- JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Opportunities
- James Webb Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 1
- •JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Checklist and Resources
- •JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Policies and Funding Support
- JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Categories
- •JWST Cycle 1 Observation Types and Restrictions
- •JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Preparation
- •JWST Cycle 1 Single-Stream Proposal Process
- •JWST Cycle 1 Special Submission Requirements
- •JWST Cycle 1 Observation Mode Restrictions
- •JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Selection Process
- •JWST Cycle 1 Awarded Program Implementation
- •JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Science Categories and Keywords
- JWST Director's Discretionary Early Release Science Call for Proposals
- •JWST DD ERS Notice of Intent to Propose
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Checklist
- •JWST DD ERS Program Goals, Project Updates, and Status Reviews
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Policies
- •JWST DD ERS Preparatory Funding Budget Requirements
- •JWST DD ERS Funding and Institutional Endorsement
- •JWST DD ERS Observation Types and Restrictions
- •JWST DD ERS Special Observational Policies
- •JWST DD ERS Special Submission Requirements
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Process
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Preparation
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Evaluation and Selection Procedures
- •JWST DD ERS Proposal Science Categories and Keywords
- JWST Cycle 1 Guaranteed Time Observations Call for Proposals
- •JWST Cycle 1 GTO Proposal Submission Policies
- •JWST Cycle 1 GTO Proposal Submission Process
- •JWST Cycle 2 and 3 GTO Proposal Process
- JWST GTO Observation Specifications
- James Webb Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 1
- JWST General Science Policies
- • JWST Observing Overheads and Time Accounting Policy
- • JWST Duplicate Observations Policy
- • JWST Science Parallel Observation Policies and Guidelines
- • JWST Observing Program Modification Policy
- • Policies for the Telescope Time Review Board
- • JWST Target of Opportunity Program Activation
- NASA-SMD Policies and Guidelines for the Operations of JWST at STScI
- •Policy 2 - Data Rights and Data Dissemination
- •Policy 3 - Data Requests and Facilities
- •Policy 4 - Post-Launch Commissioning of JWST
- •Policy 5 - Clarification of Extensions of Exclusive Access Data to Public Affairs Activities
- •Policy 7 - NASA Needs for Support for Other Missions
- •Policy 8 - Definition of Observing Time
- •Policy 10 - Redistribution of Guaranteed Observing Time Among Observers
- •Policy 11 - Protection of Science Programs Associated With Guaranteed Time
- •Policy 12 - Education and Public Outreach
- Methods and Roadmaps
- JWST Imaging
- • JWST Slit Spectroscopy
- • JWST Slitless Spectroscopy
- JWST High-Contrast Imaging
- •Contrast Considerations for JWST High-Contrast Imaging
- •JWST Coronagraphic Observation Planning
- •JWST Coronagraphic Sequences
- •JWST Coronagraphy in ETC
- •JWST High-Contrast Imaging in APT
- •JWST High-Contrast Imaging Inner Working Angle
- •JWST High-Contrast Imaging Optics
- •JWST Small Grid Dither Technique
- •MIRI-Specific Treatment of Limiting Contrast
- •NIRCam-Specific Treatment of Limiting Contrast
- •NIRISS AMI-Specific Treatment of Limiting Contrast
- •Selecting Suitable PSF Reference Stars for JWST High-Contrast Imaging
- JWST Integral Field Spectroscopy
- JWST MOS Spectroscopy
- JWST Time-Series Observations
- •Overview of Time-Series Observation (TSO) Modes
- •Noise Sources for Time-Series Observations
- •Sensitivity of Time-Series Observation Modes
- •Bright limits of Time-Series Observation Modes
- •Preparing Time-Series Observations with JWST
- •Target Acquisition for Time-Series Observations
- •NIRCam-Specific Time-Series Observations
- •NIRISS-Specific Time-Series Observations
- •MIRI-Specific Time-Series Observations
