UFIRST Grants Proposal System Goes Live This Month

This month, UF will launch the first phase of UFIRST—the University of Florida Integrated Research Support Tool—with the implementation of a new proposal routing system. Beginning March 23, all proposals for sponsored funding will be required to be routed through UFIRST.

Designed to significantly improve the way the Office of Research administers research, from proposals through awards, UFIRST will streamline workflow processes and improve transparency, tracking and reporting. Subsequent phases of UFIRST’s implementation will occur in the fall of 2015, when UFIRST submission to grants.gov will replace the use of Cayuse, and the spring of 2016, when a new awards system will be introduced.

Departments that currently use myUFL Proposal Express and anticipate submitting proposals between Friday, March 13, and Friday, March 20, should have all electronic routing completed by March 12. Any proposals initiated between March 13 and March 20 must use the paper DSP-1. The DSP-1 can be found on the Office of Research Forms and Templates webpage under Sponsored Projects Approval Forms. All proposals routed after March 20 will be required to use UFIRST.

For more information about UFIRST—including frequently asked questions, training information, and a project timeline—please visit http://research.ufl.edu/faculty-and-staff/initiatives/ufirst.html.

/by

UF Office of Research Revises Cost Sharing Policy

With the implementation of UFIRST and the new federal Uniform Guidance (see article UF Implements New OMB Uniform Guidance), the UF Office of Research has updated its Cost Sharing Policy.

Key changes include the following:

  • Definition of voluntary committed cost sharing updated to “Voluntary committed cost sharing is created if a proposal budget or justification specifically includes cost sharing where none was required.” Prior policy included any documented commitment anywhere in the proposal.
  • Clarification on unit approval of voluntary committed cost sharing to “All voluntary committed cost sharing being offered to the sponsor in a proposal must be approved by the College Dean, Department Chair, or Unit Director (or any of their delegates) and forwarded with the proposal to the Division of Sponsored Programs (DSP) for approval by authorized institutional representative.”
/by

UF Implements New OMB Uniform Guidance

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has issued Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200 revising administrative requirements, cost principles, and audit requirements for federal awards. The modified regulations place increased emphasis on institutions to strengthen their internal control processes over the management of funds in order to provide reasonable assurance of effective and efficient operations, reliability of reporting, and compliance with laws and regulations.

The major points of emphasis and implications for UF at this time are as follows:

All costs must be reasonable, allocable, and necessary to the performance of the work.

