“$HOW ME THE MONEY”: Funding Opportunities in the USDA Joint Meetings of AAEA & RSS July, 2003 Montreal, Quebec

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES The National Research Initiative Competitive Programs Unit Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE PROGRAM RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM OTHER NRI PROGRAMS Research programs Integrated programs OTHER USDA PROGRAMS

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE PROGRAM Forces that affect competitiveness and sustainability of U.S. food, fiber, and bio-based products in domestic and/or international markets Implications of globalization... Implications of U.S. and world trade policy, regulation, and practices... Effects of macroeconomic policy, industry structure, business behavior, and/or changing consumer behavior on U.S. food, fiber, and bio-based products and the agricultural and rural sectors.

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Forces and opportunities that affect rural places and the people who live there Implications of globalization for rural community viability and prosperity Consequences of structural changes in agriculture and their affect on rural communities and landscapes Rural development potential of agricultural and non- agricultural rural entrepreneurship

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE, and RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Request for Applications (RFA) posted to CSREES website: Click on “Funding Opportunities” National Research Initiative FY2004 RFA August 1, 2003)

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE, and RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS FY2004 Proposals due in early December, 2003 Funding ceiling will rise in FY2004 Awards are planned at $ K for 3-4 years

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE, and RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Funding ceiling will rise in FY2004, but Program budget not expected to increase Problem-centered, rather than discipline-centered –FY2003 applicants represented >20 disciplines Multidisciplinary approaches encouraged Policy implications bonus Practical implementation bonus

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE, and RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Patricia (Pat) C. Hipple, Ph.D. National Program Leader and Program Director Phone:

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ADDITIONAL NRI PROGRAMS NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT NUTRITION, FOOD SAFETY, and HEALTH ANIMALS BIOLOGY and MANAGEMENT of PESTS and BENEFITICAL ORGANISMS PLANTS ENHANCING VALUE and USE of AGRICULTURAL and FOREST PRODUCTS

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES NATURAL RESOURCES and the ENVIRONMENT Plants and Environmental Adaptation Managed Ecosystems Soils and Soil Biology Watershed Process and Water Resources

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES NUTRITION, FOOD SAFETY, AND HEALTH Improving Human Nutrition for Optimal Health Food Safety Epidemiological Approaches for Food Safety Food Safety Organized Research Unit

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ANIMALS Animal Reproduction Animal Growth and Nutrient Utilization Animal Genomics Animal Genome Reagent and Tool Development Animal Protection

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES BIOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF PESTS AND BENEFICIAL ORGANISMS Integrative Biology of Arthropods and Nematodes Arthropod and Nematode Gateways to Biology and Genomics Biology of Plant-Microbe Associations Biology of Weedy Invasive Plants

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES PLANTS Plant Genome Genetic Processes and Mechanisms of Crop Plants Plant Translational Genomics Organized Research Unit Developmental Processes of Crop Plants Biochemistry of Plants and Plant Symbionts

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ENHANCING VALUE and USE of AGRICULTURAL and FOREST PRODUCTS Improving Food Quality Biobased Products and Bioenergy Production Research Improved Utilization of Wood and Wood Fiber

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES NRI INTEGRATED PROGRAMS AIR QUALITY HUMAN NUTRITION AND OBESITY ANIMAL BIOSECURITY PLANT BIOSECURITY HOMELAND SECURITY TRAINING FUNCTIONAL GENOMICS OF Animals Insects and Mites Microbes Plants

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES OTHER USDA/CSREES PROGRAMS New Integrated Programs through the NRI 406 Integrated Programs –Biotechnology Risk Assessment –National Integrated Food Safety Initiative –Water Quality –Pest Management SBIR – Small Business Innovation Research National Needs Graduate Fellowships Higher Education Challenge Grants

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES BEYOND CSREES Economic Research Service (ERS) Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Program (FANRP) –Workforce Attachment, Income Volatility, & Administrative Costs –Food Assistance as a Safety Net –Targeting High Needs Subgroups –Eating Patterns, Food Choices, and Health Outcomes –Nutrition Education: Public and Private Returns on Information

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES BEYOND CSREES Rural Business-Cooperative Services (RBCS) Value-Added Agricultural Marketing Development Grant Agricultural Marketing Resource Center Agriculture Innovation Center Demonstration Project Rural Cooperative Development Grant Research on Rural Cooperative Opportunities and Problems Research on Cooperative Energy Alternatives Unsolicited Cooperative Research Agreements

CAPACITY-BUILDING OPPORTUNITIES COMPETITIVE PROGRAMS Serve as an Ad Hoc (External) Reviewer of Requests for Applications Serve as a Panel Member for Competitive Programs Serve as a Panel Manager for Competitive Programs Participate in USDA “Listening Sessions” to Develop Competitive Programs, Advise Research Directions, and Devise Requests for Application Rotational Service as USDA as an IPA, LOA, Chief Science Advisor, Chief Education Advisor, or Other

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS (RFA) –Developed annually by the CSREES with input from stakeholders RFA is published –In the Federal Register in late July, and –Posted to the CSREES website by August 1

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE Project Directors (formerly, Principal Investigators) –Develop proposal of research in accordance with »Accepted standards of discipline »Specific NRI program goals »Competitive program eligibility requirements »Application constructions rules laid out in RFA (i.e., page length, formatting, form completion, etc.)