- JWST Moving Target Observations
- •Field of Regard Considerations for Moving Targets
- •Instrument-Specific Considerations for Moving Targets
- •JWST Moving Target Calibration and Processing
- •JWST Moving Target Ephemerides
- •JWST Moving Target Observing Procedures
- •JWST Moving Target Policies
- JWST Moving Targets in APT
- •JWST Moving Targets in ETC
- •JWST Moving Target Useful References and Links
- •Overheads for Moving Targets
- •Moving Target Recommended Strategies
- JWST Parallel Observations
- • JWST Target of Opportunity Observations
- • General Proposal Planning Workflow
- Observatory Functionality
- • JWST Position Angles, Ranges, and Offsets
- • JWST Instrument Ideal Coordinate Systems
- JWST Background Model
- • JWST Guide Stars
- • JWST Mosaic Overview
- • JWST Dithering Overview
- JWST Duplication Checking
- JWST Observing Overheads and Time Accounting Overview
- •JWST Observing Overheads Summary
- •JWST Slew Times and Overheads
- JWST Instrument Overheads
- Observing Overheads for NIRCam Imaging
- • JWST Data Rate and Data Volume Limits
- Observatory Hardware
- • JWST Observatory Overview
- • JWST Observatory Coordinate System and Field of Regard
- • JWST Field of View
- • JWST Orbit
- JWST Spacecraft Bus
- • JWST Pointing Performance
- • JWST Telescope
- • JWST Wavefront Sensing and Control
- • JWST Momentum Management
- • JWST Integrated Science Instrument Module
- • JWST Solid State Recorder
- • JWST Target Viewing Constraints
- • Fine Guidance Sensor, FGS
- Exposure Time Calculator
- • JWST Exposure Time Calculator Overview
- • JWST ETC New User Guide
- • JWST ETC Calculations Page Overview
- • JWST ETC Scenes and Sources Page Overview
- • JWST ETC Downloads
- • JWST ETC Creating a New Calculation
- • JWST ETC Defining a New Scene
- • JWST ETC Defining a New Source
- • JWST ETC Sharing Workbooks
- • JWST ETC Using the Sample Workbooks
- • JWST ETC Source Spectral Energy Distributions
- • JWST ETC User Supplied Spectra
- • JWST ETC Batch Expansions
- JWST ETC Strategies
- • JWST ETC Backgrounds
- JWST ETC Target Acquisition
- • Residual Flat Field Errors in the ETC
- JWST ETC Pandeia Engine Tutorial
- • JWST ETC Images and Plots
- • JWST ETC Reports
- • JWST ETC Point Spread Functions
- • JWST ETC Wavelength of Slice
- • JWST ETC Instrument Throughputs
- • JWST ETC Defining an Extended Source
- Astronomers Proposal Tool
- • JWST Astronomers Proposal Tool Overview
- • APT Proposal Information
- APT Targets
- • APT Observations
- • APT Visit Splitting
- JWST APT Coordinated Parallel Observations
- • JWST APT Pure Parallel Observations
- • APT Target Acquisition
- JWST APT Mosaic Planning
- • APT Special Requirements
- • APT Visit Planner
- • JWST APT Aladin Viewer
- • APT Smart Accounting
- • JWST APT Target Confirmation Charts
- • APT Submitting Your JWST Proposal
- JWST APT Functionality Examples
- • JWST APT Help Features
- • JWST APT Training Examples and Video Tutorials
- Other Tools
- Mid Infrared Instrument
- • MIRI Overview
- MIRI Observing Modes
- MIRI Instrumentation
- MIRI Operations
- MIRI Target Acquisitions
- MIRI Dithering
- MIRI Mosaics
- •MIRI MRS Simultaneous Imaging
- MIRI Time Series Observations
- MIRI Predicted Performance
- MIRI APT Templates
- MIRI Observing Strategies
- MIRI Example Programs
- •MIRI Coronagraphy of GJ 758 b
- MIRI and NIRSpec Observations of SN1987A
- •MIRI and NIRCam Coronagraphy of the Debris Disk Archetype around Beta Pictoris
- •MIRI IFU and NIRSpec Observations of Cas A
- Near Infrared Camera
- • NIRCam Overview
- NIRCam Observing Modes
- NIRCam Instrumentation
- •NIRCam Field of View
- •NIRCam Modules
- •NIRCam Optics
- •NIRCam Dichroics
- •NIRCam Pupil and Filter Wheels
- •NIRCam Filters
- •NIRCam Coronagraphic Occulting Masks and Lyot Stops
- •NIRCam Filters for Coronagraphy
- •NIRCam Grisms
- •NIRCam Weak Lenses
- NIRCam Detectors
- NIRCam Operations
- NIRCam Dithers and Mosaics
- •NIRCam Coronagraphic PSF Estimation
- •NIRCam Coronagraph Astrometric Confirmation Images
- •NIRCam Apertures
- NIRCam Target Acquisition Overview
- NIRCam Predicted Performance
