1. RESEARCH GROWTH INITIATIVE 10.0 APPLICANT WORKSHOP SEPTEMBER 5, 2014 PROPOSAL DEADLINE: OCTOBER 6, 2014 9:00AM

2. OVERVIEW 1.What is the UWM Research Growth Initiative? 2.Review Process 3.Preparing The Application 4.Tips for Developing Your Project Narrative RGI.UWM.EDU2

3. WHAT IS THE RGI? RGI.UWM.EDU

4. WHAT IS RGI? Internal seed funding program Intended for early stages of projects Examples: – Data collection – Archival work – Establishing proof-of concept Open to all disciplines External referees evaluate the proposals RGI.UWM.EDU 4

5. RGI PROGRAM GOALS Increase research productivity, scholarship, and creative endeavors Increase external funding – expected to submit extramural proposals totaling at least 3 times the seed funding Research grants – national/state/local agencies and foundations Fellowships University/industry partnerships RGI.UWM.EDU5

6. SUPPORTED PROJECTS Lead to competitive proposals for external funding (e.g., NSF, NIH, NEA) Lead to self-sustaining research Have a one-year time frame RGI.UWM.EDU6

7. ELIGIBILITY UWM faculty and staff with Principal Investigator status and expectation of continuing appointment May have external collaborators, but lead PI must be from UWM Lead PIs may submit only one proposal May be Co-PI on any other proposals Co-PIs can be non-UWM employees or eligible UWM employees RGI.UWM.EDU 7

8. INELIGIBLE PERSONS Do not have UWM Principal Investigator status Received RGI award in the last two years (funding began July 2013 or July 2014) Did not submit final reports for past RGI, Research Committee, or FRACAS awards Will not have continuing appointment (e.g. accept position at another institution) RGI.UWM.EDU8

9. UWM CATALYST GRANTS AND RGI GRANTS PIs may submit the same proposal to both programs and list the same set of potential reviewers, BUT The same review may be used for both programs, and The RGI award may be reduced by the amount of the Catalyst Award RGI.UWM.EDU9

10. FUNDING CYCLE Deadline: Monday, Oct. 6 at 9:00am Final review: Jan.-Feb. 2015 Award announcement: mid-April 2015 Award letters sent: mid-May 2015 Funds available: July 2015 RGI.UWM.EDU10

11. REVIEW PROCESS RGI.UWM.EDU

12. EXTERNAL REVIEW PROCESS Must suggest at least four external reviewers outside of UWM who have the expertise needed to evaluate your proposal We seek two reviews for each proposal Review criteria: Quality Return on Investment Risk RGI.UWM.EDU 12

13. REVIEW CRITERIA Quality Excellence and novelty of concept; appropriateness of approach or methodology Clarity of project plans Degree of scientific/intellectual merit Rating Scale Proposals are scored from 1-9 1 = Exceptionally strong with essentially no weaknesses 9 = Very few strengths and numerous major weaknesses RGI.UWM.EDU13

14. EVALUATION CRITERIA Return on Investment Probability of securing extramural funding or engaging in commercialization Potential for self-sustaining the RGI investment phase Expectation: 3x requested budget Rating Scale High: Outstanding potential outcomes (top 10%) Medium: Average potential outcomes (next 40%) Low: Low potential outcomes (bottom 50%) RGI.UWM.EDU14

15. EVALUATION CRITERIA Risk of Failure Availability of necessary skills and experience Likelihood of completing the project within proposed timeframe Rating Scale Low Risk: Highly likely to achieve milestones and objectives Medium Risk: Likely to achieve milestones and objectives High Risk: Unlikely to achieve milestones and objectives RGI.UWM.EDU15

16. REVIEW PROCESS Proposals evaluated by external reviewers and ranked according to the criteria Quality rating is the main factor in making funding decisions RGI.UWM.EDU16

17. EXTERNAL REVIEWERS Must suggest four external reviewers Nationally recognized in field of expertise related to your work Previous review experience You will receive the reviewers’ comments RGI.UWM.EDU17

18. EXTERNAL REVIEWERS Do not recommend reviewers with a conflict of interest: Known family relationship Business or professional partnership Past or present association as thesis advisor or thesis student Collaboration on a project or on a book/article/report within the last 48 months Co-editing a journal, compendium, or conference proceeding within the last 24 months NEW: Having read the RGI proposal at the request of the PI or co-PIs RGI.UWM.EDU18

19. AWARD SELECTION Awards will comprise a balanced portfolio across disciplines Applicants with prior RGI awards: Significant factors include performance in meeting prior projects’ milestones and deliverables, and submission of outcome reports. Applicants with extramural awards: Preference given to those who have made regular expenditures on the awards. RGI.UWM.EDU19

20. PREPARING THE APPLICATION RGI.UWM.EDU

21. APPLICATION COMPONENTS 1. Online application - Required 2. Project narrative (PDF) - Required 3. Biosketches (PDF) - Required 4. RGI budget spreadsheet (Excel) – Required 5. Letters of collaboration (PDF) - Optional RGI.UWM.EDU 21

