NSF and DOC NNME National Hub OTASO Questions and Answers.pdf

U.S. National Science Foundation and Department of Commerce Solutions Offering for the National Network for

Microelectronics Education Program

Questions & Answers (Publication Date: October 16, 2024)

Eligibility

Award Amount and Period of Performance

Programmatic Activities

Regional Nodes

Regional Node Conflicts / Eligibility

Proposal Requirements

Evaluation and Selection

Additional Questions

The questions in this document were submitted to NSF by email in accordance with the instructions contained in the Solutions Offering or posed during the “Introduction to the National Network for Microelectronics Education (NNME)” webinar hosted by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Department of Commerce (DOC) on Friday, Oct. 4, 2024.

In some cases, duplicate, suf�iciently similar, or related questions have been combined to enable NSF to address them with a single response. Additionally, questions that are not relevant to the NSF Solutions Offering were omitted and not included herein. NSF and DOC panelists answered many webinar questions live. A small number of webinar questions which were answered live were included in this document either because their inclusion was deemed important by NSF and DOC, or because NSF and DOC wanted to provide additional information. Should any information provided in this document con�lict with a live response to a webinar question, the information contained in this document shall govern.

A recording of the live event is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQd3TwiJc4.

Eligibility

1. I do not see any language about this being a limited submission. Could you con�irm that organizations are only eligible to submit a single application?

Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering states: A lead organization may only submit one proposal in response to this solicitation and may not appear as a subawardee on any additional proposals.

2. Is it an absolute that the Prime submission be from education or non-pro�it?

All eligibility requirements are stated in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering. The lead organization must be an institution of higher education or non-pro�it organization or a consortium (group) of such institutions and organizations (42 U.S.C. § 18997(a)(1)) as well as for-pro�it companies, as long as the for-pro�it companies are not the lead organization in the consortium.

3. Is there a limit on the number or criteria for the organizations that are part of the applicant-consortium?

Eligibility requirements are stated in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering, and there are no limits on the numbers of organizations that can be part of a consortium. Please see answer to question 2. above for further information regarding the criteria of the organizations in an applicant consortium.

4. My organization is a System administration of�ice for a state university system.

Is the System of�ice separate and distinct (in terms of eligibility) from any of its campuses?

Given the level of information in this question, a de�initive answer cannot be provided.

The relationship between the System Of�ice and campuses, as described by the proposing organization, will determine if there are any eligibility issues or organizational con�licts of interest (OCIs). Organizational conflict of interest means that because of other activities or relationships with other persons, a person is unable or potentially unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Government, or the person’s objectivity in performing the contract work is or might be otherwise impaired, or a person has an unfair competitive advantage. In accordance with Section 7.1.8 of the Solutions Offering, proposing organizations must include a statement describing any potential �inancial interests that the organization may have that could create con�licts of interest with the work to be performed in its proposal.

5. Is there a provision to ensure participation of small businesses and minority-owned entities?

Section 7.1.2 requires proposing organizations to describe how they will ensure broad participation by all Americans, including how a proposing organization will remove barriers for underrepresented and/or underserved communities to fully participate in its programs.

6. What are the limits and restrictions on the participation of for-pro�it organizations?

Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering states: The lead organization must be an institution of higher education or non-pro�it organization or a consortium (group) of such institutions and organizations (42 U.S.C. § 18997(a)(1)) as well as for-pro�it companies, as long as the for-pro�it companies are not the lead organization in the consortium. There are no further restrictions listed in the Solutions Offering related to the participation or roles of for-pro�it entities, including their ability to perform as subawardees.

7. Is there a minimum annual income for the grant recipient? And can a small 501(c)(3) nonpro�it org qualify for the funds?

This is not a solicitation for �inancial assistance. There are no income requirements included in Section 3.0 Eligibility of the Solutions Offering.

8. For an international non-pro�it with chapters in multiple U.S. states, should the

Headquarters submit the proposal, or can a local chapter submit?

In accordance with Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering, foreign entities are not eligible to submit a proposal as a lead organization or to participate as a subawardee under this solicitation. However, a US-located chapter of an international non-pro�it wherein the chapter is an US-incorporated entity would likely be eligible.