- NIRCam APT Templates
- NIRCam Observing Strategies
- NIRCam Example Programs
- NIRCam Imaging and NIRISS WFSS of Galaxies Within Lensing Clusters
- •NIRCam Coronagraphy of HR8799 b
- •NIRCam Deep Field Imaging
- NIRCam Grism Time-Series Observations of GJ 436b
- NIRCam Time-Series Imaging of HAT-P-18 b
- •NIRCam WFSS Deep Galaxy Observations
- •NIRCam and MIRI Coronagraphy of the Debris Disk Archetype around Beta Pictoris
- Near Infrared Imager and Slitless Spectrograph
- • NIRISS Overview
- NIRISS Observing Modes
- NIRISS Instrumentation
- NIRISS Operations
- NIRISS Predicted Performance
- NIRISS APT Templates
- NIRISS Observing Strategies
- NIRISS Example Programs
- NIRISS WFSS and NIRCam Imaging of Galaxies Within Lensing Clusters
- NIRISS AMI Observations of Extrasolar Planets Around a Host Star
- NIRISS SOSS Time-Series Observations of HAT-P-1
- Near Infrared Spectrograph
- NIRSpec Overview
- NIRSpec Observing Modes
- NIRSpec Instrumentation
- •NIRSpec Optics
- •NIRSpec Dispersers and Filters
- NIRSpec Detectors
- •NIRSpec Micro-Shutter Assembly
- •NIRSpec Integral Field Unit
- •NIRSpec Fixed Slits
- NIRSpec Operations
- NIRSpec Dithers and Nods
- NIRSpec MOS Operations
- NIRSpec IFU Operations
- •NIRSpec FS Operations
- •NIRSpec BOTS Operations
- NIRSpec Target Acquisition
- NIRSpec Predicted Performance
- NIRSpec APT Templates
- NIRSpec Multi-Object Spectroscopy APT Template
- •NIRSpec MOS Proposal Checklist
- •NIRSpec MSA Planning Tool, MPT
- NIRSpec MPT - Catalogs
- •NIRSpec MPT - Planner
- NIRSpec MPT - Manual Planner
- •NIRSpec MPT - Plans
- •NIRSpec MPT - Parameter Space
- •NIRSpec MSA Spectral Visualization Tool Help
- •NIRSpec Observation Visualization Tool Help
- •NIRSpec IFU Spectroscopy APT Template
- •NIRSpec Fixed Slit Spectroscopy APT Template
- •NIRSpec Bright Object Time-Series APT Template
- •NIRSpec FS and IFU Mosaic APT Guide
- NIRSpec Multi-Object Spectroscopy APT Template
- NIRSpec Observing Strategies
- •NIRSpec Background Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec Bright Spoilers and the IFU Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec Detector Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec Dithering Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec MOS Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec MSA Leakage Subtraction Recommended Strategies
- •NIRSpec Target Acquisition Recommended Strategies
- NIRSpec Example Programs
- NIRSpec and MIRI Observations of SN1987A
- •NIRSpec and MIRI IFU Observations of Cas A
- NIRSpec Bright Object Time Series Observations of GJ 1214b
- NIRSpec MOS Deep Extragalactic Survey
- •NIRSpec MOS Observations of NGC 346
- Understanding Data Files
- Obtaining Data
- Data Processing and Calibration Files
- JWST Data Reduction Pipeline
- • Primer and Tutorials
- • Pipeline User's Guide
- • Software Reference Documentation
- Algorithm Documentation
- • Obtaining and Installing Software
A General Observer (GO) or Survey proposals may be submitted for any amount of observing time on JWST. Proposals may also be submitted to financially support the analysis of Archival JWST data (AR), to develop data science software to benefit the community of JWST users, or to financially support theoretical research in support of JWST observational programs.
Overview of Proposal Categories
JWST observations can be requested with a General Observer (GO) Proposal. GO proposal categories include Small, Medium, Large, Calibration, Long-Term, Treasury, and Survey. Funding for JWST-related projects that do not require new JWST observations can be requested with an Archival Research (AR) Proposal. An AR proposal can be either a Regular AR, Calibration AR, Legacy AR, Theory, or a Community Data Science Software Proposal. All GO and AR proposals are peer-reviewed by a Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC), as described in JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Selection Process. Investigators may also request Director's Discretionary (DD) time at any time for unanticipated and scientifically compelling astronomical observations.
