\\ Home Page
Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for Board of Regents Support Fund FY 2016-17 competitions are now available on the BoR website, http://web.laregents.org. These documents set forth all requirements, including deadlines, for submission of proposals.
Deadlines for Mandatory Notices of Intent:
- Deadline for Mandatory Research & Development (RCS & ITRS) Notices of Intent: Monday, September 12, 2016
- Deadline for Mandatory Awards to Louisiana Artists and Scholars (ATLAS) Notices of Intent: Monday, October 10, 2016
Deadline for Asking Questions about these RFPs: Monday, October 17, 2016
Deadlines for Submission of Full Proposals:
- October 24, 2016: Traditional Enhancement
- October 31, 2016: Industrial Ties Research Subprogram
- November 7, 2016: Research Competitiveness Subprogram
- November 14, 2016: 1. Traditional Graduate Fellowships 2. BoR/SREB Graduate Fellowships to Promote Diversity
- November 21, 2016: Awards to Louisiana Artists and Scholars
- February 1, 2017: 1. Endowed Chairs for Eminent Scholars Program 2. Endowed Superior Graduate Student Scholarships 3. BoRSF Endowed: Two-Year Student Workforce Scholarships
NSF continues to focus on the automated compliance checks of proposals in order to decrease the burden on both the research community and NSF staff. Effective July 25, 2016, all proposals will be subject to a new series of automated compliance validation checks to ensure proposals comply with requirements outlined in Chapter II.C.2. of the Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG).
The new set of automated compliance checks will trigger error messages for each of the following rules:
o Biographical Sketch(es) and Current and Pending Support files are required for each Senior Personnel associated with a proposal; and
o Biographical Sketch(es) can only be uploaded as a file, must not exceed two pages and can no longer be entered as text.
Note About Proposal File Update (PFU):
Proposers should be aware should that if a proposal was received prior to July 25 and contained only one Biographical Sketch and/or Current & Pending Support file (rather than individual files for each senior personnel), a PFU addressing any section of the proposal will result in the proposal not being accepted if it does not comply with these new compliance checks. The checks will be run on all sections of the proposal regardless of which section was updated during the PFU.
Note About Grants.gov:
Proposers should also be aware that Grants.gov will allow a proposal to be submitted, even if it does not comply with these proposal preparation requirements. Should NSF receive a proposal from Grants.gov that is not compliant, it will be returned without review.
Please note that the new set of compliance checks are in addition to the compliance checks that currently exist in FastLane. You can view a complete list of FastLane auto-compliance checks, including these checks, by visiting the NSF website. The list specifies which checks are run depending on funding opportunity type (GPG, Program Description, Program Announcement, or Program Solicitation) and type of proposal (Research, RAPID, EAGER, Ideas Lab, Conference, Equipment, International Travel, Facility/Center, or Fellowship). It also specifies whether the check triggers a “warning” or “error” message for non-compliant proposals.
We encourage you to share this information with your colleagues. For system-related questions, please contact the NSF Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or Rgov@nsf.gov. Policy-related questions should be directed to firstname.lastname@example.org.
An email was sent to campus today announcing the re-opening of the LaSpace K-12 & Outreach Program. Proposals submitted under old guidelines will not be considered for funding so please review the updated guidelines. Guidelines are posted on their website: http://laspace.lsu.edu/rfp/index.php
Program Requirement Highlights
• This is an open program, so proposals may be submitted for consideration at any time.
• Projects will be considered as funds are available, and they expect to make approximately 3-4 awards each year.
• Funding for individual projects is expected to range from approximately $1000-$5000.
• A strict cost-match is not required, but some match will review more favorably.
• All invoices and a final technical written report must be submitted to the LaSPACE office within 30 days of the project end date. Photographs and copies of all papers, presentations, and posters generated should be shared with LaSPACE as they occur and collected/referenced in the final report.
• Submit all properly executed proposals via email as fully searchable pdf documents to email@example.com.
• Proposals will be reviewed as received and decision letters will be released as soon as possible. In addition to being selected or declined for funding, LaSPACE management might also offer a contingent-award based on a required modification. One of these three types of decision letters will be released typically within 30 days, but no later than 90 days from proposal submittal.