9. Are Federally Funded Research and Development Corporations (FFRDCs) eligible to apply to operate the Hub?

Entities who meet the eligibility requirements in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering can propose. An FFRDC Sponsoring Agreement or the policies and procedures of the FFRDC's sponsoring agency will address this. Generally, there is a prohibition against an FFRDC competing with any non-FFRDC concern in response to a Federal agency request for proposals for other than the operation of an FFRDC.

10. Are Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) allowed to apply? Are there any training sessions on knowing the needs of these institutions about this grant?"

Yes, HBCUs are eligible to apply as long as they satisfy the other criteria for eligibility as noted in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering. There are no training sessions related to the issuance of this Solutions Offering. All eligibility requirements are stated in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering.

11. Are Native nations eligible to be a lead applicant?

Yes, as long as they satisfy the other criteria for eligibility as noted in Section 3.0 of the Solutions Offering.

12. Can a subawardee be on more than one proposal?

Yes. A subawardee may be on more than one proposal.

Award Amount and Period of Performance

13. To verify: the size of the entire program is potentially $30 million. The size of the Regional Node is not �ixed but determined by the submitting group as needed to complete the work.

Please refer to Section 4.0 of the Solutions Offering. NSF and DOC intend to make one award to a Hub operator in the amount up to $30 million over a six-year period of performance (subject to the availability of funds and quality of proposals received).

The number of Regional Nodes and their funding amounts will be determined at a later time. As speci�ied in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, the NNME is envisioned as an up to $200 million investment comprising the Hub and Regional Nodes as well as other related efforts to disseminate workforce development throughout the U.S.

14. How many awards will be made? What should be a typical budget for a Regional

Node?

Please refer to Section 4.0 of the Solutions Offering. The Solutions Offering intends to make one award to a Hub operator in the amount up to $30 million over a six-year period of performance. The number of Regional Nodes and their funding amounts will be determined at a later time.

15. Is the $30 million spread over six years? Does the 12-month budget equate to one-sixth of the $30 million?

NSF and DOC intend to make one award to a Hub operator in the amount up to $30 million over a six-year period of performance (subject to the availability of funds). The budget for the �irst 12 months does not need to equate to one-sixth of the $30 million.

16. For budgeting purposes, what should we use as the project start date?

The start date for the Hub is not yet known. However, it is expected that the Hub will be under contract in early 2025. You may use March 1, 2025, as an anticipated start date for budgeting purposes, with the understanding that this may shift slightly in either direction.

17. Will the funding for the future Regional Nodes �low-through the Hub/Hub's

Other Transaction Agreement (OTA), or will they be directly/independently contracted by NSF?

NSF and DOC expect that the National Network Coordination Hub will select and award the Regional Nodes with oversight by NSF and DOC. Please see Section 6.1.A of the Solutions Offering.

Programmatic Activities

18. Should applications address/propose how a NNME Hub would engage/work with the WCoE?

It is not a requirement in the solicitation, but it is encouraged.

19. The way the NNME and National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC) Workforce Center of Excellence (WCoE) will work together has been explained, but it's still not clear to me how they will actually differ.

The NSTC Workforce Center of Excellence will serve as the main platform for industry stakeholders to better understand workforce challenges and identify solutions, which includes providing technical assistance to NSTC members and establishing a data and analytics initiative to evaluate what works. The NNME, including the Network Coordination Hub, will disseminate solutions and best practices identi�ied by the NSTC WCoE to regional organizations across the country, adapting them to local conditions, stakeholders, and institutions.

20. From the graphic that shows Organizational Elements, it appears that the NSTC Workforce Center of Excellence is developing best practices and sharing them with the Hub. Does the Hub have a role in developing best practices or is it more disseminating them to Regional Nodes and helping the Regional Nodes implement them?

The Hub will certainly be a partner with the NSTC WCoE in identifying and sharing best practices, but its role will be focused more on disseminating best practices and collaborating with the Regional Nodes on local adaption and adoption.

21. Does the independent evaluator report to NSF or the Hub Manager?

Please see Section 6.2, sub-section 4a. The Hub will identify an independent professional external evaluator. This evaluator will report to the Hub and any information provided by the evaluator to the Hub will be shared with NSF and DOC.

22. Is there an expectation of connecting this to Microelectronic Commons?

This has not yet been determined.