General Observer (GO) Proposals
A GO Proposal may be submitted for any amount of observing time, counted in hours, including all overheads. GO Proposals are classified as Small (≤ 25 hours), Medium (> 25 and ≤ 75 hours) and Large (>75 hours). The classification into these categories is the total charged time for the observatory, including overheads. Proposals in these categories can request observing time in future cycles as a Long-Term Proposal when this is scientifically justified, however the program's total time, and hence its category, will be determined from the sum total of time for all cycles in the request. The additional category of Treasury Proposals is designed to stimulate certain types of ambitious and innovative proposals that may not naturally fit into the Small, Medium, or Large Proposal categories.
Submitters of Medium, Large, and Treasury Proposals should note that all JWST observations are accepted with the understanding that the timescale on which the observations will actually be obtained will depend on scheduling opportunities and demands on JWST resources. Programs with scheduling constraints may require execution over an extended period. In general, proposals are either accepted or rejected in their entirety. Accordingly, proposers are urged to request the actual number of hours required to achieve the proposal science goals. Laboratory astrophysics relevant to JWST observations is an acceptable component of a GO proposal. Ground-based observations that complement JWST observations may also be included as a component of a GO proposal, but note that these observations must be obtained independently, as STScI does not award time on ground-based facilities.
Small GO Proposals
Small GO Proposals are those that request less than or equal to 25 hours of total time. It is anticipated that approximately 3500 hours will be available to the review panels for allocation to Small Proposals in Cycle 1. Small Proposals will have a default exclusive access period (formerly called a "proprietary period" in HST proposals) of 12 months.
Medium GO Proposals
Medium GO Proposals are those that request above 25 hours but less than or equal to 75 hours of total time. The Medium Proposal category exists to ensure that compelling science programs that demand a medium-size hour request have a comparable chance of success to both Small and Large GO proposals. It is anticipated that approximately 1500 hours will be available for GO medium proposals in Cycle 1. Medium Proposals will have a default exclusive access period of 12 months.
Large GO Proposals
Large Proposals are those that request more than 75 hours of total time. These programs should lead to a clear advance in our understanding in an important area of astronomy. They must use the unique capabilities of JWST to address scientific questions in a comprehensive approach that is not possible in smaller time allocations. Selection of a Large Proposal for implementation does not rule out acceptance of Small or Medium Proposals to do similar science, but target duplication and overall program balance will be considered.
Approximately 1000 hours will be made available to Large and Treasury Proposals in Cycle 1. Data taken for Large Proposals will, by default, have no exclusive access period. Proposals may request an exclusive access period, and that request should be justified in the "Special Requirements" section of the proposal. Such a request will be subject to review by the TAC.
Calibration GO Proposals
JWST is a complex observatory, with many possible instrument configurations. Calibrations and calibration software are maintained by STScI for the most important and most used configurations. However, STScI does not have the resources to calibrate fully all potential capabilities of all instruments. Additionally, the astronomical community has expressed interest in receiving support to perform calibrations for certain uncalibrated or poorly calibrated modes, or to develop specialized software for certain JWST calibrations. In recognition of this, STScI is encouraging outside users to submit Calibration Proposals, which aim to fill in some of the gaps in our coverage of the calibration of JWST and its instruments.
Calibration Proposals should not be linked to a specific science program, but should provide a calibration or calibration software that can be used by the community for existing or future programs. A specific science program that has special calibration requirements is not a Calibration Proposal; such a proposal should be submitted as a normal GO Proposal and the necessary calibration observations should be included in the science program. Users submitting Calibration Proposals must contact the appropriate instrument team at STScI (via the helpdesk) to discuss their program prior to submission. Failure to do so will result in automatic rejection of the proposal.
Successful proposers will be required to deliver documentation, data products and/or software to STScI to be made available to the community to support future observing programs or archival research. Funding is available to support Calibration Proposals in the same manner as for normal science programs, with the following exception: Scientists affiliated with STScI are not eligible for any funding to support their role (as PI or Co-I) in a Calibration Proposal.
Calibration Proposals will be reviewed internally at STScI by the Instruments Division. The internal review will provide the TAC with an assessment of the feasibility of the proposal, how the proposal complements/extends the existing calibration program, and the type of science impacted by the proposed calibrations. Proposers should summarize the relevance and overall scientific utility of the calibration techniques and products described in their proposal.
