...
The LSST:UK proposal to PPRP in April 2022 will contain 7 FTE of staff effort over the Phase C period 2023 - 2027. This 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. If, as we expect, (“Manual for In-kind Contributors and Recipients”; Marshall et al. 2021). 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 the selection panel, as they did for the Phase B process.
LSST:UK
...
The Manual for in-Kind contributions should be read in some detail. 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, 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 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 a 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 should explicitly describe the UK DAC effort that will be needed to support the DEV work packages.
2 page max
Requirements for the proposal submission
It should be self contained on 2 pages maximum. Using the template provided, including all citations and any figures. Any proposals over 2 pages will be rejected and not considered further.
We highly recommend approximately 0.5 page prea-amble, of context and summary and 0.5 page from the Rubin recipient group
This leaves approximately 1 page for the project description and justification
The template linked here must be used
Evaluation panel, process and criteria
...
An evaluation panel will be defined, which will have authority from the Board to make a recommendation and prioritized list of work packages for consideration for inclusion in the Phase B proposal. The panel should be nominated by the Board and have representation from the LUSC Exec, the LSST Project, and the UK community. The LSST Exec propose a 8 member panel made up of 2 Exec members, 2 LSST Project representatives, 2 from the UK community and the Project Scientist and Project Lead. The members will be chosen to minimise conflicts of interest. As for Phase B, the Project Scientist and Project Lead will sit on the panel to offer advice, guidance and opinion, but will not have a vote on the ranking of the proposals, while the representatives of the Exec and the UK community will be chosen so as not to include in any teams proposing DAC or DEV work packages
This balance should allow the panel to judge the general interest in the work packages being put forward (LUSC-Exec and UK community representation) and to judge how these work packages align with the project effort (LSST Project reps). The panel has the remit to recommend merging of proposals into coherent, deliverable work packages, rather than rejecting.
The panel will be chosen to have a diversity and balance in subject area, and care should be taken to ensure appropriate gender representation.