ID, tested in conjunction with existing standard
methodologies, which generally involve direct human observation from
shore, boats, or aircraft.
The Commission recognizes that the full cost of a proposal under this
topic may exceed the resources available from the Commission alone,
particularly if new equipment is involved (e.g., tags or passive
acoustic sensor arrays). Therefore, applicants should take advantage of
existing survey efforts or matching funds from other sources. For
example, the proposed effort might cover the cost of a visual survey
during acoustic monitoring of an area or the cost of
photo-identification efforts during repeated visual surveys.
In their proposals, applicants should describe the data to be
collected, methods to safeguard independence of the survey efforts, and
the analysis they will use to generate a population estimate with
measures of uncertainty (e.g., mean and standard deviation). For an
example of a multi-methods calibration survey effort, see Barlow and
Taylor (2005). Applicants also should describe how they will evaluate
improvements in quantitative results and/or reductions in cost
associated with their proposed survey methodology.
Barlow J., and B. L. Taylor. 2005. Estimates of sperm whale abundance
in the northeastern temperate Pacific from a combined acoustic and
visual survey. Marine Mammal Science 21:429–445.
Alternative Observer Coverage for Marine Mammal Species at High
Risk from Fishery Interactions
Many stocks of marine mammals are known or suspected to experience
some degree of annual loss due to interactions with fisheries, either
within U.S. waters or on the high seas. Fishing vessel size, operating
constraints, limitations in funding for observer programs, and other
factors often preclude observer coverage for some of these at-risk
stocks and the fisheries with which they interact.
The Commission seeks proposals that offer alternative approaches for
collecting data about the frequency and spatial-temporal distribution of
interactions between marine mammals and fisheries, and the observed or
estimated serious injury and mortality arising from such interactions.
Alternative methods might include dockside and market surveys and
monitoring, coastal observations, use of dedicated observer vessels, use
of existing enforcement efforts, or observations from other aircraft or
vessels on the fishing grounds.
The proposed effort should be sufficient to generate more accurate
and precise (i.e., reliable) data for analysis, and analytical methods
should be included in the proposed effort. In addition to providing
better estimates of fisheries interactions, proposed alternatives must
be safe and feasible to implement.
Building Capacity for Marine Mammal Research and Conservation
in the Caribbean Region
The Commission seeks proposals that will build marine mammal research
and conservation capacity in the Caribbean region. At its annual meeting
in December 2008 in San Juan, Puerto Rico, the Commission discussed a
variety of marine mammal risk factors (e.g., fisheries interactions,
contaminants, subsistence whaling, tourism and whale-watching, and
coastal development). Development of national or international
conservation efforts in the Caribbean region has been limited due to
insufficient funds and the difficulties of building multi-national
partnerships; thus, the Commission is particularly interested in
projects that will further the purposes of the newly created Action Plan
for the Conservation of Marine Mammals in the Wider Caribbean Region,
available from the United Nations Environment Programme at http://www.cep.unep.org/about-cep/spaw/wg31-4en-mmap-rev-1-10-november-2008.pdf.
Proposals from individual nations are welcome, but multi-national
proposals are particularly encouraged as a means of building the
research and management capacity needed to sustain long-term
efforts.
Assessment and Conservation of Sirenians
The Commission seeks proposals that will provide biological
assessments and facilitate on-the-ground conservation actions for
populations of dugongs and manatees in Asia, Africa, and South America.
Because of their coastal habitats, sirenians are particularly vulnerable
to subsistence hunting, loss of habitat, vessel collisions, contaminant
exposure, and other threats associated with human coastal
development.
The Commission will place priority on proposals that will promote
increased outreach and communication among sirenian researchers and
conservationists within regions. The applicant should indicate how the
proposed effort fills a gap in our existing understanding of the
distribution and status of sirenian populations around the world and how
it will lead to improved conservation action for the pertinent
population and its habitat.
Grant Size and Indirect Costs
The Commission expects that the majority of awards under this program
will fall in the range of $25,000 to $125,000. However, the Commission
has not specified upper or lower limits to award size, other than that
the total amount of awards is not expected to be greater than $400,000.
The primary budgetary evaluation criterion will be the appropriateness
of the requested level of funds to the proposed scope of work.
Matching funds are NOT required under this funding
opportunity.
Applicants are encouraged to keep their overhead rates below 10
percent of the amount requested, in keeping with the general Marine
Mammal Commission policy on such costs. This policy is intended to
maximize the impact on science and conservation from the limited
resources available to the Commission for discretionary spending (also
see www.mmc.gov/research/policy.html).
Grant Period
Projects may extend from one to three years. The Commission cannot
guarantee that additional funds will be available in future years to
supplement awards made as a result of this review.
Application Guidelines
The following guidelines will be used by an advisory team of experts
to evaluate applications requesting support from the Marine Mammal
Commission.
Full Proposal (by invitation only)
A limited number of pre-proposal applicants will be invited to submit
a full proposal to elaborate on their work for a second stage of review.
The following additional information will be required at that time.