Investigators interested in the submission of a Calibration Proposal are encouraged to study the JWST User Documentation to determine the level at which STScI provides calibration and characterization. The data obtained for a GO Calibration Proposal will nominally have no exclusive access period, as is the case for regular calibration observations. Proposers may request an exclusive access period (which should be explained in the "Special Requirements" section of the proposal), but such a request will be subject to panel and TAC review and will only be granted in exceptional circumstances. Calibration Proposals can also be submitted as Survey Proposals or Archival Proposals. AR Proposals are appropriate in cases where the necessary data have already been taken, or for programs that do not require specific data but aim to develop specialized software for certain JWST calibration and data reduction tasks.
Long-Term GO Proposals
Small, Medium, Large, and Treasury GO Proposals may request JWST observing time in more than one cycle if a clear scientific case can be made. Long-Term Proposals must be limited to cases where long-baseline, multi-epoch observations are clearly required to optimize the scientific return of the project. Long-Term Proposals require a long time baseline, but not necessarily a large number of JWST hours, to achieve their science goals. Examples include astrometric observations or long-term monitoring of variable stars or active galactic nuclei.
Proposers may request time in up to three cycles (1, 2, and 3). Long-term Proposals should describe the entire requested program and provide a cycle-by-cycle breakdown of the number of hours requested. The Cycle 1 review panels and TAC will only be able to award a limited amount of time in future cycles, so a detailed scientific justification for allocating time beyond Cycle 1 must be presented. Scheduling concerns are not a sufficient justification. The sum of all hours requested in Cycles 1, 2, and 3 determines whether a Long-Term Proposal is Small, Medium, or Large, with the appropriate exclusive access periods applied (12 months for Small and Medium, and 0 months for Large). Target-of-Opportunity Proposals are eligible to be Long-Term for rare phenomena if certain conditions are met (see JWST Cycle 1 Observation Types and Restrictions). GOs with approved Long-Term Proposals need not submit continuation proposals in the subsequent cycles.
Treasury GO Proposals
Treasury Proposals are those designed to create datasets of lasting value to the JWST project. A Treasury Program is defined by the following characteristics:
- The program should focus on the potential to solve multiple scientific problems with a single, coherent dataset. It should enable a variety of compelling scientific investigations.
- The program should produce data products that are processed or calibrated significantly beyond the capabilities of the JWST Calibration Pipeline to maximize the scientific impact of the program. Examples include tiled images, multi-band object catalogs, or coordinated observations on other facilities (for which some funding can be provided). Funding for the proposed data products will depend on their timely availability. They should be delivered to STScI in suitable digital formats for further dissemination via MAST.
- Data taken under a Treasury Program will usually have no exclusive access period, although brief exclusive access periods may be requested if that will enhance the public data value. Such requests are subject to TAC approval.
The following additional characteristics are particularly encouraged:
- Development of new techniques for data reduction or analysis.
- Creation and dissemination of tools (software, Web interfaces, models, etc.), beyond what is offered to the community by STScI, for the scientific community to work with the data products.
The emphasis will be on observations whose value is maximal if taken soon. However, Treasury Proposals may request observing time to be distributed in future cycles if scientifically required (similar to the situation for Small, Medium, and Large Long-Term GO Proposals). In Cycle 1 approximately 1000 hours of JWST time will be available for Large and Treasury Proposals. Treasury Programs will be selected by the TAC as part of the normal peer review process. Successful proposals will be reviewed by STScI to ensure observing efficiency. Investigators submitting Treasury Proposals must select the Treasury Program flag on the APT cover page and include additional technical details on the scheduling aspects of their program in the “Description of the Observations” section in APT. Note that a proposal can be both Large and Treasury.
The "Scientific Justification" section of the proposal should include a description of the scientific investigations that will be enabled by the final data products and their importance. The "Technical Justification" section of the proposal should not only include a detailed rationale of the observations, but also plans for data analysis and a description of how the data products will be made available to STScI and the community, the method of dissemination, and a realistic time line.
