ARCHIVAL FAQs: GO 1

***General Cycle Information

Q:   When will the Cycle-1 Call for Proposals be issued?

A:   The Cycle-1 CP was issued November 8, 2002. A major update occured December 19, 2003. Proposals are due February 14, 2004, allowing researchers to include on-orbit performance results in their proposals. For future dates for these sorts of events, consult the science schedule.

Q:   When, exactly, is Cycle-1?

A:   The nominal start date for Cycle-1 is July 1, 2004 and the nominal end date is May 31, 2005. However, these dates must be flexible to accommodate the actual performance of the observatory, the overall efficiency of telescope operations, and the reservoir of schedulable observations. For example, some AORs resulting from the Cycle-1 selections (to be announced on May 14, 2004) could be scheduled as soon as June 2004. By the same token, the end date of any given observing cycle is not a fixed boundary, but rather a transition between cycles. For planning purposes, investigators may assume that these boundaries have uncertainties of (plus/minus) one month.

For more information on schedules (e.g., when is Cycle-2?), please see the schedules page.

Q:   How much observing time will be available in Cycle 1?

A:   There are 3700 hours of available time for General Observers (GO) in Cycle-1, rather then the approximately 5000 hours expected in future cycles. The reduced amount is due to the shortened duration of Cycle-1 plus the fact that Legacy Science observations will be interleaved throughout Cycle-1.

Q:   Can archival research be proposed in Cycle 1?

A:   Yes! It may seem counterintuitive, but funding support for limited archival research can be proposed in Cycle-1. Archival research is limited to data from the ~100-hour First-Look Survey (FLS). Samples of the FLS data have been released (on 15 Jan 04) and the rest will go public with the opening of the Spitzer archive in May 2004.

***Formatting Questions

Q:   What is the preferred format for Spitzer Proposals?

A:   There is no template for Spitzer observing proposals. Use your favorite word processor and follow format and page limits listed in Section 6.1 of the Call for Proposals. All proposers should assume proposals will be printed on 8.5 x 11 inches and should allow apprpriate margin space (1 inch) for that size paper. The proposals must be submitted in PDF format; also see the document entitled How to make PDF files.

Q:   How do I make a PDF file on [my platform]?

A:   Please see the document entitled "How to make PDF files" for instructions on how to generate a PDF file from several platforms, with or without the Adobe products.

Q:   Do I have to prepend the coversheet info to my proposal PDF file before I submit my 'scientific justification' PDF file?

A:   No, proposers should NOT prepend the coversheet information to their scientific justification file that they submit to the SSC. This feature is for users who may want to create an electronic copy of a 'complete Spitzer proposal' for their own institutional use. The SSC will generate a coversheet from the latest, final coversheet information you submit with your proposal and prepend it to your final scientific justification PDF file for our use.

Q:   Do I have to append the AORs themselves into my proposal PDF file before I submit my 'scientific justification' PDF file?

A:   No, ALL of the AORs in your Spot AOR window are sent along with your proposal by the Spot proposal tool. Be sure that all of the AORs in your window are ones you want as part of your proposal (no test AORs, etc).

Q:   Should my 'scientific justification' PDF file also include the technical justification and everything else?

A:   Aside from your AORs and your coversheet (see above), everything else goes into your PDF file. There is a 2 MB size limit on the PDF file, and all figures should be black-and-white.

Q:   What is the maximum size for the PDF part of the proposal?

A:   The maximum size is 2 MB. To get your file size down, be sure that your figures are all black-and-white, and that the resolution is no more than 300 dpi.

Q:   Is the list of targets in the Technical Plan separate from the Observation Summary Table?

A:   Yes. The Observations Summary Table is intended to provide the proposal reviewers and Time Allocation Committee with a "quick-look" summary of the main characteristics of the proposed observations. More complete details are available in the second paragraph of Section 6.2.3. Note that this summary should not list targets, but rather AOT characteristics. The table should include the number of proposed AORs and total time requested for all relevant observing modes, for second-look observations, for generic targets, and for targets of opportunity.