  • Computing Devices – The Uniform Guidance allows the direct charging of computing devices, costing less than $5,000 as a material and supply cost provided they are essential and allocable to the project. Computing devices do not have to be solely dedicated to the performance of a federal award, in order to be charged 100% to a single award or allocated to several awards. Computer devices are expected to be primarily used to support the performance of the federal award. The UF Division of Sponsored Programs (DSP) will continue to require CAS exemption forms for these items.
      DSP recommends that for any project where a computer is essential and allocable and can be documented as such, to include these items in your budget and justification starting immediately.
  • Administrative and Clerical Support – The Uniform Guidance clearly states salaries of administrative and clerical staff should normally be treated as indirect (F&A) costs; however, direct charging of administration and clerical costs may be appropriate to a federal award only if all of the following conditions are met:
    • Administrative or clerical services are integral to a project or activity.
    • Individuals involved can be specifically identified with the project or activity.
    • Such costs are explicitly included in the budget or have the prior written approval of the federal awarding agency.
    • The costs are not also recovered as indirect costs.
      DSP recommends starting immediately for the budget justification to include the positions, cost, reason the project has a need for dedicated administrative and clerical personnel, and the role these individuals will play. If awarded, DSP will require a CAS exemption form to be approved for these charges to be expensed to your project. DSP recommends that administrative or clerical time must exceed 20% of an individual’s total effort to be proposed as direct charged to any sponsored project. Any effort less than 20% should generally be recovered as indirect costs.
  • Effort Reporting – The standards for documenting personnel charges on sponsored projects remain. There is some flexibility in the method of documentation, but the overall policy and requirements are not changed. UF will work to clarify its policy on Institutional Base Salary but anticipates no procedural changes. Effort reporting in myUFL will continue once per semester for all individuals paid or cost shared on sponsored projects.
  • Subrecipient Monitoring – There is an increased emphasis on the role of the prime award recipient in monitoring the fiscal and programmatic performance of its subrecipients. UF is required to evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with federal regulations and the terms of the award for the purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. PIs on projects with subrecipients will be required to collect, review, and retain subrecipient’s programmatic reports as required by the terms of the subaward and continue to review invoices and ensure that the subrecipient is performing work at least equivalent to the charges billed.
  • Fixed Price Outgoing Subawards – Sponsor prior approval will be required in order for UF to issue a fixed price subaward rather than a cost-reimbursement subaward. The total cost of each fixed price subaward may not exceed $150,000. UF typically uses fixed price subawards with foreign subrecipients, clinical trial site agreements, and occasionally with small organizations. UF will consider the fixed price subaward approved if the award is made and no contrary guidance has been provided by the sponsor in the award notice.
      Starting immediately, DSP recommends that for any project where an outgoing subaward is contemplated to be fixed price, a clear statement must be included in the proposal/budget justification that indicates the budgeted subaward for (insert subrecipient name) will be issued as a fixed price subaward.
  • Fixed Amount Awards – UF will require that all budgets for all types of awards are built, routed, and approved at a minimum category level budget, with key personnel broken out by name and effort commitment. The guidance requires that any deviation from the effort commitment, even for fixed amount awards, by 25% or more be approved by the sponsor, in writing, prior to the change.
  • Closeout – There is increased scrutiny on the timeline for closeout of an award. UF has already experienced increased pressure from sponsors to ensure timely closeout of all awards. PIs and administrators are encouraged to monitor charges throughout the life of the award to expedite the fiscal closeout. In addition, PIs are expected to file all technical and invention reports within 90 days of the expiration of the award.
  • Participant Support Costs – Participant support costs in all budgets will be excluded from the F&A base. UF is seeking clarification whether this applies immediately to all budgets or only after the next F&A agreement is negotiated.
  • Procurement Requirements – There are significant changes in the procurement requirements. They are so significant that the research community was successful in delaying the implementation for one year (until 7/1/2016). These changes will require bids, quotes, and increased documentation on all purchases greater than $3,000.

Please see the UF Office of Research Uniform Guidance Implementation webpage for more information.

/by

2015 Workshop on Quasi-Experimental Design and Analysis

Northwestern University, with a grant from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), is hosting the 2015 Workshop on Quasi-Experimental Design and Analysis from Monday, August 3 to Friday, August 14. Applications to attend the workshop should be submitted by April 20, 2015 and decisions will be made by May 1. The workshop is for faculty from all disciplines who have an interest in causal research in education though advanced graduate students working with quasi-experimental data are also welcome.

The application process will include a vita and a letter describing past, present, or future involvements with the conduct of quasi-experimental studies in education. The application form and more information can be found at the workshop website http://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/workshops/annual-summer-workshops/quasi-experimental-design-and-analysis/. Workshop instruction and accommodations will take place at the Orrington Hotel (http://www.hotelorrington.com/) in Evanston, Illinois.

The workshop is funded by IES (Grant R305D140029), and thanks to this grant, all instructional and lodging costs will be met, but not travel or food costs. However, there are travel scholarships available for five persons from institutions that cannot pay for the travel costs. Applicants who need a travel scholarship should request one. The Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University has agreed to defray the costs of breakfast snacks. In addition, Evanston has a large number of easily available, inexpensive, and good restaurants where workshop attendees may eat.

This two-week workshop will expose attendees to the best current quasi-experimental practice for education and will help them analyze the data that the better designs produce. The format will be some lectures with active involvement from attendees. These lectures will describe better practice with the rationale based on both statistical theory and the results of studies directly comparing non-experimental and experimental causal results. The rest of the workshop will be spent hands on the analysis of data from the designs covered in the lectures.

The hands-on instructional component having to do with analysis will use two programs: R and STATA. Attendees should have a copy of one or both of these on their laptop they bring to the training. There may be some people who do not know either program. For those who are adept at learning computer languages and are confident of their skills, we advise them to apply for the workshop. For those who know they are not adept and do not know either language, it would probably not be a good idea to apply. We anticipate that most attendees will be familiar with one or both of these programs.