Survey GO Proposals
Survey programs are designed to increase the observing efficiency of the telescope by allowing for short "filler" observations when gaps are identified in the scheduling process. They are analogous to Snapshot programs on the Hubble Space Telescope. Accepted Survey Proposals are allocated time to cover observations of targets drawn from a large sample. However, there is no guarantee that any individual target will be observed because the observations are placed on the Long Range Plan after the observing sequence has been determined for GO/GTO programs. The number of observations actually executed will depend on the availability of appropriate schedule gaps. In general, only a small fraction of the targets will be observed. We anticipate that up to 200 hours may be available for Survey observations in JWST Cycle 1; the TAC will select programs requesting up to 1200 hours to provide appropriate sky coverage. All accepted Survey programs will terminate at the end of Cycle 1.
There is no commitment on the part of STScI to obtain any specific completion factor for Survey programs.
Survey programs have the following characteristics:
- Proposers request time to cover observations of a specific number of targets; those targets can be drawn from a larger sample.
- PIs are not required to give a complete list of all targets and their coordinates at the time of submission. Example observations should be provided at the time of submission. You must specify the number of targets and describe their distribution on the sky, and unambiguously identify the targets (e.g., reference to target lists in papers) or give a detailed description of the target characteristics. Accepted programs will be required to submit a full target list within one month of notification. Survey programs may not be used for targets of opportunity.
- Observations of any particular target cannot be guaranteed; the point of the Survey program is to have many different options from a class of objects that can be inserted into the observing schedule. Survey Proposals must target sources over a wide range of Right Ascension (> 12 hours), to ensure that potential targets are always nearby. Examples of programs that are not well suited to Survey Proposals (because they do not help improve scheduling efficiency) are surveys of targets confined to an area of a few square degrees (e.g., the LMC) or surveys limited to a few areas (e.g., surveys of two or three specific galaxy clusters).
- Moving targets are acceptable.
- Individual observations should be limited to a maximum of 30 minutes of science integration time, not counting instrumental overheads.
- Each observation must be schedulable at least 90 days out of the year.
- In the case of duplication, Regular GO proposals have priority over Survey Proposals since observations of individual Survey target are not guaranteed.
- Proposers may not assign priorities to individual observations in a Survey program. Targets will be selected for execution based on available observatory resources as determined by STScI. This selection will occur as part of the normal scheduling process.
- In general, shorter-duration and spatially well-distributed Survey targets have a higher number of scheduling opportunities and a higher chance of being executed than longer duration and/or spatially clustered Survey observations.
- Survey Proposals cannot request time in future cycles.
- Small and Medium Survey Proposals are assessed by the review panels, in conjunction with other GO programs. Survey programs requesting more than 75 hours will be treated as Large Programs, and reviewed by the TAC.
- Calibration Proposals may also be submitted as Survey Proposals. As with GO Calibration programs, all data obtained will have no exclusive access period unless proposers specifically request and justify an exclusive access period. Successful proposers will be required to deliver documentation, and data products and/or software to STScI to support future observing or archival programs. Users submitting Calibration Proposals are required to contact the appropriate instrument group to discuss their program prior to submission.
Survey proposals can be Small, Medium or Large. Small and Medium Survey proposals have a default exclusive access period of 12 months. However, because of the potential benefit to the community at large, proposers should give serious consideration to the possibility of requesting a shorter access period of 3 or 6 months (it is one of the selection criteria for Survey Programs; see JWST Cycle 1 Proposal Selection Procedures). Large Survey proposals have no exclusive access period.
Archival (AR) Proposals
Observations that are no longer in the exclusive access period are freely available for analysis by scientists through retrieval from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST). For JWST Cycle 1, this includes all Director's Discretionary Early Release Science datasets, which have no exclusive access period, and some approved GTO program datasets (see JWST Cycle 1 GTO Observations Available for Archival Proposals). The JWST Archival Research (AR) Program can provide financial support for the analysis of such data sets. AR Proposals must outline a management plan and detailed budget for analyzing the data. Proposals for AR funding are considered at the same time, and by the same reviewers, as proposals for observing time, on the basis of scientific merit.
Regular AR Proposals
The general goal of a Regular AR Proposal is to analyze a subset of data from MAST to address a specific scientific issue. In general, the scientific questions addressed should differ from those tackled by the original programs that obtained the data. A strong justification must be given to reanalyze data if the new project has the same science goals as the original proposal. There is no limit to the amount of funding that may be requested in a Regular AR Proposal. For reference, it is expected that the majority of awards will fall under $150,000, with a median of about $75,000. However, STScI actively encourages the submission of more ambitious AR programs for which larger amounts of funding may be justified. Budget plans should be commensurate with the level of work required to carry out the goals of the proposal. Laboratory astrophysics relevant to JWST observations is an acceptable component of an archival proposal.