23. How early is early in “Engaging Early Learners”?

Proposing organizations are free to determine with suf�icient explanation the optimal time to engage with K-12 learners.

24. For those of us passionate about Microelectronics education, research, and industry, but not in a position to submit a competitive proposal here, what opportunities will there be for us to get involved? Should we try to join another effort? Can we hope to apply for grants to the winning institution, which will be the "vehicle for awards"?

NSF and DOC expect that future opportunities for participation will be available including as Regional Nodes and Regional Node performers. See Section 6.3 of the Solutions Offering for examples of anticipated Regional Node activities.

25. We know that technically trained individuals often don't stay in technical jobs, especially underrepresented groups. While education is critical to meeting the industry workforce gaps, how will the Hub be expected to track / monitor / enforce retention of those educated workers in the industry as an outcome?

NSF and DOC’s expectation is that the learner outcomes will be monitored and tracked (see Section 6.2.4.b of the Solutions Offering). However, retention will not and cannot be enforced.

26. How can academic institutions outside the U.S. coordinate with the Hub?

Please see "Hub Activities," Solutions Offering Section 6.2. under Subsection 6, Other Critical Engagements.

27. Would you like the proposal to discuss only the Hub operator's ability to carry out the outlined activities or to achieve the objectives and goals as well? If the latter, in what ways do you suggest applicants illustrate the partnerships and collaboration fostered while also demonstrating that the applicant is without con�licts of interest?

NSF and DOC would like proposals to address the Hub operator's ability to ful�ill the goals and objectives in Section 6.1 through (but not limited to) execution of the activities outlined in Section 6.2. With regard to proposing organizations’ illustrating partnerships and collaborations, it is the responsibility of the proposing organization to address con�licts of interest. See Solutions Offering Section 7.1.8 and the Regional Node Con�licts/Eligibility Section of this FAQ document for more information.

28. My question is whether this program is restricted only to education and workforce (EWD) for semiconductor chip manufacturing or whether this program is also interested in EWD for heterogeneous integration (advanced packaging) of chips and chiplets to form complex multi-chip components/assemblies.

Please refer to Section 2.0 of the Solutions Offering, in particular Goal 3 of the NSTC's National Strategy on Microelectronics Research which refers to growing and sustaining all aspects of the semiconductor industry’s workforce, spanning design as well as manufacturing. Heterogeneous integration of application-speci�ic integrated circuits (ASICs) and chiplets using advanced packaging technologies is included.

Regional Nodes

29. Is there a point in the six-year period of performance by which the Hub is expected to stand up the Regional Nodes? Are Regional Nodes established sequentially or in parallel? Is it up to the proposer to establish the timeline?

NSF and DOC anticipate that the Regional Nodes will be stood up some time after the Hub is established, with the exact time still to be determined. It is not expected that the Hub provide a timeline for the establishment of the Regional Nodes. However, we do expect the proposing organizations to describe how they would ensure that the Regional Nodes ful�ill the activities of the Regional Nodes in each region and the objectives and goals of the NNME are instilled in the Regional Nodes and their performers.

30. Is this application for selecting a Hub leader? If one is more suited to being a performer, is this the application for that? Or are performers selected later on?

This Solutions Offering is to select the lead operator of the National Network Coordination Hub only. The Regional Nodes and their performers will be selected at a later date.

31. If an organization plans to apply for a Regional Node in the future, is it advisable for them to submit a commitment letter to another entity that is applying for the NNME Hub solicitation, or will that be considered a COI?

The Solutions Offering is only directed at the selection of the National Network Coordination Hub and not the Regional Nodes. Since the Hub will be expected to establish a fair and transparent, merit review-based process for selecting the Regional Nodes, NSF discourages proposing organizations from including in their proposal submissions letters of commitment by organizations to be Regional Nodes.

32. What amount of funding is being set aside for the Regional Nodes and what is the maximum number of Regional Nodes that the NNME support?

The amount of funding for the Regional Nodes and the number of Regional Nodes will be determined at a later date.

33. Will the Hub decide and select the Regional Nodes? Will the Regional Notes be competed through NSF as a NOFO?

The expectation is that the Regional Nodes will be selected by the Hub using a merit review process with oversight by NSF and in collaboration with DOC.