Each day will involve about three hours of lecture time with breaks, then lunch, then three to four hours of hands-on instruction in analysis that takes place in smaller groups. This breakout time will be organized around modules that we prepared to illustrate analytic practice with either R or STATA. Lunch can be local, including inexpensive sandwiches or ethnic restaurants. During the evenings, we envisage that most dinners will be taken communally in local, inexpensive restaurants. The town of Evanston is beautiful in the summer and nearby Chicago offers plenty of leisure options for the weekend.

The instructors will be Thomas Cook of Northwestern University, Will Shadish of the University of California at Merced, Peter Steiner from the University of Wisconsin- Madison, Coady Wing from Indiana University at Bloomington, and Vivian Wong from the University of Virginia. Taken together they have had considerable experience in the design and analysis of randomized experiments, regression discontinuity designs, interrupted time series, and many other forms of non-experimental practice. All have backgrounds in education research, with three teaching graduate students and postdocs in education. Together they know the literature, not just in education, but also in statistics, psychology, economics, and public policy.

For further information, please contact Ms. Rebecca Morris at rebecca.morris@northwestern.edu

/by

Research Event in March

Faculty and doctoral students are cordially invited to attend:

OER Professorship Symposium

with Stephen Smith, Fien Professor; Pat Snyder, Lawrence Professor; and Ester de Jong, B.O. Smith Professor 

Monday, March 16, 2015
12:00 pm – 1:00 pm
Terrace Room

Bring your brown bag lunch. Refreshments and cookies will be served.

RSVP to Rosie Connolly by Friday, March 13: rconnolly@coe.ufl.edu

/by

Awarded Projects for February 2015

College of Education
Awarded Projects
February 2015
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Performance Adjustments to School Districts
Project Period: 7/1/2014 – 6/30/2015
Award Amount: $51,292

 

/by

Submitted Projects for February 2015

College of Education
Submitted Projects
February 2015
Principal Investigator: Philip Poekert (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Early Learning Coalition of Miami Dade/Monroe
Proposal Title: Early Childhood Development Services #2015-5
Requested Amount: $120,000
Principal Investigator: Thomasenia Lott Adams (Dean’s Area)
Co-PI: Jennifer Curtis (College of Engineering), Henry “Hank” Frierson (UF Graduate School), Juan Gilbert (Computer & Information Science & Engineering), R. Elaine Turner (College of Agricultural & Life Sciences)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: In Pursuit of the National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers
Requested Amount: $135,579
Principal Investigator: Feihong Wang (AZCEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: Patricia Snyder (AZCEECS/SESPECS), Maureen Conroy (AZCEECS/SESPECS), James Algina (AZCEECS/SESPECS)
Funding Agency: National Institutes of Health
Proposal Title: Validation of a Task Engagement Factor in Early Childhood and Exploration of its Mediating Role in Children’s Executive Function and Academic Performance
Requested Amount: $150,000
Principal Investigator: Elliott Douglas (Materials Science and Engineering)
Co-PI: David Therriault (SHDOSE)
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: Collaborative Research: Ambiguity as Choice: How Engineers Approach Ill-Structured Problems
Requested Amount: $310,953

 

/by

Calling Your Program Officer: The Need to Establish Close Ties

To call or not to call? The decision to contact an agency can make or break a project. Often, faculty do not call or email a program officer about a pending proposal, or if they do, they fail to ask key questions.

Program officers have shared their disappointment at receiving a proposal that might have been fundable but missed key information in the RFP that would have been caught in a conversation, or if the program officer had gotten to read a draft. Some RFPs require interpretation, and others have hidden requirements that only personal contact will bring out.

In other instances, what looks like a good fit based on the RFP or on a web page may have a very different backstory that can be learned in a few minutes on the phone with a program officer. Faculty members can invest hours in proposal development, only to learn later that the idea was outside of the agency’s area of consideration.