Legacy AR Proposals
A Legacy AR Proposal is defined by the following characteristics:
- The project should perform a homogeneous analysis of a well-defined subset of data in MAST.
- The main goal should be to provide a homogeneous set of calibrated data and/or ancillary data products to the scientific community.
- The results of the project should enable a variety of new and important types of scientific investigations.
We encourage the development of open source community software tools for dissemination to the community.
The main difference between a Regular and a Legacy AR Proposal is that the former aims at performing a specific scientific investigation, while the latter will also create data products and/or tools for the benefit of the community. While Legacy AR Proposals will be judged primarily on the basis of scientific merit, the importance and broad applicability of the products produced by the Legacy Proposal will be key features in judging the overall scientific merit of the proposal.
It is a strict requirement for Legacy AR Proposals that the proposed data products be created and distributed to the community in a timely manner. Data products should also be delivered to STScI in a format consistent with the MAST High-Level Science products Contributions Guidelines for dissemination via MAST.
It is anticipated that Legacy AR Proposals will be larger in scope and requested funds than most Regular AR Proposals. While there is no lower limit on the requested amount of funding, it is expected that most Legacy AR Proposals will require at least $150,000, and possibly up to a few times this amount, to accomplish their goals. Commensurate with the expected scope, Legacy AR Proposals are allowed to be multi-year projects, although this is not a requirement. Multi-year projects will be funded on a yearly basis, with continued funding beyond the first year subject to a performance review. Legacy AR Proposals will be evaluated by the TAC in conjunction with Large and Treasury GO Proposals.
The ‘Scientific Justification’ section of the proposal should include a description of the scientific investigations that will be enabled by the final data products, and their importance. The ‘Analysis Plan’ section should describe the plans for data analysis, the data products that will be made available to STScI and the community, the method of dissemination, and a realistic time line.
Calibration AR Proposals
Calibration Proposals may also be submitted as AR Proposals. AR Proposals are appropriate in cases where the necessary data have already been taken, or for programs that do not require specific data but aim to develop specialized software for certain JWST calibration and data reduction tasks. Users submitting Calibration Proposals must contact the appropriate instrument group (accessible via the JWST Helpdesk) to discuss their program prior to submission.
The opportunity exists under the JWST AR Program to obtain financial support for theoretical research. Research that is primarily theoretical can have a lasting benefit for current or future observational programs with JWST, and it is appropriate to propose theory programs relevant to the JWST mission.
A Theory Proposal should address a topic that is of direct relevance to JWST observational programs, and this relevance should be explained in the proposal. Funding of mission-specific research under the JWST Theory Program will be favored over research that is appropriate for a general theory program (e.g., the NASA Science Mission Directorate Astrophysics Theory Program; ATP). The primary criterion for a Theory Proposal is that the results should enhance the value of JWST observational programs through their broad interpretation (in the context of new models or theories) or by refining the knowledge needed to interpret specific observational results (a calculation of atomic cross sections may fall under the latter category). The results of the theoretical investigation should be made available to the community in a timely fashion.
As with the other AR Proposals, there is no limit to the funding that may be requested in Theory Proposals. For reference, it is expected that the majority of awards will fall under $150,000, with a median of about $75,000. The effort detailed in the Management Plan of the proposal should be commensurate with the level of funding to be requested in the budget submission. Theoretical research should be the primary or sole emphasis of a Theory Proposal. Analysis of archival data may be included, but should not be the main aim of the project. GO or AR Proposals which include a minor component of theoretical research will be funded under the appropriate GO or AR Program.
A Theory Proposal may be submitted by a non-U.S. PI if there are one or more U.S. Co-Is who request funding.
Award amounts for Theory Proposals are anticipated to be similar to those made for Regular AR Proposals. STScI also allows the submission of more ambitious proposals for which larger amounts of funding may be justified.
The ‘Scientific Justification’ section of the proposal should describe the proposed theoretical investigation and also its impact on observational investigations with JWST. Review panels will consist of observational and theoretical astronomers with a broad range of scientific expertise. They will not necessarily have specialists in all areas of astrophysics, particularly theory, so the proposals must be written for general audiences of scientists. The ‘Analysis Plan’ section of the proposal should discuss the types of JWST data that will benefit from the proposed investigation, and references to specific data sets in MAST should be given where possible. This section should also describe how the results of the theoretical investigation will be made available to the astronomical community, and on what time-scale the results are expected.
