Humanities Proposal Review Process January 24, 2014 University of Southern Mississippi Sandra George Richard Wellons.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Presenters: Maureen Chalmers (NWCC) and Terry Delaney(TRCC)
Advertisements

Grant Reviews A Tutorial on How to Participate on a DD Council Grant Review Panel Play.
Secret 21 Triple Your Chances Of Getting Your Grant Funding With a Pre-Proposal Contact.
1 Performance Assessment An NSF Perspective MJ Suiter Budget, Finance and Awards NSF.
Intro to Grant-Seeking Presented by Bess de Farber Library Grants Manager George A. Smathers Libraries University of Florida February 09,
Governor’s Grants Office Higher Education Conference Bowie State University Bowie, Maryland May 22, 2012.
Carol Shields, Chair, Research Council Successful Research Council Grants
INCREASING THE PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS WITH COMPETITIVE GRANT PROPOSALS.
NSF Merit Review and Proposal Preparation Mark Courtney, Ph.D Adjunct, Department of Biology New Mexico State University 24 September 2008.
How to Write Grants Version 2009.
Staff Compensation Program Update
Instructional and Research Technologies Symposium for the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences The NEH Digital Humanities Initiative March 21, 2007.
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
1. Types of Awards 2. Identify Funding Opportunities 3. How to find grant opportunities from resources available to Cooperative Extension, UW-Extension,
2012 ToolBox Grant Cycle. What is capacity building? “Capacity building is about strengthening management systems and governance in organizations.” Making.
PARTICIPATING IN EX APPOINTMENT PROCESSES
The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Presented by Mary Huffman for the 2010 Oklahoma State Board of Regents Grant Writing Institute.
Emerging Artist *Artist statement *Work samples Established Artist *Artist statement *Work samples *Evidence of contributions to the local arts community.
TPAC GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT GRANT (GOS)
Tips for Writing a Successful Grant Proposal Diana Lipscomb Associate Dean for Faculty and Research CCAS.
Office of Sponsored Programs November  Focus on What is Important  Proposal Structure  Proposal Development Process  Proposal Review.
NEA Design Program Art Works Guidelines Webinar Jason Schupbach Apply:
UTIA Promotion & Tenure Workshop May 19, 2015 UTIA Promotion & Tenure Workshop May 19, 2015 Overall Philosophy: Maximize faculty FTE while maintaining.
Grassroots Arts Program Partnership between local arts councils and NC Arts Council. All 100 counties in NC receive Grassroots arts program funds. In.
A Roadmap to Success Writing an Effective Research Grant Proposal Bob Miller, PhD Regents Professor Oklahoma State University 2011 Bob Miller, PhD Regents.
NEH Challenge Grant Workshop Appalachian College Association Summit Abingdon, VA October 23, 2010.
NEH 101: Opportunities and Initiatives University of Baltimore March 11, 2011 Division of Research Programs National Endowment for the Humanities.
Outcome Based Evaluation for Digital Library Projects and Services
Local Arts Council Subgranting Workshop. Grassroots Arts Program Partnership between local arts councils and NC Arts Council. All 100 counties in NC receive.
LITERATURE Art Works Guidelines Webinar Amy Stolls Apply:
Application-Writing Workshop January 11, 2007 Co-sponsored by Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, and Washington University in St. Louis.
Developing and Writing Winning Individual, Corporate and Foundation Proposals Robin Heller, Director, Corporate and Foundation Philanthropy, BBBSA Robert.
Writing More Effective NSF Proposals Jeanne R. Small Oklahoma City, Oklahoma March 2, 2006 Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) National Science Foundation.
Research Program Overview National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research Robert J. Jaeger, Ph.D. Interagency and International Affairs Interagency.
Page 1 RESEARCH EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK : RESEARCH IMPACT ASESSMENT LESSONS FROM THE PILOT EXERCISE Professor John Marshall Director Academic Research Development.
Webinar on Reporting and Evaluation for Museums for America Grantees January 6-8, 2009.
National Center for Information and Technical Support for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities (NCITSPSD) NCITSPSD Technical Assistance Workshop Orientation.
BEST PRACTICES by Gil Harootunian, PhD, Director, ORSP A Dozen Pieces of Tested Advice.
Governance Subcommittee James Dobbins, Chair. Dobbins – Governance 13 December 2010 The Summary Mission Statement Foster engagement between the U.S. society.
1 Faculty Motivation and Policies Steven R. Hall Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair of the MIT Faculty.
Office of the Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies Office of Research Development and Proposal Coordination.
The NEH Digital Humanities Initiative April 23-25, 2007.
Research and Creative Activity Sara McLaughlin Mitchell Department of Political Science University of Iowa.
Promotions on the Clinician Educator Track Larry L. Swift, Ph.D. Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs Department of Pathology, Microbiology & Immunology.
Update on Funding Opportunities at the NEA and NEH Carrie Holbo (NEA) Stefanie Walker (NEH) Daniel Sack (NEH)
Research grants opportunities and applications. Richard Arnold, Muskingum University.
1Mobile Computing Systems © 2001 Carnegie Mellon University Writing a Successful NSF Proposal November 4, 2003 Website: nsf.gov.
Presented by the College of Arts & Sciences with the Office of Contracts and Grants University of San Francisco April 2012.
Limited Submissions NCURA Region III Spring Meeting.
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
A Look at the Research Foundation of SUNY We are Here To Help You!
Office of the Vice President for Research CLA Proposals Barbara Scott Murdock Institute for Global Studies CLA Grants Support Team
Monique Lacerte-Roth Community Arts Development and Partnerships Officer Katherine Leong Publishing and Outreach Officer.
Can I Get a Grant for That? Strategically Researching, Writing, and Administering Grants for Archives Projects Kelsey Scouten Bates Assistant Archivist,
Overview of the NEH’s Digital Humanities Initiative
Evaluation of proposals Alan Cross European Commission.
Access to Historical Records: An Overview (and Several Tips) You may either have ATT Connect call you or dial in yourself Access code: Alex Lorch,
Governance Subcommittee
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
Identifying Programs and Contacting Program Directors
Humanities Center January 19, 2018
National Endowment for the Humanities
Office of Grant Resources
DOCUMENTING MODERN LIVING
Extending “Scholarship” to Including Teaching in a Digital World
Grassroots Arts Program Subgranting Workshop
BEST PRACTICES A Dozen Pieces of Tested Advice by Gil Harootunian, PhD
Presentation transcript:

Humanities Proposal Review Process January 24, 2014 University of Southern Mississippi Sandra George Richard Wellons

© 2014 AASCU Know Your Funder! All federal agencies and foundations have different grants management/review processes and “cultures” Understand the Culture: A good proposal must “fit” the mission/goal of the agency or foundation. Ask For Help: Your Sponsored Programs Office and GRC can help. - Your project MUST fit the goals of the grant. - Don’t force the grant to fit the your project. 3

One of the best ways to learn what makes a successful proposal is to participate in the review process as a panelist. ED: Varies by office - for the Office of Post-Secondary Education visit OPE’s Program Resources Page urces.html urces.html NEA: for NEH: Register at NEH’s Panelists and Reviewers Information System (PRISM) IMLS: Register as a library or museum reviewer at © 2014 AASCU

U.S. Department of Education (ED) Funds variety of organizations Colleges and Universities Local Schools State Education Departments Community-based Organizations Funding driven by agency priorities States exactly what it wants to see in a grant proposal Doesn’t look to universities for funding ideas 5

ED Review Process ED has many more "internal" reviews than peer reviews. Peer review panels mostly consist of former grant recipients. Unfortunately, ED publishes minimal information about their review process. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, ASK THE PROGRAM OFFICER. © 2014 AASCU 6

ED Sample Review Process Narrative descriptions should follow the criteria below 100 possible points for all selection criteria Don’t forget the weighted subcriteria! 1.Need for Project - 15 points 2.Significance - 20 points 3.Quality of the Project Design - 30 points 4.Quality of Project Personnel - 10 points 5.Quality of the Project Evaluation - 25 points © 2014 AASCU 7