Contacting an agency also shows you are serious about the process, especially when you have good questions. Calling and asking questions can save a lot of time. Some key questions you can ask program officers include the following:

  • Does this program still exist and is it funded? Is there still funding available for a new program? A call to the program officer will reveal the agency’s intent.
  • Is my institution the right applicant? In some cases, the RFP may state that institutions of higher education are eligible, but when the funding list comes out, nonprofit agencies other than colleges and universities may dominate.
  • Are certain types of expenses allowed/or not allowed? Finding out the key areas that can and cannot be put in the budget of a grant can help produce a winning proposal, particularly when funding is tight and competition is fierce.
  • Is there a match required for this proposal? What kinds of resources count toward a match (Cash? In-kind contributions?) How do commitments need to be documented at the time of grant submission? Agencies are idiosyncratic in how they view cost-sharing, and missing this key detail can cost you project funding.
  • How is this project going to be evaluated? What evidence of impact/success will be needed as part of the project, which therefore needs to be built into the evaluation component of the application. Agencies are increasingly looking for evidence that the program “makes a difference,” but this can be highly agency- and program-specific.

Even if your proposal is not funded, keep in contact with the agency. Request the comments on the proposal, and if there are questions, contact the program officer to clarify why you were denied. While it depends on the agency and individual, program officers can give you tips for the next time, and help interpret your chances of approval in the future.

If funded, the relationship with the program officer (or other representative of the funding agency) changes. This person will form part of the team that monitors your progress on the project. Always keep in contact with a program officer after being funded—do not make program officers come looking for you.

In summary, the relationships you build and manage with program officers will contribute to your long-term success.

Excerpted from “Reach Out to Your Program Officer,” by Russell Olwell, Inside Higher Ed, an online source for news, opinion, and jobs for all of higher education

/by

Florida Minority Cancer Research and Training Center Announces Grand Opening

The executive leadership, program directors, and council/committee members of the Florida Minority Cancer Research and Training (MiCaRT) Center are pleased to announce the grand opening of the MiCaRT Center, February 16–20, at the University of Florida.

Highlights of the event include the following:

  • Breakfast and Informational Session at the Health Professions, Nursing, Pharmacy (HPNP) Atrium on Feb 16.
  • Dinner and Prostate Cancer Disparities Research Retreat at HPNP on Feb 17.
  • Lunch and Cancer Health Disparities Research Showcase (poster presentations) for UF and FAMU investigators at the Cancer and Genetics Research Complex (CGRC) Atrium on Feb 18. If you are interested in participating in the research showcase, please forward the following documents to K. Cameron Schiller at kschiller@cop.ufl.edu by Thursday, Feb 12:
    1. Name, dept/college affiliation, and email address
    2. NIH bio with personal statement that clearly specifies expertise
    3. Expressed interest in poster presentation
  • Virtual Open House on Feb 19.
  • Lunch and Distinguished Lecture by renowned breast cancer scientist, Dr. Olufunmilayo Olopade (University of Chicago), at CGRC on Feb 20.

View the complete Grand Opening Celebration announcement on the UFHealth website.

To view the keynote presentations via web video streaming, access as follows:

Feb 17, 4:00–5:00pm:

Dr. Camille Ragin (Investigating Prostate Cancer Risk in Black men: What Really Matters?)

http://mediasite.video.ufl.edu/Mediasite/Play/fc92e431848a41f3ada0a0f605610a491d

Feb 18, 11:00 am – 12:30pm:

Dr. Clayton Yates (Impact of Epigenetic Regulators on the Outcome of African American Prostate & Breast Cancer Patients)

http://mediasite.video.ufl.edu/Mediasite/Play/2136231d986541e39a28fa861aff56871d

The Florida MiCaRT Center is an NIH/National Cancer Institute collaborative partnership between University of Florida and Florida A&M University (NIH/NCI P20CA192992)

/by

NSF Completes Updates to FastLane and Research.gov

On January 26, 2015, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released updates to FastLane and Research.gov.

A revised version of the Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 15-1) was issued on November 20, 2014, which incorporates the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), as well as other policy updates. FastLane and Research.gov have been updated to support the revised PAPPG.

Updates to FastLane

The following changes have been made to FastLane:

  • Budget Form Update: The budget form has been updated so that the “Residual Funds” line (Line K) is not editable for all programs except Small Business as such “Residual Funds” has been renamed to “Small Business Fee.”
  • Budget Justification Upload: The budget justification can no longer be entered as text. Awardees are required to upload a budget justification for each organization added to the budget via an upload screen.
  • Cost Sharing Notifications Requirement: The requirement that only awards with cost sharing of $500,000 or more must submit a cost sharing certificate has been modified to support the revised policy which specifies that cost sharing notifications must be submitted by all awardees with awards that include cost sharing.
  • New Funding Mechanism: The FastLane proposal cover sheet has been updated to include the new funding mechanism type, Ideas Lab. Ideas Lab is designed to support the development and implementation of creative and innovative project ideas. These projects are typically high-risk/high-impact as they represent new and unproven ideas, approaches, and/or technologies.

FastLane Automated Compliance Checks

Beginning January 26, 2015, FastLane will run an additional 24 automated checks on proposals to ensure they comply with requirements outlined in the PAPPG, Chapter II.C.2of the Grants Proposal Guide (GPG). Detailed below, these checks validate a proposal for compliance with page count, proposal sections per type of funding mechanism and budget-related rules for proposals submitted in response to the GPG, Program Announcements, and Program Descriptions.

  • Page Count: Page count rules are enforced on the following proposal sections:
    • Project Description: 15-page limit [exceptions: 8-page limit for Early-Concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER), and 5-page limit for Rapid Response Research (RAPID)]
    • Budget Justification: 3-page limit for the proposing institution and a separate, 3-page limit for each sub-recipient organization
    • Mentoring Plan: 1-page limit
    • Data Management Plan: 2-page limit
  • Budget: Budget-related checks focus primarily on proposal duration and requested amount. For example, the system enforces a maximum requested amount of $200,000 for a RAPID proposal and $300,000 for an EAGER proposal.
  • Proposal Section: Proposal sections are enforced by their funding mechanism for Program Announcement, Program Description, and other GPG-type funding opportunities.

The checks detailed above are triggered when the “Check Proposal,” “Forward to SPO,” or “Submit Proposal” functions are selected by a proposer or proposing organization. Depending on the rule being checked, a warning or error message displays when a proposal is found to be non-compliant. If an error message appears, the organization will not be able to submit the proposal until it is compliant. For a detailed list of all compliance checks, see Automated Proposal Compliance Checks for Full Proposals Effective January 26, 2015 on the NSF Automated Compliance Checking of NSF Proposals webpage.

Updates to Research.gov

NSF has completed another round of user enhancements to Research.gov based on feedback received from the community and recommendations from usability experts. These changes will begin to prepare the research community for the Research.gov/FastLane integration while improving the awardee experience.

The following enhancements have been implemented:

  • Updated Branding: The logo, header, footer, and background have been updated for consistency with current NSF branding.
  • Improved Look and Feel: Page widths and font size have been modified in project reports and the Award Cash Management $ervice (ACM$) in order to optimize layout and ease of reading for each visitor’s screen resolution.
  • Streamlined Navigation: The site has been streamlined by removing the left navigation bar and adding top-level navigation across Research.gov.
  • Simplified Login: Login options have been consolidated onto one page in order to simplify the process.
  • Expanded Help: The Research.gov Live Help service has been expanded to now include support for logging in and changing a password.
/by

NVivo Webinar for Your Department, Research Team, or Class

NVivo is offering a complimentary webinar demonstration of its software for your department, research team, or class.

NVivo is software that helps you organize, capture, manage, explore, and understand your unstructured qualitative and mixed-methods data (e.g., interviews, survey responses, website data, images, videos and social media posts), enabling you to uncover new insight and easily share your findings, individually or as part of a team.

The live webinar provides an overview of what NVivo can do, including how to complete the following:

  • Set up a project
  • Import your text data
  • Organize your content
  • Begin the coding process to assist in identifying possible themes, topics, and trends

To schedule a complimentary demonstration, contact Judith Eastbrook, Business Development Manager, QSR International, at (617) 607-5117 or j.eastbrook@qsrinternational.com.