Community Data Science Software Proposals
The details of how the data products are created from the JWST calibration pipeline, and some software tools for working further with data, are available on JWST Data Calibration and Analysis Documentation. There is an opportunity under the JWST AR Program to obtain financial support for the development of additional data science software products that will be made available to the community for the purposes of analyzing JWST data. There are numerous possibilities for the types of products that could be developed. Examples include: scripts to mitigate artifacts from specific detectors, tools to identify and extract fluxes/magnitudes from multiple sources within a field, utility software for working with JWST data products, or codes to produce background-subtracted spectra or software to interact with JWST archive services. Please contact the Data Science Mission Office (email@example.com) for additional guidance. The primary criterion for a Community Data Science Proposal is that the results should broadly enhance the value of JWST observational products for anyone in the astronomical community. The results of the data science software development should be made available to the community in a timely fashion through an appropriate distribution platform. Open source software using a standard license (https://opensource.org/licenses) is encouraged. The software should have thorough internal documentation at a level consistent with software best practices, and, if computationally intensive, should be compatible with a cloud computing service.
There is no limit to the amount of funding that may be requested, but it is expected that the amounts will be at a similar level to those in the Regular AR category. The effort detailed in the Management Plan section of the proposal should be commensurate with the level of funding requested.
A Community Data Science Software Proposal may be submitted by a non-U.S. PI if there are one or more U.S. Co-Is who request funding.
The ‘Scientific Justification’ section of the proposal should describe the proposed software plan and also its impact on observational investigations with JWST. Review panels will consist of observational and theoretical astronomers with a broad range of scientific expertise. They will not necessarily have specialists in all areas of astrophysics, particularly software development, so the proposals must be written for general audiences of scientists. The ‘Analysis Plan’ section of the proposal should discuss the types of JWST data that will benefit from the proposed investigation, and references to specific data sets in MAST should be given where possible. This section should also describe how the results of the investigation will be made available to the astronomical community, and on what time-scale the results are expected.
There will be no joint proposals with any other observatories for JWST Cycle 1.
Director's Discretionary (DD) Time Proposals
Up to 10% of the available JWST observing time in a given cycle may be reserved for Director’s Discretionary (DD) allocation. In Cycle 1, a substantial fraction of that time has been invested in the Director's Discretionary Early Release Science program. Scientists wishing to request DD time can do so at any time during the cycle (post-launch).
Observations obtained as part of a DD Program generally do not have an exclusive access period, and are made available immediately to the astronomical community. However, DD proposers may request and justify such periods in their proposals. Upon receipt of a DD Proposal, the STScI Director will usually seek advice on the scientific merit and technical feasibility of the proposal from STScI staff and external specialists. A proposal for DD time might be appropriate in cases where an unexpected transient phenomenon occurs or when developments since the last proposal cycle make a time-critical observation necessary.
DD Proposals for timely follow-up of new discoveries will also be considered even if the astrophysics of the phenomena do not require such rapid follow-up. In such cases, the proposers must demonstrate that the observations will provide a critical link in the understanding of the phenomena and that carrying them out quickly is particularly important for planning future observations with major facilities. They should then also indicate their plans for quickly making the scientific community aware of their discoveries, to enable subsequent wider community follow-up.
DD observations should not generally be requested if any of the following is true:
- The observations could plausibly have been proposed in the most recent regular proposal cycle, possibly as a Target-of-Opportunity Proposal.
- The observations were proposed in a recent regular proposal cycle, and were rejected.
- The proposed observations could wait until the next proposal cycle with no significant reduction in the expected scientific return.
Subject to availability of funds from NASA, STScI will provide financial support for U.S. PIs and Co-Is of approved DD Programs.
Possible Cycle 1 JWST Supplementary Call
The proposal deadline for Cycle 1 Observing proposals will be at least a year in advance of JWST's launch and 18 months in advance of the first science observations. To take account of potential significant new discoveries during this period, STScI and the JWST Project are developing a Call for Supplementary Proposals to be issued shortly after JWST's launch and deployment. The detailed implementation of any such program will be explored in consultation with the JWST Users Committee.