Two Year College Bert E. Holmes Carson Distinguished Chair of Science at UNC-Asheville and formerly Program Officer in Division of Undergraduate Education at NSF Grove Park Inn – Asheville, NC 12 September, 2011

Question 1 – Challenges to Submitting Grants 1. Challenges related to faculty time and incentives to develop proposals and manage grant projects – Competing priorities – colleges are focused on teaching mission 2. Lack of awareness of NSF grant opportunities and the process to apply – Limited access to successful proposal examples – Issue of innovation – colleges daunted by request for “innovation” in proposals and what’s required / expected – Understanding NSF solicitations Money for equipment Credentials of PIs Diversity “requirements”

Question 1 – Challenges to Submitting Grants 3. Institutional capacity / lack of college infrastructure to apply for and manage federal awards – How to establish/manage Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) – Lack of Grants Management Office/ Sponsored Projects Office – How to establish / negotiate indirect cost rates 4. Lack of consistent support from college administration to go after and support federal awards – Institutional culture

Question 1 – Challenges to Submitting Grants 5. Lack of expertise in grant writing – College does not have grant writer – College has a grant writer – but there is a disconnect between subject matter experts/faculty and grant writer in communicating proposal needs 6. Establishing Internal and External Partnerships and Collaborations – External: How to connect with business/industry How to establish partnerships with other educational institutions – Internal: How to assemble grants management team/collaborators from PI, Co-PI, evaluator, etc.

Question 1 – Challenges to Submitting Grants 7. Lack of understanding of grant review and award process – Insecurity of who exactly is reviewing proposal – Perception that some RFPs are geared more toward four-year universities – Perception that reviewers are hostile to community college submissions 8. Limited resources for colleges interested in submitting proposals and managing federal award – Mentoring programs for faculty interested in pursuing grants – Grant writing and grants management webinars – Professional development/leadership development for faculty

Question 1 – Challenges to Submitting Grants Others challenges identified: Budgeting Knowledge: Lack of overall budgeting knowledge of PIs/Co-PIs – Challenges with working with college financial offices Evaluation: Effective evaluation – how to develop an evaluation plan; find a qualified evaluator Sustainability: Project sustainability, post grant-term Technical Challenges: Challenges with technical portions of grant submissions; i.e. using FastLane, grants.gov Institutional research capacity of community colleges – issues with tracking students, data management plans, and accountability Intimidating Competition: Intimidated by competition of grants awards process Unclear Return on Investment to College: Overall issue with college seeing value/return on investment for applying and receiving a federal award Budget Challenges: Local/state budget challenges

How can NSF address these issues? How to find out about developing successful proposals – NSF Community College Days – Regular request of a PD to come do a funding opportunities and proposal writing workshop Resources for Potential PIs – NSF PI Guide – deals w/ program management- – Other Resources: ; Grant Review – Encourage CC people to sign up Evalu-ATE – A resource for everyone involved in evaluation

How can NSF address these issues? Diversity requirements? – There is no specific requirement Need for PhD degree for PI? – No. Principal Investigator needs to have necessary expertise to carry out project, but doesn’t need a PhD ROI to Institution? – All projects build infrastructure & faculty expertise and increase institutional visibility Equipment requests? – Careful read of solicitation. Some allow for purchase tied to project goals

How can NSF address these issues? Proposal Rules? – Two sources: Grant Proposal Guide Actual Solicitation Can we make FastLane more CC friendly? – Start early and practice – Project reporting help sheets

Question 2 – Key STEM Issues facing Colleges 1. Improve student readiness (with proven math curriculum) and other promising practices What can community colleges do? Involve current K-12 teachers in professional development at community colleges Foster real science and math learning Improve communication with K-12 students and families including first-year experience Support innovative strategies in developmental education Put developmental education in STEM courses

The END

NSF Proposal Rules? – Two sources: Grant Proposal Guide Actual Solicitation Can we make FastLane more CC friendly? – Start early and practice – Project reporting help sheets

How to Demonstrate a Strong Partnership Individuals from all institutions have clear roles and communication structures Management plan includes a description of how communication, meetings, roles, division of responsibilities, and reporting will occur Distribution of resources is appropriate to the scope of the work All partners contribute to the work and benefit from it Letters of commitment are provided from non-lead partners (consult the solicitation for which letters are required, and which are optional)

What Makes a Proposal Competitive? Original ideas Succinct, focused project plan Realistic amount of work Sufficient detail provided Cost effective High impact Knowledge and experience of PIs Contribution to the field Rationale and evidence of potential effectiveness Likelihood the project will be sustained Solid evaluation plan

Tips for Success Consult the program solicitation and NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 10-1) Test drive FastLane Alert the Sponsored Research Office Follow page and font size limits Be aware of other projects and advances in the field Cite the literature Provide details Discuss prior results Include evaluation plan with timelines and benchmarks

Tips for Success Put yourself in the reviewers’ place Consider reviewers’ comments if resubmitting proposal Have someone else read the proposal Spell check; grammar check Meet deadlines Follow NSF requirements for proposals involving Human Subjects Call or NSF Program Officers

Return Without Review Submitted after deadline Fail to separately and explicitly address intellectual merit and broader impacts in the Project Summary Fail to follow formatting (e. g. page limitation, font size, and margin limits) requirements Fail to provide describe mentoring activities for postdoctoral researchers if included in proposed budget

Not ready to submit a proposal this year? Consider serving as a reviewer.