1.Reviewers read applications individually, then come together for panel review 2.Proposals are reviewed and ranked (decline applications receive explanation letter) 3.Funding is allocated “top down” until spent 4.If interested in becoming a reviewer for the Office of Postsecondary Education, apply anytime at urces.html urces.html 5.If interested in becoming a reviewer for any other ED office, contact the appropriate program manager 8

Helpful ED Websites General ED grant information - index.html index.html Grant Application Packages - dex.html dex.html Funding forecast for each Year - forecast.html Staff First name.last © 2014 AASCU 9

Helpful ED Websites General ED grant information - index.html index.html Grant Application Packages - dex.html dex.html Funding forecast for each Year - forecast.html Staff First name.last © 2014 AASCU 10

Overall Mission: Fund and promote artistic excellence, creativity, and innovation for the benefit of individuals and communities. 11 © 2014 AASCU

Artistic Excellence Quality of the artists, arts organizations, arts education providers, works of art, or services that the project will involve, as appropriate. Artistic significance of the project. Artistic Merit Creating art that meets the highest standards of excellence. Engaging the public with diverse and excellent art. Enabling participants to acquire knowledge or skills in the arts. Strengthening communities through the arts. Refer to individual program guidelines for further criteria and specific interpretations of the above criteria. 12 © 2014 AASCU

3 Level Process: 1. Review by independent, national panels of artists and arts experts. Panel reviewers evaluate applications based on artistic excellence, merit, and program guidelines. 2. National Council on the Arts, an advisory body comprised of renowned artists, distinguished scholars, arts patrons appointed by the President, and members of Congress (who serve ex officio). The council recommends which applications to fund and which to reject. 3. NEA Chairman reviews applications recommended by the Council and makes the final decision on all grant awards. © 2014 AASCU 13

NEA’s Reading Room contains sample funded application narratives from all major programs and most disciplines. NEA’s live and archived webinars explain application guidelines for each program. Archived webinars can be found on NEA program websites. NEA’s current Art Works series can be found here. webinars webinars 14 © 2014 AASCU

Overall Mission The National Endowment for the Humanities serves and strengthens our nation by supporting high quality projects and programs in the humanities and by making the humanities available to all Americans. 15 © 2014 AASCU

Humanities significance Applicant’s abilities and qualifications Proposal’s clarity of expression Project’s feasibility, design, cost, and work plan Additional review criteria may vary from program to program 16 © 2014 AASCU

4 Levels of Review: 1.Panel Review by outside experts in a program’s relevant subject areas. 2.Staff Review – the staff organizes the panel results, summarizes the panelists’ reviews of the highest- rated applications, adds comments of fact, and makes recommendations for the National council. 3.National Council on the Humanities, an advisory body of twenty-six members who have distinguished themselves in the humanities, makes recommendations to the Chairman. 4.NEH Chairman reviews applications recommended by the Council and makes the final decision on all grant awards. © 2014 AASCU 17

Each proposal is rated individually by peer reviewers. They are not ranked against each other in the peer review stage. NEH uses the following rating scale: E for Excellent, VG for Very Good G for Good SM for Some Merit NC for Not Competitive © 2014 AASCU 18

Explore your NEH program’s web page. Aside from program guidelines and application forms, NEH program web pages contain links to: Funded application narratives Sample budgets Answers to frequently asked questions Funding ratios and program statistics from previous years. 19 © 2014 AASCU

Final Thoughts HOW is just as important as WHAT you present to the reviewer REMEMBER: “Publication is about science, and grant writing is about marketing.” If, at first, you don’t succeed, TRY, TRY AGAIN! © 2014 AASCU 20

21

Digital Humanities Start-Up Grants: Level One Acting as peer reviewers, we will review and rate two proposals for the above program. Looking beyond the peer review stage we will imagine a situation where we must choose between the programs, which will get funded. 22 © 2014 AASCU