Opportunities Through the Board of Regents Support Fund (BoRSF) Programs

1. Opportunities Through the Board of Regents Support Fund (BoRSF) Programs Zenovia Simmons, R&D Program Manager Carrie Robison, Special Programs Manager (ATLAS & GF) Noreen Lackett & Bryan Jones, Enhancement Program Managers http://web.laregents.org 225-342-4253

2. Background of BoR support fund • Mid-1980s • Offshore oil dispute won by LA - $550 M • Article VII, section 10.1 established two trust funds 8(g) for K-12, BoRSF for higher ed. • 25% interest earned + 25% recurring revenues returned to Trust Fund until $2 B • BoRSF $$ expended to enhance state’s economic development

3. Four programs to enhance economic development in LA • Carefully defined research efforts of public & private universities • Endowment of chairs for eminent scholars • Enhancement of academic, agricultural & research departments, units at colleges/universities • Recruitment of superior graduate students

4. Where to find information on BoRSF programs • http://web.laregents.org • 225.342.4253, as for sponsored programs section • Email firstname.lastname@la.gov • Read previously gathered information for 4 programs and 13 subprograms (click Downloads, Consultant Reports, select correct year) • Ask for copy of successful proposal — all in public record

5. BoRSF program opportunities • Enhancement program – Bryan Jones & Noreen Lackett • TR, UG, 2 YR subprograms • R&D program – Zenovia Simmons • RCS, ITRS, ATLAS subprograms • Graduate Fellows program – Carrie Robison • GF and GFT subprograms • Endowments - John Wallin • Chairs & fellowships

6. 4 ENH subprograms haveexisted since 1986-87 • Traditional Enhancement – open to all campuses in LA, public & private • Undergraduate ENH – open to all except large research universities (began in early 1990s) • Two-Yr. Institution ENH – open to community colleges in collaboration with LTC and 4 yr. campuses (began in 2002-03) • Endowed Professorships – only non- competitive subprogram in BoR Support Fund

7. TR and UG ENH programs --trends • Usually larger awards—avg. in 2008-09 • TR = $84,962 (fewer proposals funded) • UG = $41,025 (success rate higher for getting some $$) • More competition in TR (more campuses involved) • Discipline-based proposals – same rotation cycle every three years Reviewers “look like” campuses that submit in each program

8. ENH program eligibility • Any faculty or staff member affiliated with any public or private higher education institution in State • Any campus or campus entity • PI can submit more than one proposal • No Notice of Intent to submit a proposal required

9. ENH disciplines eligible, FY 2009-10 • Arts • Agricultural Sciences • Earth/Environmental Sciences • Engineering A (see taxonomy of subdisciplines in RFP) • Health and Medical Sciences • Multidisciplinary (at least one eligible discipline must be selected) – popular category for PIs unsure where they fit

10. BoRSF monetary distribution, FY 2009-10 • TR ENH - $5 – 6 M (of that, $950,000 allocated to Multidisclinary proposals) • UG ENH - $1,620,000 • 2 YR. ENH - $1,080,000 • Endowed Professorships - $2,680,000 • Prior years’ commitments - $5 M • Total ENH anticipated = $16.3 M • Overall BoRSF dollars anticipated – $30-32 M

11. Developing your proposal - 1 • What do you need? What are possible sources of funding (scan RFPs for program’s purpose) • Brainstorm with others, especially colleagues & campus grants officers • Study the RFP from most likely funding source(s) … federal, state, local, regional • Outline ideas ... develop them into cohesive plan that fits the specific RFP (aka, the proposal) • Decide under which ENH discipline(s) to submit – harder than it looks on the surface.

12. Developing your proposal - 2 • Write ideas, related goals and objectives (make performance objectives quantifiable) • Identify program requirements (including cost sharing and other budgetary matters) • Identify campus and BoR deadlines, put on calendar, adhere to them • Identify collaborators/partners

13. Developing your proposal - 3 • Contact the program manager (name and contact info in RFP) • Develop the proposal fully; develop the budget . . . don’t inflate . . . align budget with goals/objectives • Proofread proposal ... edit, edit, etc. • Submit the proposal by deadline (Oct. 26th)

14. ENH proposal peer review process • BoR receives ENH proposal electronically and 7 hard copies • In the fall, 1 team formed for each TR discipline • 1 person from each discipline for UG team • Chairs of teams review Multidisciplinary proposals in their discipline • Every proposal read by at least 2 or 3 out-of-state experts • Teams evaluate all proposals at home and in BR - winter & spring • Consensus reports of teams recommend funding to BoR in April; schools notified via BoR website All BoR Support Fund program reviewers are solicited from outside Louisiana to ensure fairness

