Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, Gulf Coast CESU | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is this funding opportunity?

This is the Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU), Gulf Coast CESU funding opportunity, Funding Opportunity Number G12AS20053. It was issued by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Wetlands Research Center (NWRC) as a discretionary research solicitation offered as a cooperative agreement under CFDA 15.808 (USGS Research and Data Collection).

Which agency and office offered the opportunity?

The opportunity was offered by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), specifically through the National Wetlands Research Center (NWRC).

What is the CFDA program associated with this solicitation?

The solicitation was issued under CFDA 15.808, titled USGS Research and Data Collection.

What type of award instrument was used?

The opportunity was offered as a cooperative agreement (not a standard grant). Cooperative agreements typically include substantial involvement by the federal agency (here, USGS/NWRC) in coordination, scientific collaboration, data integration, and technical review of progress.

What was the main scientific focus of the project?

The work focused on scientific research and development to advance how wetland vegetation change is represented in computer models. The emphasis was on the real technical and conceptual difficulties that arise when building and using cell-based numerical models that simulate vegetation succession in wetland environments.

What does "cell-based" numeric modeling mean in this context?

"Cell-based" modeling generally refers to grid- or raster-style simulation models where a landscape is divided into discrete cells, and ecological processes are simulated within and across those cells through time.

Why are wetlands particularly challenging to model using cell-based approaches?

Wetlands are highly dynamic and spatially heterogeneous. Small elevation differences can strongly affect flooding frequency, water depth, and salinity, which in turn influence which plant communities persist. In cell-based models, this also brings challenges around scale (cell size and time step), boundary conditions, feedbacks between vegetation and hydrology, and representing transitions between vegetation states in a realistic but computationally feasible way.

Was the opportunity aimed at applying an existing model or improving modeling methods?

The opportunity specifically sought research that examines and documents modeling challenges themselves and explores approaches to improve model structure, parameterization, calibration, validation, uncertainty treatment, and overall predictive usefulness, rather than simply applying an existing model.

What kinds of model improvements were explicitly within scope?

Within scope were investigations and approaches that could improve model structure, parameterization, calibration, validation, uncertainty treatment, and predictive usefulness for cell-based models simulating wetland vegetation succession and change.

What environmental drivers and processes were relevant to the modeled vegetation changes?

The solicitation described vegetation succession and shifts in plant communities over time in response to drivers such as hydrology, salinity, disturbance, and other environmental drivers.

Did the solicitation emphasize broader impacts beyond wetlands?

Yes. The announcement explicitly called for investigations that could lead to broader improvements to ecological modeling as a discipline, so that methods, lessons, or tools could carry over to other ecosystems and modeling efforts.

What types of broader ecological modeling outcomes were envisioned?

The notice indicated potential outcomes such as better ways to represent succession and state transitions, improved handling of spatial processes, clearer treatment of uncertainty and sensitivity, more robust validation strategies, and potential improvements in linking ecological mechanisms to observable data. It also suggested deliverables could include methodological recommendations, model evaluation frameworks, guidance on best practices, or prototype enhancements.

How many awards were expected?

The opportunity was listed as a single-award opportunity, with Expected Awards: 1.

What was the estimated total funding amount?

The estimated total funding amount was $250,000.

Was cost sharing or matching required?

No. The listing indicated there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

Were there stated award minimums or maximums?

The award ceiling and floor were both listed as 0. This generally indicates that formal per-award minimums or maximums were not specified in the grants.gov fields and that the final budget would be defined through cooperative agreement negotiation and the scope of work.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was limited to organizations that were already participating partners in the Gulf Coast Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU) Program. This was not an open competition to all applicants.

What is the Gulf Coast CESU, in plain terms?

The notice described CESUs as collaborative partnerships designed to connect federal agencies with universities, research institutions, and other partners to provide research, technical assistance, and education related to natural and cultural resource issues.

When was the opportunity posted and created?

The notice indicated it was posted on June 18, 2012, and created on July 9, 2012.

What were the closing dates?

The notice showed an original closing date of July 6, 2012, and a current (extended) closing date of July 18, 2012.

When was the opportunity archived?

The opportunity was archived on September 18, 2012.

Where could applicants find the full announcement details?

The additional information link pointed to grants.gov.

Who was the listed contact for access issues or questions about the announcement?

The contact listed was Faith Graves, reachable at 703-648-7356 and fgraves@usgs.gov.

What role would USGS/NWRC likely play during the project under a cooperative agreement?

Because the instrument was a cooperative agreement, the notice indicated the project would typically involve substantial involvement by USGS/NWRC staff, such as project coordination, scientific collaboration, data integration, and review of technical progress.

Does the description specify particular model outputs, datasets, or named software tools?

No. The information provided describes the modeling focus and types of methodological improvements sought, but it does not name specific software packages, required datasets, or mandated outputs.