Rev. 9/14
Accounts will be opened in the Business Office for faculty members who receive awards. The same forms are used as when spending funds from department accounts. All State of
Minnesota and university policies apply.
Researcher:
Bargaining Unit Status: Tenure/Non-tenure track
Qualifying Adjunct
Qualifying Fixed Term
(Verified ______)
College:
Department/Center:
Date of application:
Title, award date and amount of research grants received during previous 3 years; final reports filed: (Verified ______)
Research project title:
Other investigator(s) involved in the project:
Estimated starting and completion dates for project:
Total amount requested (Budget, Item g):
Compensation requested? No Yes If yes, amount (Budget, Item a.i.):
Two sentence summary of the project:
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
1

Rev. 9/14
Applicant is responsible for collecting the first three signatures prior to submission.
1.
Department Evaluation Committee: Recommend Do not recommend
Comments:
Date Dept. Faculty Evaluation Committee Chairperson Signature
2.
Department Chairperson: Acknowledge
Comments:
Date Chairperson Signature
Department of
3.
College/School Dean: Recommend Do not recommend
Comments:
Date Dean Signature
College/School of
Do not collect the following two signatures prior to submission.
4.
Faculty Research Grants Committee: Recommend Do not recommend
Date Officer Signature
5.
Provost: Approve Not Approved
Comments:
Date Provost Signature
These grants are awarded on the following conditions: (1) the recipient agrees to return to St. Cloud State
University for a period of time specified in the contract, which must at least be equal to the time included in the grant; (2) the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs will be notified in case of changes in the grant period or the nature of the proposal so that financial adjustments may be made in the amount of the grant; (3) the recipient will acknowledge support received from university faculty research grant funds on any manuscripts, publications and/or creative projects or performances that result from this funding; and (4) the recipient will submit a written report regarding the grant upon completion of the award period. The report form is available on the Office of
Research and Sponsored Programs website.
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
2

Rev. 9/14
BACKGROUND/LITERATURE REVIEW (NEED/SIGNIFICANCE/VALUE)
This part tells why the study should be undertaken. It should include a statement of the problem or purpose of the proposal and tie that to the relevant literature that supports the need for the study. It should include a concise statement of the objectives of your proposal, as well as any other information related to what you propose to do.
Background information to justify the need for your scholarship is essential (bibliography, etc.).
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
In this section specific, tangible goals and objectives should be enumerated that align with the scholarly need described in the previous section. At least one objective must be a scholarly product. Scholarly products are outcomes that will be evaluated, assessed, and/or critiqued.
STRATEGY/METHODS/DESIGN
Often referred to as “procedures,” this part tells what is to be done, when, and how. The amount and kinds of detailed information will vary according to the type of study undertaken, e.g., experimental, statistical survey, documentary, or other creative endeavors. The plan presented in this section should outline a systematic and feasible procedure for accomplishing the goals and objectives proposed in the previous section.
TIMELINE
Here the applicant should provide a reasonable timeline for the execution of the methodology/strategy described in the previous section that includes when specific goals/objectives will be completed. Note that reasonableness will be evaluated in context of the fiscal year covered by this award, with the assumption that the faculty member is performing contractual obligations normally associated with his/her position.
OUTCOME/BENEFIT
In this section, the benefits of the goals and objectives proposed should be described in context of their contribution to the proposer’s professional development, as well as what significance the results might have for teaching, the discipline, the university, and society.
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
3

Rev. 9/14
PERSONNEL
Faculty Compensation:
Non-faculty at SCSU as co-investigator
(capped at $500 or include sufficient rationale to support the request):
Staff (students, clerical, secretarial):
SUPPLIES
EQUIPMENT
TRAVEL*
If international travel, met with from the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs on
to discuss budget items.
COMPUTER COSTS
OTHER IDENTIFIABLE COSTS
*Travel Note: Employee business expenses must be submitted for reimbursement within 60 days after the expense is incurred. If not submitted within 60 days, the reimbursement becomes taxable for federal, state, FICA and
Medicare purposes. Such taxes may total approximately 40% of the reimbursable amount. If this situation is applicable to you, please contact the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs prior to submission of the research grant application.
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
4

Rev. 9/14
Criteria and Description
0
Not addressed
1
Does not meet standard
Rating Scale
2
Somewhat meets standard
3
Meets standard
Background: Applicant justifies scholarly activity in terms of their professional development.
Rationale: Describes the importance to the applicant’s field or discipline.
Goals and Objectives: The alignment of goals and objectives with the scholarly needs of the project; relevance of the project.
Strategy, Design, and Methods: Proposed strategies accomplish the goals and objectives of the project; the design is consistent with the rationale and need.
Timeline: Is reasonable and feasible; the project can be accomplished; timeline includes all goals and objectives.
Outcomes: These are relevant to, and enhances, the applicant’s professional scholarly development
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
0
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
Benefits: The project has broader impact and intellectual merit beyond the applicant’s personal and professional development.
Budget: Is appropriate to meet the goals and benefits;
0 1 2 3 requested funds reflect the need for and align with the significance of the project. Requested funds are justified and explained.
Overall Quality: The proposal is well written, professional in appearance, coherent, and is internally consistent.
0
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
Note: Changes to this scoring sheet may change after piloting over several rounds. Subtotal possible points = 36; applicant needs 60% or greater (min. of 21.6 pts.) to be recommended for funding Subtotal Points:
4
Exceeds standard
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Funding in the previous three (3) years: +8 points
+7 points
+6 points
+5 points
+4 points
+3 points
+2 points
+1 point
+0 points
$0 - $1,000
$1,001 - $2,000
$2,001 - $3,000
$3,001 - $4,000
$4,001 - $5,000
$5,001 - $6,000
$6,001 - $7,000
$7,001 - $8,000
$8,001 or higher ______________
Total Points: ______________
Faculty Research Grant Committee: (a majority must answer in the affirmative)
1.
Is the proposed project longer than 14 days? Yes
□
No
□
2.
Did the applicant meet all of the grant criteria guidelines? Yes □ No □
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
5

3.
Does the proposed project meet the definition of a scholarly product?
4.
Is at least one scholarly product an outcome of this proposal?
Yes
□
No
□
Yes □ No □
Rev. 9/14
Faculty Improvement Research Grant
6