Awards honor contributions and public service in science and engineering
Each year, the National Science Board (NSB) pays tribute to remarkable contributions and public service in science and engineering through its Vannevar Bush and Public Service awards. NSB welcomes nominations for its 2017 honorary awards through Monday, Oct. 3, 2016.
Named after the gifted visionary and dynamic public servant who was behind the creation of the National Science Foundation (NSF), NSB's Vannevar Bush Award honors life-long leaders who have made exceptional contributions toward the welfare of humankind and the nation through public service activities in science, technology, and public policy. Nomination instructions are available on the Vannevar Bush Award website and all recipients are listed on the NSB site.
NSB's Public Service Award honors individuals and groups for substantial contributions to increasing public understanding of science and engineering in the United States. These contributions may be in a wide variety of areas, including mass media, social media, education, training programs and entertainment. A complete list of recipients, as well as nomination instructions, can be found on the award website.
Leaders in the higher education, scientific society and association, congressional, federal, and private industry communities celebrate the accomplishments of NSB awardees during an awards ceremony held each May.
Questions? Please contact NSB Communications Director Nadine Lymn, (703) 292-2490, firstname.lastname@example.org
About the National Science Board
The NSB is the policymaking body for the National Science Foundation. NSB also advises the President and Congress on science and engineering policy issues. The Board's 24 members are drawn primarily from universities and industry and represent a variety of science and engineering disciplines. Selected for their eminence in research, education or public service and records of distinguished service, Board members serve six-year terms. NSF's director is an ex officio 25th member of the Board.
Who - can serve as a reviewer?
Funders generally seek reviewers with experience or expertise in the areas that they will be reviewing. Generally, you do not have to be a successful grantee in order to serve as a grant reviewer. Junior faculty members are often welcome to serve as proposal reviewers and it can assist in your own grant writing. In some instances non-Ph.D. professionals may be able to serve as reviewers.
What – is involved?
The review process can vary among sponsors. You may be tasked evaluate proposals independently and then submit them to the sponsor. Other sponsors will have you perform the initial review independently and then convene as a review panel for a joint discussion. Formats for reviewing proposals vary widely and may or may not involve travel. If you are required to travel the sponsor will usually cover travel expenses and many sponsors will provide a small stipend for review work.
When - will the review process take place?
Sponsors will need reviewers to serve after the deadline for submitting proposals has passed. This will vary depending on the sponsor and their proposal deadlines.
Where - will the review panel meet?
You should understand the time and travel commitments prior to agreeing to serve as a reviewer. The review process often requires a lot of time in a short period of time. For instance, a panel session may be conducted in three 8-hour days or two 10-hour days plus travel time.
Why - should I serve as a reviewer?
One of the best ways that you improve your own grantsmanship skills is to read and evaluate proposals that others have written. As a reviewer you can read a variety of proposals written for the same funding program which is excellent training for what makes a successful grant and what does not. Serving on a review panel also provides insight into how the other reviewers evaluated the same proposals. The review process will give you firsthand knowledge about the funder and the priorities of its grant program. Understanding the review process gives you a competitive advantage when you later apply for a grant from the funder because you have a deeper understanding of the review process.
Serving as a reviewer allows you to keep abreast of current topics in your field and also allows you to network with other experts in your field.
How - can I become a reviewer?
Numerous federal and state sponsors are seeking reviewers and even have websites that facilitate volunteering. Choose a sponsor that fits your area interest or expertise and check the sponsors’ website for instructions on how to become a reviewer. In many instances you will email the contact for the funding program you are interested in and provide them with your area of expertise and contact information. You may have to submit your CV or complete a questionnaire. The sponsor will contact you to serve when they have a review opportunity that matches your expertise and interest. If the reviewer process is not clearly outlined on the sponsor website then you can contact the grant manager or program officer and let them know you are interested in serving as a reviewer.
NASA is looking for reviewers this summer.
One of the best ways that you improve your own grantsmanship is to read and evaluate proposals that others have written. As a reviewer you can read a variety of proposals written for the same funding program which is excellent training for what makes a successful grant and what does not. Serving on a review panel also provides insight into how the other reviewers evaluated the same proposals. The review process will give you firsthand knowledge about the funder and the priorities of its grant program. Understanding the review process gives you a competitive advantage when you later apply for a grant from the funder because you have a deeper understanding of the review process.