34. Will the Hub operator contract (or subcontract) with entities/conveners to manage Regional Node performers?

It is expected that the Hub will select and contract with the Regional Nodes with oversight by NSF and in collaboration with DOC.

35. Once a Hub is selected, how can entities throw their hat in the ring to be a Regional Node or of�icial performer for a Regional Node? How would a smaller consulting �irm, specialized in training that might complement this initiative, �it into this structure eventually (for example, through the Regional Nodes?)

All interested parties that can provide useful capabilities are encouraged to participate as performers to the NNME. How the Regional Nodes will select performers has not been determined. The Hub, in collaboration with NSF and DOC, will play a critical role in determining how to best establish a number of Regional Nodes that will form the NNME, composed of regional networks, to collectively perform activities tailored to industry’s needs in each regional semiconductor ecosystem. More information about the application process for parties interested in becoming Regional Nodes and regional performers will be available following the establishment of the Hub.

36. Will there be funding for Regional Nodes to develop new programs and training opportunities that address the skills needed for the microelectronics industry?

Will there be support to hire instructors and teachers for these programs? Or is the funding more for administration of the network?

NSF and DOC expect that future funding opportunities will be available to Regional Nodes and Regional Node performers to develop new programs and training opportunities. Please see Section 6.3 of Solutions Offering for examples of anticipated Regional Node activities.

37. How do you envision the Regional Nodes working with the Workforce Intermediaries that each company receiving large incentives under 9902 was required to identify?

The Department of Commerce is working with CHIPS Incentives awardees to help them identify and utilize workforce intermediaries, which are neutral, trusted, and credible entities in a region that have established relationships with solution providers such as industry associations, workforce or economic development organizations, labor unions, non-pro�it/philanthropies, state or local workforce boards, and educational institutions such as community colleges (see here for more:

https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2024/09/13/IntermediaryFactSheet- 508C.pdf). While there is no formal, de�ined relationship between workforce intermediaries and Regional Nodes, or any speci�ic requirements regarding collaboration between the entities, a workforce intermediary could potentially work with a Regional Node in a few ways: 1) a workforce intermediary could become a Regional Node, 2) A Regional Node could work with a workforce intermediary as a potential solution provider for the intermediary's associated company, and 3) a workforce intermediary could work with a Regional Node to help convene stakeholders in its region of service.

38. Are Regional Nodes able to support a demographic or will they be strictly focused on geography?

Each Regional Node is expected to create a network of performers in a speci�ic region, so by de�inition, there is an emphasis on geography. That said, NSF and DOC intend for the Regional Nodes to be open to and ensure broad participation from all demographic groups.

39. What information can you share about the requirements for applying to be a

Regional Node?

It is expected that the Hub will select and contract with the Regional Nodes with oversight by the NSF and in collaboration with DOC. The requirements for applying to be a Regional Node or a performer to a Regional Node have not yet been determined.

40. Can we broadly approximate the number of nodes anticipated? 5, 10, 100? This would be helpful for budget planning.

The number of Regional Nodes in the NNME has not yet been determined.

Regional Node Conflicts / Eligibility

41. Can Hub applicants also be Regional Node applicants? What about associated universities/centers within a university system?

The Hub is not eligible to serve as a Regional Node awardee. Member organizations of the entity proposing may be eligible to serve as Regional Node, subject to any relevant con�licts of interest and associated mitigations. Proposing organizations must describe how they will address post-award con�licts in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

42. Are subawardees named in the awarded Hub application also eligible to serve as a Regional Node?

Potentially, if the work of the subawardee under the Hub does not constitute an organizational con�lict of interest. The proposing organization must also include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

43. Could you provide clari�ication on whether being a subaward for the Hub would preclude an entity from leading a Regional Node? If an institution is a subawardee under a Hub award, would that institution be eligible to be a subawardee (not lead) on a Regional Node award?

It would depend on the proposed role of the subawardee at the Hub and Regional Node level. The proposing organization must also include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

44. In the webinar presented on Friday, October 4, it was stated that due to con�licts of interest, the organization selected as the National Network Coordination Hub operator cannot also be a Regional Node operator (selected at a later time). Our understanding is that if an organization is a subawardee (not a lead) on the selected National Network Coordination Hub, they would be eligible to also be bid on a future Regional Note as either a lead or subaward. Please con�irm.