Q:   What do I do if I have too many targets to fit into the technical plan's 2 pages?

***Specifics on definitions, language clarifications, etc.

Q:   Is there a minimum time required for Spitzer proposals? What is a "snapshot" proposal? What does the prohibition against snapshot proposals mean?

A:   No, there isn't a minimum time required for Spitzer proposals. You can propose for as little time as you'd like.

No, there isn't a minimum time for an AOR. You can have as short exposures as Spot allows. Spitzer is very sensitive, and many exposures will indeed be short.

"Snapshot" proposals refer to a concept perhaps more familiar to Hubble observers. In brief, this concept was initiated to fill gaps in the Hubble schedule that would otherwise have been idle time for the telescope. The snapshot description from the HST Cycle-11 Call for Proposals is still on line. There is also a paper in astro-ph describing the origin of the concept.

Snapshot proposals are not being solicited for Spitzer, at least in Cycle-1. This is primarily because the anticipated observing efficiency of the telescope will be very high with regularly scheduled observations.

Q:   When is the cost plan due? Do I submit electronically (with the proposal) or in hard copy?

A:   You should use Spot to submit the proposal electronically by the deadline.

Printed versions of cost plans for AR proposals may be submitted after the submission of electronic proposals, so as to not penalize AR researchers. Otherwise, most institutions would require AR proposals to be completed 1-2 weeks prior to our deadline in order to satisfy internal review at the home institution. Since our proposal deadline is on a Saturday, we will ask that such cost plans by received before the first business day following the next week. For evaluation purposes, the SSC requires three copies of the cost plans (and budget narrative, as necessary) be sent with a courtesy copy of the proposal (so we are sure we match up the cost plan with the proper proposal). The snail mail version of the proposal is due to the SSC at the specified address "within one week of the proposal submission deadline" (section 6.3.4), i.e., by February 23rd. These documents should be mailed to "Cycle-1 Proposal Submission" at the address listed in section 8 of the CfP.

Q:   What are allowable costs for GO and AR investigators?

A:   Section 4.2.3 of the CP discusses funding support for AR investigators, and refers proposers to Appendix F for additional details. In the itemized "Travel" category, it is stated that allowable costs include "transportation and subsistence costs for project personnel to plan, obtain, analyze and disseminate direct results of a Spitzer research investigation."

Up to ten percent of requested funds (for GO or AR investigators) may be directed towards costs associated with obtaining, analyzing and disseminating results from ancillary investigations using ground-based facilities.

Q:   Do I have to summarize Co-Is involvement if they are PIs on other Spitzer projects? (CfP, section 6.2.3)?

More information on the question: The CfP, section 6.2.3, says that "Proposers must explicitly summarize their current involvement as a Principal Investigator on existing....". In my case, one of the CoI's on my planned GO proposal is a PI on a Legacy proposal. I can't tell from the wording whether this "rule" applies because he IS a CoI on my proposal, or doesn't apply because he is not the PI.

A:   The rule covers PIs only. Co-Investigators on a submitted proposal that happen to be PIs on other Spitzer projects need not be listed.

Q:   How much of the fractional contributions from my Co-I's do I have to list?

More information on the question: On page 11 of the call it states that "If a GO proposal includes US based Co-Is who are based at institutions different from that of the PI...the PI must explicitly identify the fractional extent..." while on page 20, it says "If a GO proposal includes US based Co-Is who require data analysis support from NASA, the PI must explicitly identify them and the fractional..."

A:   Please list the fractional contribution from each co-I, even if they are at the same institution as the PI. FYI...If the proposal is approved, funding will be bundled under a single account for an institution. The exception is NASA centers, where the funding accounts are set up for each co-I at such institutions.

Go back to FAQ page.