Expanded Proposal Narrative
Applicants will be asked to submit an expanded proposal narrative
that provides the following information and all relevant detail on
background, objectives, methodology, results, etc. The document
should not exceed 6 single-sided pages in length, single-spaced
with 12-point type. Applicants should upload this
narrative in addition to completing the online full proposal using
NFWF’s Easygrants system.
- Targeted Topic: List which of the five topics will be
addressed by your proposal.
- Introduction, Background, or Problem Statement:Provide a
review of past related efforts by the research team or others. Indicate
knowledge gaps, shortfalls of prior efforts, or challenges to further
progress and describe how the proposed effort will address these
issues.
- Goals and Objectives: List only the goals and objectives that
will be addressed within the scope of this proposal. Do not include
broader, longer-term goals of your research program or
organization.
- Methods: Provide a short description of project methods,
sufficient to enable the reviewer to understand how you will address the
proposed objectives. If you are not conducting original research but are
developing a workshop, review panel, or other activity, describe the
nature of the activity, the agenda or working format, confirmed or
anticipated attendees, and tentative dates and location of the planned
activity.
- Anticipated Outcomes: Describe the short-term outcomes; that
is, those outcomes anticipated to occur within the time span of the
proposed project (e.g., completion of a workshop report, one or more
peer-reviewed journal articles, an equipment prototype and report).
- Research and Management Utility (Long-Term Outcome): Describe
the anticipated long-term utility of the project and its implications
for future research, management, or conservation activities. Avoid
making your descriptions overly broad or vague (e.g., “will aid in
the conservation of the species” or “will empower decision
makers to make better decisions” are not useful descriptions of
anticipated long-term outcomes).
Budget and Timeline
The budget section should provide sufficient detail to inform the
reviewer of costs by general category, including salaries, travel,
vessel charters, major equipment (e.g., computers or lab instruments)
and supplies, publication costs, overhead, miscellaneous, and
sub-contracts. Office supplies or laboratory supplies do not require a
detailed justification unless unusual amounts of materials or unusually
expensive materials are involved. Also, please refer to the
Commission’s Statement of Policy on Overhead Rates (http://www.mmc.gov/research/policy.html).
Exceptions to the 10 percent upper limit on overhead charges are allowed
only in very unusual cases and may be a factor in the proposal selection
process for the reasons provided in our statement of policy.
Include information on other sources of funding for the project in
the section entitled “matching funds,” if
applicable. For multi-year or multi-stage projects, include a
timetable for completion of each phase as a means of gauging progress
toward completion of the full proposed effort in the “other”
category of the “uploads” section of the online
application.
Short Biography, Research Team Qualifications
Upload a full CV of the principal investigator and a short
biography of no more than one page each for key members of the proposal
team. Key members are those individuals whose unique background and
experience are essential to completion of the project. Although the
proposal should list only one corresponding principal investigator,
multiple co-investigators may be listed in this section of the
proposal.
Supporting Materials and Letters of Support
If the applicant is invited to submit a full proposal, additional
supporting materials such as recent publications or presentation
materials, short descriptions of relevant work in progress,
organizational charts, flow charts or maps can be included in the
“uploads” section of the submission. Applicants also can
upload letters of support to their full proposal. These can be
particularly relevant in cases of multi-jurisdictional, political, or
institutional projects when the proposed work will rely on the data or
actions of a third party. However, supplemental materials should be
limited to information absolutely essential to understanding the
significance, approach, and context of the proposed work.
If relevant, applicants asked to submit full proposals will be
required to provide proof of all necessary permits and clearances to
comply with the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered
Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, and any international permits
(e.g., CITES) or relevant non-U.S. national, state, or local ordinances.
To comply with the Animal Welfare Act, applicants whose projects involve
invasive procedures or may materially alter the behavior of study
animals will be required to obtain approval from an Institutional Animal
Care and Use Committee before an award can be finalized. Please
upload a document listing what permits and approvals, if any, are
needed.
Application Process
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation launched an on-line
application program in March of 2008. Applicants can find information
about the grant applications, including templates and orientation
webinars if needed, at http://www.nfwf.org/applicantinfo.
Pre-proposals must be submitted via the Foundation's online system,
in
English, and received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time
on August
19, 2009 (no exceptions). Upon receipt and competitive
evaluation of the pre-proposal, the Foundation will invite successful
applicants to submit a full proposal. Applicants will be notified
by September
9, 2009, as to the status of their preliminary applications
and whether they are invited to submit a full proposal.
Full proposals must be submitted via
the Foundation's online system, in English, and received by 5:00 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time on October 9, 2009 (no
exceptions). Awards for this program are scheduled to be
announced by early December 2009.
Awards may be contingent upon obtaining CITES permits, research
permits from appropriate national environmental agencies, and/or
approvals from appropriate animal care and use oversight bodies at the
performing institution or appropriate government agency.
For further information on the program or completing the application,
please contact Stephanie Pendergrass (at 202-857-0166 or stephanie.pendergrass@nfwf.org). For
technical information about the RFP topics, please contact Dr. Robert
Gisiner at the Marine Mammal Commission (bgisiner@mmc.gov
or 301-504-0087).
Visit www.nfwf.org/applicantinfo
for further assistance in navigating the Foundation’s Easygrants
application system.
Return to Program
Home