The panel will meet in New Orleans the first week of August. More information is below.
NASA Research and Education Support Services (NRESS) is seeking persons willing to serve as peer reviewers for a solicitation titled NASA Education Aeronautics Scholarship and Advanced STEM Training and Research (AS&ASTAR) Fellowship. Information about this opportunity, proposal requirements and evaluation criteria can be found on the NASA Solicitation and Proposal Integrated Review and Evaluation System (NSPIRES) website at AS&ASTAR Fellowships 2016.
Peer review is a critical component of the decision-making process for awarding projects. Your participation will assist in identifying high-quality projects by engaging individuals with different backgrounds, perspectives and areas of expertise in the review process.
AS&ASTAR Fellowships proposals are due June 17, 2016, and reviewers will be selected based on the subject matter of the proposals received. If you are selected, you will be notified by email which will contain detailed instructions on the process.
The online review period is scheduled for July 07-20, 2016. Reviewers will be asked to review no more than five proposals approximately 5-10 pages in length. Non-civil servants will receive an honorarium of $50 for each proposal fully reviewed and submitted through NSPIRES by the close of the review period.
Following the online review, a panel will convene to discuss which proposal(s) should be recommended for funding. The panel, which will be held in New Orleans, LA will last about 3 days and is tentatively scheduled for the week of August 1, 2016.
Please indicate your availability by responding to the questions below via email before COB June 13, 2015.
=== === === ===
1. Would you like to serve as an on-line reviewer for the AS&ASTAR Fellowships proposals?
Provide your contact information as it appears/will appear in the NSPIRES system. If you are not registered yet, please do so at https://nspires.nasaprs.com
• Full name
• Position / Title,
• Email address(es),
• Phone number(s)
Briefly identify/list your area(s) of expertise in a paragraph format when you reply to this email; you can attach your CV to this email to provide more background detail, if you wish, but it cannot be in lieu of your paragraph description.
• My area of expertise____________
2. Would you be available to serve as a panel member?
Please list your availability for the week of August 1, 2016.
*include limited availability e.g. only available Tuesday & Thursday
=== === === ===
NSPIRES registration is REQUIRED to participate in the review process. If you are interested in serving as a reviewer, and are not already registered in NSPIRES,please do so immediately. Be sure to register using the contact information you provided above. If you are already registered in NSPIRES, take a moment to verify that the contact information on your NSPIRES account is current, and corresponds with what you provided.
If you have any problems with registration or accessing a current account, contact the NSPIRES Help Desk at (202) 479-9376, or by email at email@example.com. The Help Desk should ALWAYS be your first line of communication if you encounter any issues with NSPIRES.
Also, if you know of colleagues who may be qualified and interested in serving as reviewers, please share this information with them.
Dawnbreaker administers the DOE’s SBIR/STTR Phase 0 Assistance Program. The program’s goal is to support the DOE’s efforts to increase SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications from, and ultimately make more awards to, small business concerns owned by women, minorities, and all small business concerns located in underrepresented states. For the purpose of this program, the DOE has classified among others Mississippi and Louisiana as under-represented states.
The core premise of the program is to identify under-represented SBC’s and provide comprehensive assistance with the preparation of their SBIR/STTR Phase I proposals such that they will be compelling to the DOE reviewers. The DOE SBIR/STTR Phase 0 Assistance Program is designed to augment assistance efforts by universities, state organizations, and other associations. Importantly, the services are offered at no charge to qualified small businesses. This includes university faculty, post-docs, and graduate students who do not have a small business now, but will have one at the time the award is granted.
A brief description of the Phase 0 Assistance program can be found at: http://www.dawnbreaker.com/doephase0/webinarfiles/DOE_Phase_0.pdf
As part of the outreach efforts for the program, You are invited to a webinar on June 22nd at 2pm EDT. The webinar will consist of an information presentation followed by a Q&A session and should take no more than an hour. Please feel free to extend this invitation to attend to others as well.
If you do decide to attend the webinar, please register here: http://www.dawnbreaker.com/doephase0/webinar.php?ec=GulfCoast.