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE National Program Leader and/or Panel Manager –Identify and invite prospective panel members »Expertise and research experience to “cover” portfolio of applications »Diverse representation by professional rank, geography, experience, minority-status –Assign proposals for peer-review »5-6 external (ad hoc) reviewers »3 panelists –Organize and conduct panel meeting »Panelists evaluate, discuss, and rank each proposal »Highest ranked proposals are funded »Make award recommendations and administer grants »Provide feedback and consultation on declined proposals

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE From release of RFA to issuance of awards and declines takes 1 year. If you have questions during any part of this process, CONTACT the NPL! address and telephone number of each responsible NPL is provided with each program description in the RFA.

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE Prepare EARLY for submission by studying former RFAs and program descriptions. Get a copy of a successful grant proposal! Work CLOSELY with your Office of Contracts and Sponsored Programs!

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE Review Process Evaluation Criteria Confidentiality Conflicts of Interest Awards Declines

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Review Process Ground Rules Single-blind Process Confidentiality Conflicts of Interest Diversity of Reviewers

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Confidentiality Contents of any proposal Identity of panel members and reviewers Proceeding of panel meeting Contents of any review (outside panel & PI)

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Conflicts of Interest Applicants identify all COIs in application Reviewers identify themselves as COIs and decline to review Panelist identify themselves as COIs and are sequestered and not allowed to participate in discussion, rating, ranking, and funding decisions

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Conflicts of Interest continued Lifetime – graduate advisors/advisees Current – applications from same institution 4 years – former institutions, former co-authors, former research collaborators Other – if reviewer holds any financial stake in the outcome of a proposal

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Review Process 5-6 external (ad hoc) reviewers –critique between 1 and 3 proposals –send written evaluations for use by panel 3 panel members –Primary, secondary, reader –Review and provide written or oral evaluations

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Review Process continued Proposal and all written reviews presented as evidence in discussion Primary, secondary, and reader presentations Panel discusses, then rates proposal Before closing, panel provides relative ranking Team of Primary, Secondary, and Reader write panel summary –Strengths –Weaknesses –Synthesis

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Review Process continued Speed and Fatigue –Discussion & ranking are thorough but very fast –120 proposals permits only minutes for discussion »Review 35 proposals each day of panel –Fast pace tends to punish vague or bland writing styles –Exciting, unique, well-written, feasible proposals can be quickly identified

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Evaluation Criteria Scientific merit –Novelty, uniqueness, originality –Conceptual adequacy (hypotheses or research questions) –Clearly delineated objectives –Good description of undertaking –Suitability of methods –Feasibility demonstrated through preliminary data or other work –Probability of success

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Evaluation Criteria continued Capacity of personnel and institution –Experience indicated in vita –Appropriate collaboration –Facilities and support to be successful Relevance and importance of project –To U.S. agriculture or rural well-being –As appropriate investment of public funds –Likely to make a significant contribution to knowledge

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Evaluation Criteria continued Substance –Timely, important topic –Creative approach to problem –Superior description of problem, literature, research design and methods, analysis, expected outcomes, and dissemination plan. Presentation –Easy to read –Stellar project summary –Formatting compliance –Well-edited

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Evaluation Score & Rank Rating or Score –Outstanding –Very Good –Good –Fair –Poor Ranking –Outstanding –High Priority –Medium Priority –Low Priority –Some Merit –Do Not Fund Relative Ranking

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Awards and Declines Awards –Telephone call –Fax of panel summary, reviews, and relative ranking –Exchange of required documents (budget & design revisions) –Processing of awards Declines – and/or letter with decision and panel summary, reviews, and relative ranking –Decisions regarding future resubmission

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Award Follow-up Annual Progress Reports Final Report Other PD Transfers No-cost Extensions Voluntary Service

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Decline Follow-up Understand Relative Ranking Fundable rankings are “Outstanding”, “High Priority”, and “Medium Priority” Limited budget precludes awards to all ranked as fundable Non-fundable rankings are “Low Priority”, “Some Merit”, and “Do Not Fund”

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Decline Follow-up M&T119 proposals$16.1 M $1.8 M RD 76 proposals$11.9 M $1.6 M

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Decline Follow-up Prepare for resubmission, if appropriate Resubmission of proposals ranked “Fundable” is strongly encouraged Recommendations and guidance for submission of proposals ranked Low Priority or Some Merit will be indicated in Panel Summary Do Not Fund = Do not resubmit

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING Decline Follow-up Rationales for Do Not Fund NOT a good fit with goals of program NOT a good investment of public research dollars Resubmission that totally ignored previous reviews Fatal flaws that could not be redeemed Disqualification for egregious breach of submission rules

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING SUCCESSFUL NRI PROPOSALS Excited the reviewers Were easy to read and understand Contained: Clear objectives and rationale that fit with program goals Clear hypotheses or research questions Appropriate review of literature Detailed methods, sample selection, survey instruments or example of questions Detailed description of secondary data, shortcomings of data, and amelioration plans Discussion of expected outcomes Good dissemination plan Well-communicated importance of topic and potential contributions of research Were reviewed and edited by colleagues before submission Followed the submission rules

APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE Types of Proposals Standard Research Proposals Conferences Agricultural Research Enhancement Awards (AREA) New Investigator Awards Postdoctoral Fellowships Seed Grants Equipment Grants Research Career Enhancement Awards (RCEA) Standard Strengthening Awards Note eligibility requirements for each type

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Where is the science heading? What directions should we take the science? What should be the 3 top priorities for future Markets and Trade research? What should be the 3 top priorities for future Rural Development research?

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES MARKETS AND TRADE, and RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Patricia (Pat) C. Hipple, Ph.D. National Program Leader and Program Director Phone: