What this program funds
The Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) program funds the acquisition or development of shared research instruments — the microscopes, spectrometers, compute clusters, sequencers, and one-of-a-kind custom systems that are too expensive for any single grant. The instrument, not a research project, is the deliverable: proposals are judged on the science the instrument will enable across a community of users and on the institution's plan to operate and sustain it.
Eligibility in plain English
- Proposals come from U.S. institutions of higher education and eligible nonprofits — and each institution may submit only a small number per competition, split across tracks by request size.
- Because of those submission limits, most campuses run an internal competition; individual researchers effectively apply to their own institution first.
- Cost sharing has been required for many institution types (commonly 30% of project cost for PhD-granting institutions in recent cycles), while primarily undergraduate institutions have been exempt.
- Any career stage can lead an MRI; teams typically include a PI and several co-PIs representing the major user groups.
- Track boundaries, submission limits, and cost-sharing rules change between solicitations — confirm with your sponsored-programs office and the current solicitation early.
What you'll need to submit
- Project Description covering the research to be enabled, the users and their projects, and (for development tracks) the engineering plan.
- Instrument quote(s) or a detailed development cost basis.
- Management Plan — who operates the instrument, how time is allocated, technician support, service contracts, and sustainability after the award.
- Budget and Budget Justification, including documented institutional cost share where required.
- Biographical Sketches and Current and Pending Support for the PI team.
- Facilities/Equipment describing where the instrument lives and what site preparation is needed.
- Letters or descriptions documenting the breadth of the user base, as the current solicitation permits.
Tips for this mechanism
- Your real first deadline is the internal one. Submission limits mean you must win on campus, often months before NSF's deadline. Find your research office's internal-competition calendar now, not in October.
- Shared use is scored — make it concrete. Name the research groups, departments, and (where relevant) regional partners who will use the instrument, with specific projects. A one-lab instrument dressed up as shared infrastructure is the classic decline.
- Budget the instrument's whole life. Reviewers have seen instruments arrive and rot. A credible management plan — staffing, maintenance funding, user training, downtime handling — separates funded proposals from wishlists.
- Pick acquisition vs development honestly. Development proposals are reviewed on engineering feasibility and risk, with different expectations and documentation. Calling a routine purchase "development" (or hiding real development inside an acquisition) invites trouble in review.
Related programs
- NSF Mid-scale Research Infrastructure (for needs above the MRI ceiling)
- DoD DURIP (Defense University Research Instrumentation Program)
- NIH S10 Shared Instrumentation programs (for biomedical instrumentation)
- Disciplinary NSF programs that allow equipment within a research award