Participation as a subawardee may preclude an entity from participating as a lead or subawardee on a Regional Node. That determination would be based on roles, responsibilities, and work performed by the entity. Section 7.1.8 of the Solutions Offering provides guidance on proposal submission requirements related to con�licts of interest.

45. If we can ask for letters of commitment from any organization, how best do we demonstrate neutrality on selecting Regional Nodes? If orgs/institutions interested in being Regional Nodes write us letters of support, will that threaten our neutrality?

The Letters of Commitment referenced in Solutions Offering Section 7.1.5 are speci�ic to employers and subawardees to serve roles in Hub operations, not at the Regional Node level.

46. If an application includes letters of commitment from education institutions to demonstrate prior partnerships and collaboration fostered, how do you suggest an applicant also demonstrate that those commitments do not indicate con�licts of interest in the Regional Node selection process?

It would depend on the proposed role of the subawardee at the Hub and Regional Node level. The proposing organization must also include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Solutions Offering Section 7.1.8.

47. If we make the assumption that letters from education institutions exhibit a potential con�lict of interest or bias, would it be advisable or acceptable to gather letters of commitment from consortia or networks?

NSF cannot validate this assumption. The proposing organization must include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Solutions Offering Section 7.1.8.

48. Given that this is a competitive business space, will there be signi�icant NSF and

DOC oversight of the Hub re: selection of funds for the Regional Nodes?

Oversight of Regional Nodes and the role of NSF and DOC will be negotiated with the potential successful proposing organization.

49. Will Regional Nodes also be restricted to academic institutions and nonpro�its?

Eligibility requirements for Regional Nodes will be established in the announcements issued by the Hub.

50. Can you please say more about the Hub serving as a Neutral and Independent

Platform – speci�ically how they should be decon�licted from any potential or perceived con�licts of interest that may bias the establishment and future coordination of Regional Nodes?

The proposing organization must include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

51. If a Hub applicant is an umbrella organization, would their subagencies be prevented from becoming Regional Nodes?

It would depend on the actual and proposed roles of the sub-entities at the Hub and Regional Node level. The proposing organization must include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

52. Can you please share examples of what constitutes a con�lict of interest for entities applying as the Hub or working with the Hub?

A non-exhaustive list of examples includes: 1) an entity’s outside business relationships create an economic incentive to provide biased advice under an OT; 2) as part of its work under one transaction, the entity has helped set the ground rules, such as writing the statement of work or developing speci�ications, for later competitions/awards; or 3) an entity obtains access to nonpublic information as part of its performance under another transaction which gives it an advantage in a later competition.

53. If a particular university becomes the lead for the Hub, will that prevent other faculty at that same university from proposing one or more Regional Nodes?

Likewise, if a particular university becomes a subawardee as part of a Hub, will that prevent other faculty at that university from proposing one or more Regional Nodes? To put this another way, are there limitations on who may submit later for Regional Node proposals relative to those who submit or are selected as the lead or subawardees for the Hub?

The impact of an organizational con�lict of interest (OCI) could preclude entities or individuals from participation. The determination of the existence of an OCI and any potential mitigation is speci�ic to a given set of facts and circumstances. Potential proposing organizations who believe they may have an apparent or actual con�lict of interest should engage with the Agreements Of�icer listed in the Solutions Offering and at SAM.gov.

54. To follow on to another question, if a university is selected as the Hub operator, would they be precluded from awarding another program within that university as a performer (say a training provider)?

The impact of an organizational con�lict of interest (OCI) could preclude entities or individuals from participation. The determination of the existence of an OCI and any potential mitigations is speci�ic to a given set of facts and circumstances. Potential proposing organizations who believe they may have an apparent or actual con�lict of

55. If a lead organization becomes a Hub, does that prevent faculty or staff from the lead organization from participating in later proposals for Regional Nodes?

The impact of an organizational con�lict of interest (OCI) could preclude entities or individuals from participation. The determination of the existence of an OCI and any potential mitigations is speci�ic to a given set of facts and circumstances. Potential proposing organizations who believe they may have an apparent or actual con�lict of

56. If a group of educational institutions teams up to set up a new non-pro�it organization with the purpose of competing for the Hub, would these institutions then be excluded from being able to compete for (or be part of) one of the Regional Nodes? The assumption is that none of the educational institutions would have a controlling stake in the non-pro�it for the Hub.