/by

Awarded Projects for January 2015

College of Education
Awarded Projects
January 2015
Principal Investigator: Mary McLean (AZCEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: University of Washington (Subcontract: National Institutes of Health Flow Through)
Project Title: Head Start National Center for Quality Teaching and Learning
Project Period: 9/15/2014 – 9/14/2015
Award Amount: $237,251
Principal Investigator: Elizabeth Bondy (STL)
Co-PI: Ester de Jong (STL), Suzanne Colvin (STL)
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Advancing the Development of Preservice Teachers (ADePT)
Project Period: 8/15/2014 – 7/31/2017
Award Amount: $2,718,695
Principal Investigator: Christy Gabbard (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: Catherine Atria (P.K. Yonge)
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: District Instructional Leadership and Faculty Development Grant
Project Period: 7/1/2014 – 6/30/2015
Award Amount: $7,908

 

/by

Submitted Projects for January 2015

College of Education
Submitted Projects
January 2015
Principal Investigator:  Linda Behar-Horenstein (SHDOSE)
Co-PI: Virginia Dodd (Community Dentistry and Behavioral Science)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: Enhancing Social Responsibility and Social Accountability Among Prospective Dentists via Community Engagement
Requested Amount: $99,987
Principal Investigator: Sylvia Boynton (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Co-PI: Philip Poekert (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Funding Agency: Alachua County Schools
Proposal Title: Reaching All Readers: A K-5 Series of Reading Modules, Part 2 – Spring 2015
Requested Amount: $12,000
Principal Investigator: Kara Dawson (STL)
Co-PI: Pavlo “Pasha” Antonenko (STL), Albert Ritzhaupt (STL), Carole Beal (STL), Linda Lombardino (SESPECS), Andreas Keil (Department of Psychology)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: Converging Behavioral and Psychophysical Measures: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Multimedia Learning Conditions with Dyslexic Learners
Requested Amount: $94,458
Principal Investigator: Dennis Kramer (SHDOSE)
Co-PI: Kshitij Khare (Department of Statistics)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: E-Success (Supporting Undergraduate Course and Co-curricular Exploration through Strategic Supports): The Integration of Mobile App Technology and Modern Regression Techniques to Improve Student Retention and Matriculation Within Florida Community Colleges
Requested Amount: $98,130
Principal Investigator: Brian Reichow (AZCEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: Patricia Snyder (AZCEECS/SESPECS), Maureen Conroy (AZCEECS/SESPECS)
Funding Agency: National Institutes of Health
Proposal Title: Adaptation and Evaluation of World Health Organization Caregiver Skills Training Program for Caregivers of Children with Developmental Disorders in Turkey
Requested Amount: $333,950

 

/by

COE Accomplishments in 2014

Happy New Year

Welcome Back!

We want to congratulate the COE faculty for their accomplishments in 2014 and look forward to continued success in 2015. We are constantly on the lookout for opportunities for external funding to share. Contact us—we are here to help! Listed below are some noteworthy statistics from the 2013-2014 fiscal year:

  • COE faculty members in all schools and centers submitted 70 proposals, requesting $32.2 million. Proposals were submitted to 41 different agencies including:
    • One proposal to the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
    • Two to the U.S. Department of Justice (US DOJ)
    • Eight to the U.S. Department of Education (US DOE), including one to the Institute of Education Sciences (IES)
    • Six for IES subcontracts
    • Ten to the National Science Foundation (NSF)
    • Seven to the Florida Department of Education (FL DOE)
    • Two to the Spencer Foundation
  • Research funding per faculty member totaled over $389,653. Of the 191 eligible COE faculty members, 56 (29.3%) submitted proposals for external funding as principal investigator (PI) or Co-PI.
  • COE PIs and Co-PIs received funding for 30 new proposals totaling over $8 million. These new awards included two contracts from the NSF.
  • Of the total dollar amount of newly funded awards, 7% was funded by federal agencies or organizations.
  • The total number of newly funded awards increased by 36.4% as compared to the previous fiscal year.
  • COE schools and centers have 71 currently funded projects totaling over $74.4 million.
  • Of the total dollar amount of currently funded projects, 72% were funded by federal agencies or organizations.
  • The COE experienced a 6.0% increase in the total number of currently funded projects as compared to the previous fiscal year.

View the complete 2013-2014 OER Annual Report.

/by

NSF Updates Policies and Procedures Guide

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has issued an updated version of its Proposal and Awards Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG), effective December 26, 2014. The PAPPG is NSF’s implementation of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Guidance.

Please see Significant Changes and Clarifications to the PAPPG for a summary of the revisions.

For guidance on proposals submitted or due, and awards made before December 26, 2014, continue to reference the PAPPG dated February 2014.

/by