Research and Scholarship Development Grant Program
University of South Alabama
Research and Scholarship Development Grant Program
The Research and Scholarship Development Grant (RSDG) provides tenure and non-tenure track
faculty with seed funding to help build their research and scholarly programs. Each award is
capped at $25,000. $100,000 is allocated for the 2016-2017 program. The award funds may be
used for:
 seed / pilot funding for new research/scholarly projects
 planning and development activities for complex, multi-institutional grant proposals
RSDG grants are designed to stimulate interactions across disciplines, departments, colleges,
and programs that will result in external funding. The funding is intended to facilitate pilot
project data collection or activities to develop complex, multi-institutional proposals that will
competitively position the USA applicant to attract external funding. RSDG proposals m u s t
include a timeline that demonstrates how t h e funding will directly lead to external funding
requests.
Eligibility
Faculty who are in the initial stages of building their career, who are re-entering the funding
arena, who are exploring a new research focus, or who are working with an established or
emerging group to create a nationally recognized center/consortium to support one or more
substantive research areas are strongly encouraged to apply. Interdisciplinary projects are
strongly encouraged.
1. Appointees in the rank of assistant, associate, and full professor, (regardless of
tenure status) with the exception of persons known to be in their last year of campus
employment are eligible.
2. Applicants with an “Instructor” title are eligible to apply for funding through this
Program. Applicants with an “Instructor” title must be full-time, permanent
employees having a doctoral degree that could be named as a Principal Investigator
on an externally sponsored project. In addition to the other application
requirements, Instructor applicants should include details about the research
resources and facilities that are available to conduct the proposed project.
3. Appointees working solely in adjunct titles are not eligible to apply as a PI or Co-I.
4. Faculty who are on leave without pay or on sabbatical are not eligible for an RSDG
award during the leave period.
5. Each faculty member may only be funded from one (1) RSDG award annually, in any role.
Proposal Submission Guide
1. Proposals, including application documents listed below, must be submitted through the
InfoReady Review platform by the proposal due date. Applicants are responsible for
uploading their application via the InfoReady Review platform. Detailed instructions can
be found at: https://southalabama.infoready4.com/#homePage
2. A USA Transmittal Form and supporting documentation (hard copy of the proposal,
budget and budget justification) must be routed for Department Chair and Dean
Page 1 of 4
January 2016
Research and Scholarship Development Grant Program
signature and received by the Office of Research Development and Learning by the
proposal due date. College of Medicine (COM) Transmittal Forms are routed through
the Health Systems Research Administration Office for the COM Dean’s signature;
signed COM paperwork will be transferred to the Office of Research Development and
Learning by the Health Systems Administration Office on behalf of the applicant.
3. Awards are limited to $25,000. F & A is not applied to these awards.
4. The submission deadline is 5:00 p.m. each March 1st.
5. A complete application document will contain the following items in the order
specified. Clearly label each section of the proposal.
a. Completed cover sheet with title and abstract (summary of research proposal –
350-word maximum, detailed instructions can be found on the InfoReady
Review site);
b. Research / Scholarly Project Description including compliance certifications
(human and/or animal subjects, bio- and/or radiation safety, export control, etc.
as appropriate - three-page maximum);
c. Literature Cited (one-page maximum);
d. Proposal Budget and Budget Justification (no more than three pages,
maximum);
e. Funding Potential (one page maximum);
f. Curriculum Vitae – The NSF Biosketch format is preferred. See Section II.C.2.f
of the NSF Grant Proposal Guide 16-1 for further information
(http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf16001/gpg_index.jsp) (twopage maximum).
Items b-f must be compiled as a single PDF and uploaded into the InfoReady Review application
(detailed instructions may be found on the InfoReady Review site). The proposal should be
presented in 12-point Times or 11-point Arial font, page margins should be set at 1” (right, left, top
and bottom); line – spacing must be 1.0 or higher; pages should be numbered consecutively
beginning with the Research / Scholarly Project Description.
Research / Scholarly Project Description: The project description should not exceed three
(3) pages. The research / scholarly project description should contain at least the following in
three separate sections:
•
The significance of the project relative to research / scholarly activities in the field stated
in language that can be understood by an educated, non-expert. This section should
include the intellectual merits and broader impacts of the project. For example, has
a similar question been addressed previously? How does the proposed work improve
or extend the current understanding of the field?