This answer to this would be dependent on the relationship of the new non-pro�it and the educational institutions.

57. My organization is an administration of�ice for a state university system. Is this of�ice considered separate and distinct (in terms of eligibility) from any of its campuses for the purpose of this solicitation? If this of�ice is selected for the

Hub, would that create a COI for one of its campuses to be selected for Regional Nodes?

It would depend on the actual and proposed roles of a campus at the Hub and/or Regional Node level. The proposing organization must also include their plan to resolve any potential and actual con�licts, in accordance with Section 7.1.8.

Proposal Requirements

58. Is this opportunity for large or small �irms? Large �irms cannot get approvals in 30 days.

The 30-day proposal timeframe is consistent with other Solutions Offerings and large contract requirements issued by NSF.

59. Section 7.1.5 Letters of Commitment references “employers.” Is the implication that we are only to provide industry commitments? If that is not the implication, then please clarify.

This question was answered live during the webinar. You may view a recording of the live event at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQd3TwiJc4. For additional clarity, please see Section 7.1.5 of the Solutions Offering wherein it states that single one-page letters of collaboration are allowed from:

1. Employers who have committed to working with your organization as a potential Hub operator or have worked with your organization in the past.

Commitments should be speci�ic and measurable; and

2. Proposed subawardees wherein the subawardees outline what work they will perform as part of the effort and why they are uniquely quali�ied to lead that work.

60. Could you speak to the rationale for inviting only industry support letters and not letters from academic institutions? We imagine support letters from institutions that may apply to be Regional Nodes could show broad support for a national Hub operator and be bene�icial.

Letters of commitments are not limited to industry collaborators. It can be any organization you feel is necessary for making your proposal better (e.g., academic institution, workforce development institution).

61. Do you anticipate any CUI to be generated or provided that will need safeguarding?

The National Network Coordination Hub will manage Personal Identi�iable Information (PII) and Business Identi�iable Information (BII) as part of the selection process and management of Regional Nodes. Proposals shall address within the Data Management and Privacy Plan their plans for data sharing across their organization, with NSF and DOC as well as the NSTC WCoE, and with the general public during the performance period. Additionally, proposals shall specify the types of data or products that will be generated as well as formats to be used and how these data or products are to be stored, preserved, and shared. Presumably It is expected that the Hub will contribute toward the development of data-driven best practices. Proposals shall also address how licenses will be obtained from any owners of copyrighted or patented subject matter that will be needed during this program. Proposing organizations should be aware that any future award, to the extent that it produces intellectual property, may have certain restrictions and obligations (e.g., all DOC funding must comply with 15 U.S.C. 4656(g)).

62. Are you expecting letters of support from stakeholders to be submitted with the proposal due on October 28, 2024? Can we cite our collaboration with stakeholders and later submit letters?

Letters of support must be included in the proposal package submitted on October 28, 2024. Commitments should be speci�ic and measurable.

63. Are there speci�ic key performance indicators (KPIs) that should be included in the proposal to show the potential of our programs?

Examples of important indicators include but are not limited to: the number of learners who have graduated and are certi�ied each year through support provided by the NNME; the number and percentage of learners employed by industry in each year of the program; the cost per learner of these activities; and the difference in wages individuals earn prior to training and after they secure a job in the industry.

Industry’s evaluation of the abilities of employed learners to be immediately productive in industry positions will also be an important indicator. These indicators will be applied to each level of education offered, including certi�icates; two-year community college degrees; and B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. degrees, and for each job type.

64. If this is a one-time award, how will the Hub be funded after year 6?

Long-term sustainability of the NNME after Federal funding has ended is an essential goal under this program. Therefore, NSF and DOC request that the Hub operator(s) give serious thought and consideration to how to transition the NNME from Federal support to a self-sustaining effort after funding ends six years from the date of award.

At a minimum, the proposing organizations must provide a rough-draft, second-year �inancial model as well as identify potential sources of revenue (prospective �inancial contributors, etc.) that can be established and tested at year 2 and beyond. The expectation is that self-suf�iciency will require some time to develop and therefore the operator(s) need to start experimenting with various schemes to fund their activities starting in year 2 and thereafter and continue on a pathway of growing funding sources over time towards sustainability. Proposing organizations may consider philanthropy, fees for access to the talent network and services offered, funding from external partners, industry membership fees, and other fees or sponsorship costs. NSF and DOC recognize that these �igures and projections might ultimately change post-award, but this exercise will clarify how the proposing organization thinks about how to achieve NNME sustainability. See Solutions Offering Section 7.16 for more information.