The University of New Orleans Office of Research and Sponsored Programs announced that nearly $165,000 will be awarded to faculty researchers in the form of internal grants. The annual grant competition is modeled after the process used by the Louisiana Board of Regents and is intended to help researchers hone grant writing skills and eventually become more competitive in securing external grant funding.
The 2016 competition involved three types of awards. Grants aimed at stimulating competitive research, known as SCoRe awards, are intended as seed money for faculty to develop a new area of research activity. With a traditional SCoRe award, faculty can receive as much as $12,000. With the award, however, comes a commitment to eventually compete for additional external funding for the project. A second type of SCoRe grant specifically supports the National Center for Advanced Manufacturing (NCAM) in its work on space technology. These grants have a slightly larger cap at $15,000 and must involve either nanotechnology; modeling, simulation, information technology and processing computing; or materials, structures, mechanical systems and manufacturing.
A third type of award, the Creative Endeavor Opportunity (CEO) award, provides support for faculty to launch programs of research, scholarship, exhibition or performance that will ultimately result in increased research and creative activity on campus. Each proposal is evaluated for its potential impact on the faculty member’s discipline, as well as its contribution to the faculty member’s development as a researcher, teacher and scholar in a specific field of knowledge. The maximum amount of a CEO award is $5,000.
All proposals were peer-reviewed and evaluated by the University’s Research Council, a committee of faculty representing each college and major research center on campus. The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs used these peer rankings to determine award winners.
The internal grant program is funded by indirect cost recovery, a process through which external funding agencies reimburse universities for the overhead costs associated with conducting research. With the internal grant program, the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs reinvests these dollars into faculty professional development.
The National Center for Advanced Manufacturing (NCAM) is a partnership formed in 1999 among the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the State of Louisiana, Louisiana State University, UNO and the UNO Research and Technology Foundation. The center provides advanced manufacturing technology for use in aerospace commercial markets. NCAM also has a strong educational role, sponsoring a coalition of Louisiana research universities, workforce development programs and STEM outreach initiatives.
Below is a list of faculty who will receive awards from the 2016 internal grant program and the topics of their winning proposals.
Creative Endeavor Opportunity (CEO) Awards
John Gery: Early Voices in the Poetry of Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot ($5,000)
Dong-Jun Min: Learning and Recall of Adverstisement Information in Spaced and Massed Presentations ($5,000)
Doreen Piano: What I see when Walking: Visualizing Place-Based Scholarship and Composition Pedagogies ($5,000)
Tara Tolford: Active Transportation Planning & Design Curriculum Development ($4,984)
Stimulating Competitive Research (SCoRe) Awards (Traditional)
Irfan Ahmed: Gap Analysis of Digital Forensics on SCADA Testbed ($12,000)
Nicola Anthony: Mechanisms of inbreeding avoidance in wild mandriss (Mandrillus sphinx) ($11,995)
Anna Brand: This is Your Neighborhood: Seeing New Orleans in the Three Redevelopment Moments ($11,961)
Dhruva Chakravorty: Investigating the mechanism of allosteric regulation in metallosensor proteins ($12,000)
Amiri Ebrahim: Intelligent Self-Learning Controllers for Industrial Motor Drives ($12,000)
Ioannis Georgiou: Transgressive Coastal Systems: Modeling Allogenic and Autogenic response to Sea Level Rise ($10,250)
Zhengchang Liu: Characterization of Casein Kinase I Protein Hrr25 as a Positive Regulator of Mitochondrial Respiration ($12,000)
Martin O’Connell: Response of fishes to flood gate openings in Bayou St. John: Is the new adaptive water management plan working? ($11,822)
Sonia Rubens: Teacher-Reported Psychosocial Concerns in Students Attending an Alternative High School ($12,000)
Matthew Tarr: Nanomaterials for Targeted Cancer Therapy ($12,000)
Xiaochuan Yu: Motion Simulation and Hazard Assessment of Dropped Objects ($12,000)
Stimulating Competitive Research (SCoRe) Awards (NCAM)
Stephen Ware: Bringing Use-of-Force Training Simulations into Virtual Reality ($14,982)