•
Define the specific goals o f t h e p r o j e c t , h o w t h e g o a l s w i l l b e a c h i e v e d
and the timeline for achieving the goals; include milestones. If the work is expected to
extend over several years, describe what part will be completed with the funds
requested for funding given that funding is not guaranteed in subsequent years.
•
Clearly describe the work plan and methodology to be used.
If appropriate, the use of animal or human subjects must be clearly presented in the project
description. Animal or human subject use protocols must be approved before beginning the
project. Additional information may be found at:
http://www.southalabama.edu/researchcompliance/index.html.
Literature Cited: Standard citation formats for the applicant’s academic field can be used.
Page 2 of 4
January 2016
Research and Scholarship Development Grant Program
Proposal Budget: A detailed budget and budget justification must be provided. The budget
cannot exceed $25,000; the justification should briefly address all of the items listed in the
detailed budget including the role(s) and effort commitments of all personnel. No indirect cost
charges will be applied to this program. Fringe benefits rates should be included in the
budget projection. If funds for personnel are requested, for example, a graduate assistant,
research associate, or postdoc, be specific as to what the individual will be doing and what
expertise he/she requires (e.g., computer knowledge, statistics). If graduate student effort is
proposed, please be specific in the length of appointment and percentage of effort. If the
budget includes funds to hire an external consultant, include the hourly rate and justify the
need for a consultant. All items, including computer hardware and software, must be justified
in relation to the use for the proposed project. Vague or incomplete justifications will lead to
denial of a grant or to an award with a reduced budget. University policies apply.
Funding Potential: Include a description of the e x t r a m u r a l funding potential for the
seed/pilot project or planning grant. Include a time line and discussion of extramural sources
(targeted sponsors/agencies) of funding that will be sought to fund the project (inclusion of a Gantt
chart or other timeline graphic is encouraged).
Curriculum Vitae: See NSF Grant Policy Guidelines 16-1, Chapter II.C.2.f for the NSF
Biographical Sketch format. Include source, amount and term information for all active, pending
and completed support as well as a list of previously submitted proposals (include proposal title
and sponsor) not funded. Include information for all grants and contracts (intramural and
extramural) for the past three (3) years. All funds available to PI within the past
three years, internal or external, must be cited whether or not they relate or will be
used for the work described in this proposal.
Evaluation Criteria
Intellectual Merit: What is the potential for the proposed activity to advance knowledge and
understanding within the field or across different fields? To what extent do the proposed
activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
Personnel and Environment: Is the individual and/or the team qualified to conduct the
proposed activities? Are resources and/or equipment necessary to complete the project
available?
Outcomes and Potential for External Funding: Are demonstrable outcomes clearly defined
and a timeline for completion, with milestones, provided? Has the PI identified potential
sources of external support and presented a timeline showing when submission of proposals for
external support is planned?
Quality of Proposal Document: Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities a n d
t h e m e t h o d o l o g y well- reasoned and well-organized? Is the proposal well written and
convincing? Is the budget appropriate for the proposed activities?
Proposal Review Process
Proposal review will be managed by the Office of Research Development and Learning using the
InfoReady platform. Complete USA Transmittal forms (paper/hardcopy) must be received by the
Office of Research Development and Learning by the submission deadline. Associate Deans for
Research, Department Chairs and other faculty will act as peer reviewers. Peer reviewers
Page 3 of 4
January 2016
Research and Scholarship Development Grant Program
who are capable of providing feedback on the evaluation criteria will be engaged. Reviewers
will be selected to mitigate conflict of interest. Each proposal will receive three reviews.
Whenever possible at least two reviewers from the same college/school as the applicant will
be engaged. At least one reviewer from outside the applicant’s college or school will be
engaged. Decisions on funding will be made by April 1st of each year.
Award Administration
The term of the award is one year from the date specified on the award letter.
Fund numbers will be established by Grants and Contracts accounting. Post – award
administration of the award is the responsibility of the PI and departmental/college research
administrator.
No – cost extensions, up to one year, will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Please
contact Dr. Kimberly Littlefield for additional information about applying for a no-cost extension.
Unexpended funding remaining at the end of the term of the award, including the no-cost
extension period, will revert back to the Office of Research and Economic Development.
A final progress report must be submitted via the InfoReady Review platform, no later than 90
days after the end of the award period.
The Office of Research Development and Learning may contact awardees for additional,
ad hoc progress updates for up to three (3) years following submission of the final
progress report. The ad hoc update information may be used to highlight Research and
Scholarly Development Grant research and/or to comprehensively assess the
effectiveness of the program.
Page 4 of 4
January 2016