65. Are we required to use the budget template provided in SAM.gov? Or should we provide a more detailed budget?

An optional budget projection template is available as an attachment on SAM.gov.

Alternative budget formats that include all the necessary elements outlined in Section

7.0 will be accepted. Budget justi�ication statements should be linked to each budget item.

66. Is the budget allowed to be submitted as Excel in the template provided or does it need to be a PDF?

The Excel �ile is provided as a template for optional use, but the budget should be submitted as a PDF as per the instructions provided in Solutions Offering Section 7.1.

67. If one or more microelectronics subject matter experts are part of the central

Hub team but not an employee of the lead organization, would they be considered “Key Personnel,” “Other Personnel,” or “Consultant”?

The participation of subject matter experts within a proposal would be determined by the accounting and budgeting practices of the proposing organization.

68. Is there a page limit for attachments?

Please see Section 7.0 of the Solutions Offering for submission requirements, including page limits.

69. What are considered the appendices? For example, are the letters of commitment, budget narrative, and con�licts of interest included in the 22-page limit? What documents are speci�ically included in the 22-page limit?

Please see Section 7.0 of the Solutions Offering for submission requirements, including elements that may be included in the appendix. The 22-page limit is the upper page limit for the Body of the Proposal (limited to 15 pages), the Data Management and Privacy Plan (limited to 2 pages), the Long-Term Financial Model (limited to 2 pages), and the Project Deliverables (limited to 3 pages). The other elements contained in Section 7.1 do not have a speci�ic page limit and are therefore not included in the 22-page limit.

70. Since we are required to only provide the �irst 12 months of the budget, is there a budget maximum for that �irst 12 months?

NSF and DOC intend to make one award to a Hub operator in the amount up to $30 million over a six-year period of performance (subject to the availability of funds).

While there is no maximum for the �irst 12 months, consideration should be given to the sustainability of Hub operations over this six-year expected period of performance. The �irst 12 months must be included in the budget proposal. Proposals may discuss and develop outcomes that extend beyond this window, including projections of �inancial models over time, but that is not required. NSF and DOC would like to see what strategies proposing organizations have to create and develop a sustainable funding model that may not include signi�icant future funding provided from NSF and DOC.

Evaluation and Selection

71. When will the applicants learn whether they are selected for the oral presentation?

Any virtual oral presentations with the evaluation team are currently estimated to occur during the �irst two weeks of December 2024. NSF will provide the oral presentation format to the proposing organizations invited to participate at least 5 business days in advance. See Solutions Offering Section 8.1 Oral Presentation Instructions for more information.

72. How much of a plus, if any, is a demonstrated ability to recruit, train, and manage a network of local training partners for this solicitation?

The NSF and DOC cannot comment on what would constitute a successful proposal and the questioner should refer to the See Solutions Offering Sections 7.2 and 8.2 for more information on proposal evaluation selection criteria.

73. Is past performance a consideration in criteria?

Solutions Offering Section 7.2 Written Proposal Evaluation Guidelines and Section 8.2 Oral Presentation Evaluation Guidelines contain the criteria that the NSF and DOC representatives will use when evaluating proposals.

74. What are you looking for in a Hub, especially if the institution is a community college?

The published Solutions Offering contains information about what NSF and DOC are looking for in a Hub, regardless of the organization type and provided that the organization is eligible to apply.

75. Is there a preference for proposals that include industry or private partnerships?

Given the breadth, depth, and scope of the program, the ability to partner effectively with a broad range of stakeholders is potentially worth noting. Solutions Offering Section 6.2 Hub Activities describes the need for the Hub to engage with the microelectronics industry and to drive other engagements to leverage and effectively utilize the nation’s existing and newly established capabilities, facilities, resources and talent for semiconductor implementation activities. See also the selection criteria in Solutions Offering Sections 7.2 and 8.2 for more information.