22. ONLINE APPLICATION URL: www.rgi.uwm.edu Basic project data Project abstract Milestones and deliverables Anticipated return on investment Minimum of four external reviewers Upload required biosketches, project narrative, RGI budget spreadsheet, and optional letters of collaboration RGI.UWM.EDU 22

23. PROJECT NARRATIVE Format Maximum 6 pages, including references, figures, tables One-inch margins 11-point font in Arial, Tahoma, Times New Roman, or Georgia RGI.UWM.EDU 23

24. PROJECT NARRATIVE - CONTENT Background Articulate the research question Provide theory framework Project Description Specific hypothesis, aims, methods; include measurement tools and benchmarks for success Obstacles to completion and alternative approaches Contribution/roles of team members RGI.UWM.EDU24

25. PROJECT NARRATIVE - CONTENT Significance of Project Why does this matter? Why should this research be done? Innovations, contributions to the field, broader impact Sustainability beyond RGI funding Potential sponsors Potential project scope and budget Figures Bibliography RGI.UWM.EDU25

26. BIOSKETCHES Format Maximum four pages each May use NSF or NIH format One-inch margins 11-point font in Arial, Tahoma, Times New Roman, or Georgia Upload in PDF format RGI.UWM.EDU26

27. BIOSKETCHES Required Content Professional Preparation Appointments Current and pending support Publications Optional Content, But Helpful Commercialization experience Collaborators, co-authors, co-editors Graduate advisors and post-doctoral sponsors Thesis advisor and postgraduate-scholar sponsor RGI.UWM.EDU27

28. RGI BUDGET – ALLOWED EXPENSES UWM Personnel: RAs, post-docs, student hourly Capital expenditures (expenses that cost $10,000+) 50% cost-sharing required Materials, supplies, publication costs Purchase of services (e.g., consultants, user fees) Travel May request one course release (will not be included in project budget) RGI.UWM.EDU 28

29. RGI BUDGET – INELIGIBLE EXPENSES Summer salary for UWM PIs and Co-PIs Sabbatical salary Direct salary payments for non-UWM faculty May pay them as a consultant RGI.UWM.EDU29

30. RGI BUDGET SPREADSHEET Must use required RGI budget spreadsheet Provided at the end of the online RGI Application Download and save to computer to complete Upload to online application to submit Do not use UWM Budget Development Tool Tuition rates are different RGI grants do not include indirect costs RGI.UWM.EDU30

31. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION 1.Complete Basic Project Data online form 2.Upload completed RGI Budget form (Excel) 3.Upload completed Project Narrative (PDF) 4.Upload Biosketches (PDF) 5.Upload Letters of Collaboration (optional) (PDF) RGI.UWM.EDU31

32. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION 6.Select SUBMIT PROPOSAL button in the online application 7.Submission is FINAL – cannot make changes 8.Proposal automatically routes to Dept. Chair and Dean/Associate Dean for electronic approval 9.WISPER records are NOT required 10.Deadline: Monday, October 6, 2014 at 9:00am RGI.UWM.EDU32

33. TIPS FOR DEVELOPING YOUR PROJECT NARRATIVE RGI.UWM.EDU

34. SUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS… Seek answers to significant questions Take innovative and justified approach Are placed in the context of the discipline Have a clearly articulated and integrated research plan Are methodologically sound Show attention to detail RGI.UWM.EDU 34

35. COMMONLY CITED PROPOSAL WEAKNESSES Insufficient detail in describing approach to problem “This is an intriguing idea, but is not described in sufficient detail to give confidence in the outcomes.” Insufficient rationale for the need for the study “What is missing is the motivation for doing this work. What new things will be learned in this important field?” RGI.UWM.EDU 35

36. COMMONLY CITED PROPOSAL WEAKNESSES Insufficient rationale for approach “It is unclear why the proposed methods would be particularly effective for the problem under study.” Failure to demonstrate awareness of research or other activities in this field. “The proposal is missing some important references.” RGI.UWM.EDU 36

37. WHAT WE LIKE TO HEAR: “…a very well structured and argued proposal with a high likelihood of success.” “It is difficult to identify a particular change that would improve the quality of the proposal.” “Overall, this is an exciting and well- written proposal from a talented new faculty member.... Great potential for a RO1 proposal!” “The statement on the proposal’s significance... not only justifies the project fully, but renders it compelling on a national level.” “The project will increase the national competitiveness of UWM in this field.” “The rationale, aims, and methods are outstanding.”

38. CONTACTS Administrative Matters Kathleen Koch: kjk@uwm.edu; 229-3699 Technical Matters Shane Dunlap: jsdunlap@uwm.edu; 229-3160 Proposal Development Kari Whittenberger-Keith: kariwk@uwm.edu Michelle Schoenecker: schoene7@uwm.edu RGI.UWM.EDU38