Seed Grants
P3 Collaborative Seed Grants
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) – Revise to Target Round 2 Submissions
(Last updated August 13, 2008)
Contact Information:
Emily Devereux, Program Coordinator
870-680-4344
email: edevereux@astate.edu
How does Round 2 differ from Round 1 and will the priorities and criteria for review be different?
The obvious differences are in the duration (Round 2 is limited to 12 months; Round 1 was 18-22 months) and the maximum funding per grant (Round 1 capped at $250K; Round 2 is capped at $150K). These changes were necessary due to the reduced funding remaining to support the Seed Grant Program and constraints with respect to the EPSCoR grant end date. Thus, Round 2 proposals need to have a tighter focus and be developed as a “pilot study” clearly directed at generating external follow-on funding.
Based on the timeline and funding of Round 2, the reviewers recognize that the Round 2 proposals will need to be more tightly focused and may not support the same level of involvement at multiple institutions. However, the review criteria as stated in the RFP will remain the same.
We are eager to get started. Why is the start date on these grants so late?
We would like to start Round 2 earlier but are limited by the funding structure of the EPSCoR grant. NSF provides one third of the funding each year and there is no flexibility to spending year 3 funds in year 2. Because the grant was “front-loaded” for equipment and start-ups, the bulk of Round 2 Seed Grant funding is in Year 3 of the EPSCoR grant and cannot be mobilized prior to August 1, 2009. It is possible with a strong justification that some funds could be mobilized before April 1 but the amount spent prior to August 1 would still be limited.
Do these grants have indirect costs associated with them?
Yes, these grants will utilize your university’s typical NSF indirect cost distribution unless you specifically negotiate otherwise.
Are we limited to 12 months of funding for Round Two grants?
The duration of funding for Round Two grants is set at 12 months. However, there is the potential to apply for a no-cost extension. Our goal is to have these seed grants very targeted towards follow-on funding and submission of a competitive grant is required by the ASTA/P3 Center award mechanism. Although there is additional time within the overall EPSCoR grant (ends July 2010), the plan is to focus this period on external grant writing and submission.
What are the constraints with respect to the actual start date of the proposal? I was hoping to support a graduate student for 1 year and a April 1 start date makes this hard since it starts in the middle of the semester and spans 2 academic years.
The earliest start date for Round 2 is set at April 1. However, you would have the option of starting a Round 2 grant later. If you were to start the grant on May 15, you could cover the summer and the entire 2009-10 academic year.
What are the available amounts for funding?
The funding for Round Two may range from $50,000 to $150,000, with the max capping at $150,000. Suggested criteria for funding limits are described below.
Do I need a collaborator from another institution or can I just request funds to be used in my own program?
For proposals that are seeking the maximum funding, of $150,000, collaboration would be considered favorable on your behalf. Cross-institutional collaboration was stressed by both the ASSET Initiative proposal and by NSF EPSCoR and all of the proposals that were successful in Round One did have a cross-institutional component. The reviewers realize that the lower funding cap of Round 2 reduces the potential to have large equally funded contributions at multiple institutions. However, it should be noted that a collaborator could be advisory and or contribribute a smaller but enabling component or data analysis that would be effective in moving the science forward with less financial requirements. Yet, we want to stress that you are not precluded from applying as sole PI. Smaller grants are available in Round Two, and encouraged, due to the limited time frame and funds remaining in the EPSCoR grant. A six to nine month duration, at $50,000, for a proposal that is realistic with strong objectives that can be met might be a viable approach as a successful pilot study for preliminary data. Small, well-focused projects will be encouraged and not disadvantaged compared to the larger proposals. Remember that the seed grants purpose is to provide you with your first preliminary data to get you started and published in order to apply for more competitive grants.
I am interested in collaborating with someone who is not on the “P3 Center Participant List” and not at ASU, UAF or UALR. Is this allowed? Is this seen as supporting cross-institutional collaborations?
This is a challenging question. As you know, this is a small pie and we would like to keep the research tightly focused on our plant-based bioproduction goals. However, we are also interested in mobilizing the best expertise to bring your project to a stage where you are published and competitive for federal funding. So if it is well justified and reasonable, the reviewers and EPSCoR management will support funding collaborations with researchers at other in-state institutions. It should be noted that NCTR was a part of the original proposal. Yvonne Dragon, our NCTR lead, is no longer at NCTR. However, other collaborators from NCTR would be very welcome and the NCTR expertise in microarrays (including Affymetrix), proteomics and metabolomics is a great resource for Arkansas research. Taking advantage of the funds available through ASTA for scientific exchange of students/post-docs is also a great way to support collaborative work with other researchers in the state.
Who can apply?
At least one person among the PIs on a proposal must be on the P3 participant list. Folks on this list participated in the development of the original proposal and they and the P3 Center have a stake in the P3 research focal areas and in enhancing their competitiveness. Having said that, we are primarily interested in fostering excellent science, addressing the key focus areas in plant-based bioproduction, and building competitive collaborations. Thus, partnerships with researchers outside the P3 participant list are fine. We also hope that new faculty with relevant expertise and research areas will become involved in the P3 Center and encourage them to partner with P3 participants for proposal submission.
Can I participate on more than one grant?
Our goal is to facilitate good science and good collaborations. Thus, if you bring value and expertise to multiple projects (i.e., if your role is well justified for each grant), being on more than one project is not precluded. However, it is important to EPSCoR and P3 Center goals that we have as broad an impact as possible both in solving our key issues in plant-based bioproduction through excellent science and generating outside funding to move our PIs and our science forward. Thus, preference will be given to support investigators not previously funded through the Collaborative Seed Grant program.
Will proposals that were submitted in Round One but were not funded be treated differently or have any advantage in the review process?
PIs on these proposals will have the advantage of the reviewers’ comments, an opportunity within their proposals to specifically address the reviewer’s comments, and additional grantsmanship mentoring. However, their proposals will be judged by the same criteria as new proposal and have no “special” ranking in this process.
There isn’t enough money in these grants, especially if we have to cover indirect costs and will do significant experiments at two campuses. Do you have any suggestions as to how to extend the dollars?
Remember, these are seed grants – their goal is to develop preliminary data, initial publications and collaborations that will support competitive grant applications and funding. It may be possible to use EPSCoR dollars to fund ½ of a graduate student and get institutional commitments to fund the other half. Most graduate programs with limited fellowships would be delighted to “match” a grant-funded student. The reviewers would also look favorably on this since it extends the reach of the EPSCoR funds. It may be possible to propose a 50% postdoc or technician that could be shared with a related project at your sight. Alternatively, EPSCoR has funds that would support a student or postdoc to spend 1-4 weeks at your collaborators site. NCTR has apartments that are available for short term visits. As stated above, a collaborator’s role could be advisory or could involve hosting you and your students for specific analyses or procedures with minimal costs associated with the second site.
What is required for the Grantsmanship Strategic Plan section of the proposal?
Since the seed grants are in place to provide you resources in obtaining data to prepare you for competitive grants, the investigators are strongly encouraged to identify specific programs and funding opportunities and to communicate specifically why your project is well suited to meet that program’s goal and how the data developed through the P3 grant will set you up to be competitive for this program. Proposals that were funded in Round 1 tended to have well developed Grantsmanship Strategic Plan sections that included the specific agency, program, and deadlines to be targeted and how the project will position the PIs to be more competitive.
How important are the “broader impacts” of the proposal?
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of two National Science Board approved merit review criteria (see the RFP). One of these is the broader impacts of the proposed activity. One needs to highlight in their proposal: How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? It should be noted that the external review panel commented on this aspect of all of the Round 1 proposals (whether funded or not) and suggested ways to enhance this part of the proposals in order to be competitive for NSF funding. Thus, we recommend that you consider “broader impacts” and effectively address this in your proposals.
If I get a grant, are there any opportunities for renewal or follow-on funding from the EPSCoR grant?
Very unlikely! However, we hope that the P3 Center will be the jumping-off place for multi-investigator “Centers” and “Program” grants in the future, in addition to investigator-initiated grants.
What budget format must be included?
PIs should use the NSF budget format. (The Excel Workbook is available at (www.nsf.gov) and (http://abi.astate.edu/people/EPSCoR/New%20budget%20worksheet%20with%20fringe.xls). If multiple sites are involved, you must provide a separate budget for each site and a compilation budget (both budget sheets are found in the Excel Workbook mentioned in the link addresses above.)