LSST:UK has been running a successful software development programme in preparation for the Legacy Survey of Space and Time for more than five years, through the “DEV” strand of the STFC-funded LSST:UK Science Centre (LUSC) project. LUSC Phase A (July 2015 - March 2019) funding was awarded on the basis of UK science priorities, but greater UK involvement in the Science Collaborations over time led these activities to become more closely aligned with SC priorities and to the realisation of impact within them. Phase B DEV funding (for July 2019-March 2023) was awarded on the basis of competitive proposals developed by UK groups in conjunction with Science Collaborations and assessed by a panel in an LSST:UK Board instigated process. Two of the six members of this panel (Melissa Graham and Phil Marshall) provided input to ensure that the funded effort supported and complemented existing work underway in the US and elsewhere, leading to the high rankings awarded to these contributions in the CEC feedback to our LoI. The Phase B work package selection process hence balanced UK priorities and strengths with requirements and value from the Rubin Project. A similar process will run for the selection of STFC PPRP funded work packages for Phase C.
The LSST:UK proposal to PPRP in April 2022 will contain 7 FTE of staff effort over the Phase C period 2023 - 2027. As described in the UK’s Rubin LSST In-Kind Contributions proposal (Deliverables : Sect 12.4), effort can be either directable or embedded (and endorsed) non-directable, and these definitions (as defined by Rubin Observatory) are defined in the Rubin Project document (“with these two terms defined in two Rubin Observatory documents: the Handbook for Proposal Teams (see Section 2.2.1 on p. 24) and the Manual for In-kind Contributors and Recipients”; Marshall et al. 2021). Since a case for UK funding, leadership and impact will need to be made to PPRP, we don’t expect that fully directable effort will be eligible for support and discourage proposals for such effort.
If there is an oversubscription in this call for proposals, then LSST:UK will decide jointly with Rubin and the Science Collaborations which are the highest priority projects to go forward to the PPRP proposal. The LSST:UK Board will define a selection panel, as they did for the Phase B process.
The Manual for in-Kind contributions should be read in some detail. Some UK (Section 4, p. 24). Every contribution must have one or more Recipient Groups - typically a Science Collaboration or Rubin Observatory team - which endorse the proposed contribution and monitor its progress. The distinction between directable and non-directable effort relates to the way that the work is planned, but, in all cases, the UK DEV staff effort must be embedded within the relevant Recipient Group. Since PPRP will want to see staff effort justified in terms of UK leadership and impact as well as its contribution to the UK in-kind package, proposals to contribute to the general pool of fully-directable effort (see p. 31 of the Handbook or p. 24 of the Manual) should not be made.
The Handbook and the Manual should be read in some detail by those developing proposals, but here are some UK-specific points for PPRP funding considerations :
The work packages must meet the STFC PPRP general criteria – scientific excellence, unique UK contribution, likely global impact and aspects of UK leadership
They should provide infrastructure, data access, and/or useful science ready data products to the UK consortium of LSST scientists and be of value to the broader Rubin community - either the project or Science Collaborations. Projects that provide science ready data or analysis mostly to a well defined topic are deemed more suitable for STFC Astronomy Grants Panel (AGP) proposals and not PPRP. Projects that provide proprietary data products only or exclusively to the proposing UK team are not eligible. Projects that provide a fairly narrow range of openly accessible data, or aimed at early science are also better suited to AGP. Cross-cutting proposals that support multiple science goals and areas are encouraged.
The proposing team should have a credible plan to deliver the software work packages in the proposed area (as required in the Rubin Manual). This could be a track record of delivering science ready data to a large community or demonstrate the team’s ability to deliver such data. The review panel may consider merging projects or work packages that have modest requirements and may be better delivered within one well-defined work package.
Each work package bid should explicitly describe what functional support would be required from the UK DAC effort that will be needed to support the DEV work packages.Given the large number of data rights holders that the full UK In-kind contribution facilitates, the exact value of the Phase C work in terms of PI slots is not a primary concern. UK leadership and impact combined with the scientific value to LSST (as endorsed by the Rubin Recipient group) is a more important consideration. - e.g. likely computational resources for storage of data and/or execution of software, plus support in interfacing to standard LSST pipelines or data products – and include a statement agreed with the Recipient Group(s) as to where responsibility will lie for the maintenance of software or data delivered for the lifetime of LSST survey operations
Requirements for the proposal submission
...