76. We are a nonpro�it that supported a large DOD/NSA microelectronics lab previously; we also put together a large consortium for a program with large and small players. Would the experience in setting those projects up be supportive in helping to create this consortium? Will the panel consider past performance of the Hub organization in creating other consortiums?

Written proposals will be evaluated according to the two selection criteria listed under Solutions Offering Section 7.2.1 - Organizational Experience; and 7.2.2 - Understanding of the Challenges and Proposed Approach. When evaluating written proposals, the evaluation team will weigh Organizational Experience more heavily than Understanding of the Challenges and Proposed Approach.

77. Would this type of opportunity be appropriate for funding a single entity? Is it stronger to apply as a consortium, or are single entities equally considered able to apply?

The lead organization must be an institution of higher education or non-pro�it organization or a consortium (group) of such institutions and organizations. NSF and DOC encourage organizations interested in submitting a proposal to consider the breadth, depth, and scope of the program when deciding whether their own organizational capabilities and capacity are suf�icient or whether subawardees or other members (in the case of a consortium) might strengthen their proposal.

However, proposing organizations must decide for themselves how best to organize.

See also Solutions Offering Section 3.0 Eligibility and responses to eligibility questions contained in this FAQ document.

78. Is the budget narrative reviewed separately, or as part of the comprehensive package?

Budget narrative will be reviewed as part of the comprehensive package. The extent to which the proposing organization’s rough budget projections re�lect a reasonable allocation of resources necessary to successfully complete the proposed activities and a full understanding of the goals and objectives of this program is an explicit component of the written proposal selection criteria. See Solutions Offering Section

7.2.2 Major Criteria Two: Understanding of the Challenges and Proposed Approach for more information.

79. Regarding evaluation, just to con�irm, this will not go to a panel, but be reviewed internally at NSF?

Proposals will be evaluated by NSF and DOC employees.

Additional Questions

80. Our understanding is that upon selection of the top-ranked proposer, NSF will negotiate Terms and Conditions. Will the terms and conditions of the sample agreement found in APPENDIX F (SAMPLE OA/T AWARD DOCUMENT, CLAUSES, REPRESENTATIONS, AND CERTIFICATIONS) of the NSF OTA Transaction Guide (Effective April 22, 2024) apply to the anticipated award? Can you please con�irm that offerors are not required to submit exceptions to the sample terms and conditions with their submission?

Following evaluation of oral presentations, NSF will enter into negotiations with the proposing organization that is most highly rated. To the extent practicable and applicable, the terms and conditions in the sample agreement found in NSF's Other Arrangements/Transactions Guide will apply. NSF may make changes including specifying additional terms and conditions speci�ic to this Solutions Offering.

Proposing organizations are not required to submit exceptions to the sample terms and conditions with their submission. See https://nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/�iles/Other Arrangements Transactions Guide.pdf for more information.

81. We do a lot of outreach to students and people new to the workforce and also training. We manage a platform to learn, �ind opportunities, and connect with industry and innovators. For this solicitation, we’d be interested in being on a team. Does the NSF have a way for non-pro�its like ours to connect with orgs who would apply for this funding opportunity? If a researcher wants to be on the Regional Node and work with educational performers, how can we contact the lead organizer to be included in their proposal?

Upon its establishment, the Hub will be required to determine a process to connect interested parties to opportunities for involvement in the NNME.

82. Do you have a network of contacts we could connect with / is there a way for us to connect with others in our region who might be interested in collaborating on this effort? Is there an interested parties website or email we can use to notify potential bidders that we are a highly quali�ied subcontractor with current, and relevant, prize challenge design and management as well as relevant work in evidence-based reporting and workforce development?

Upon its establishment, the Hub will be required to determine a process to connect interested parties to opportunities for involvement in the NNME.

83. How can we acquire a list of people who attended the NNME webinar? In order to facilitate the creation of consortiums, will you be sharing who attended this webinar?

Due to participant con�identiality, we will not be sharing attendee information.

84. Will the webinar be posted? Will participants receive a recording of the webinar? If so, when will that be?

Yes, the webinar was recorded and is available for the public to view at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQd3TwiJc4.

85. Is it possible to get a copy of the NNME Informational Webinar Charts that were presented on October 4, 2024?

Yes. The slides presented have been added to the Solutions Offering posting in SAM.gov.