15. ENH overview, FY 2006-07 • TR - 160 submitted, 88 funded, $6.4 M awarded, 55% success rate • UG – 48 submitted, 33 funded, $1.62 M awarded, 68% success rate • 2 YR. – 42 submitted, 22 funded, $1.08 M awarded, 52% success rate • Overall proposal success rate = 58%

16. ENH overview by discipline, 2006-07

17. Winning ENH proposals • PI writes proposal so that any reader understand its purpose • PI doesn’t use jargon • PI develops budget, timeline, activities & other plans carefully; convinces reviewers that the project has a good chance of success • PI follows RFP to the letter; gets help/advice from campus grants officer and/or BoR program manager • last day is Oct. 1 to ask questions of BoR staff • cumulative Q&A published on website soon after Oct. 1

18. Winning ENH proposals • Have a clearly defined purpose and measurable objectives that align with budget • Study the rating form(s) reviewers use to rate/rank proposals (in back of RFP) • Write persuasively . . . Sell your ideas; sell yourself/colleagues as having expertise to carry out your ideas

19. Winning ENH proposals • PI plans to evaluate goals (formative & summative) • How to accomplish objectives? • What impact will this project and your work on it have on department, unit, institution? • After project ends, PI plans to disseminate results of investment • Publish in peer reviewed journals • Present at conferences/meetings

20. Winning ENH proposals • Make proposal look professional – reread it, proofreader, check grammar, check spelling, etc. • Make copies of PDF of entire proposal on LOGAN • Get one copy signed by campus officials • Submit proposal to grants office; their staff submits proposal to BoR by program deadline • Monday, 5 p.m. on Oct. 26th- 1 original electronic plus 7 hard copies of which one is signed by primary PI, dean, authorized campus official)

21. Key elements of successful ENH proposals Convince reviewers that • You really need the enhancement; it is not just a wish list • You & colleagues have expertise to successfully conduct the project • How will what you propose will make a difference/positively impact students & faculty • evaluation cycle- develop methods for determining the degree of success of the project (goals & objectives) have been developed-

22. R&D program opportunities Three subprograms: • The Research Competitiveness Subprogram (RCS) • The Industrial Ties Research Subprogram (ITRS) • Awards to Louisiana Artists and Scholars Subprogram (Bryan)

23. RCS subprogram goals/objectives • Primary objective - to solicit research proposals that are designed to build and strengthen the research knowledge and competitiveness of Louisiana universities. • Stimulus program directed only toward those researchers on the verge of becoming competitive in the federal R&D marketplace, and clearly have a strong potential for enhancing their competitive status within a limited time span.

24. RCS proposals must include • Basic research that seeks to generate new knowledge and test hypotheses (purely descriptive or data gathering proposals will not be recommended for funding). • An assessment of the barriers faced by the investigator in his/her efforts to become nationally competitive for federal R&D dollars. • A plan to overcome those barriers and attain national competitiveness for federal R&D funds bythe expected termination date of the proposed RCS project.

25. Eligibility considerations and requirements – eligible faculty • Only those faculty affiliated with an eligible Louisiana institution of higher education may act as the principal or co-principal investigator. • An eligible faculty member may serve as a principal or co-principal investigator on no more than one RCS and/or two ITRS grants at any one time. • Individuals who are not employed by an eligible institution (e.g., out-of-state scholars, scientists, engineers, or employees of industry) may serve as consultants on applications. • Non-tenured faculty are eligible to apply, but all things being equal, tenured faculty will be given priority.

26. RCS discipline rotation • GROUP I - Eligible Every Year • Computer and Information Sciences • Biological Sciences • Earth/Environmental Sciences • GROUP II - Eligible in Award Year 2010-11; 2011-12 • Physics/Astronomy • Mathematics • Agricultural Sciences • Engineering A (Chemical, Civil, Electrical, etc. • Social Sciences • GROUP III- Eligible2008-09; 2009-10; 2012-13; 2013-14 • Chemistry • Health and Medical Sciences • Engineering B (Industrial, Materials, Mechanical, etc.)

27. R&D peer review process • PHASE I Mail Reviews (2) scholars • PHASE II Subject Area Reviewers 2-4 Panel Members • PHASE III Final Panel Members convene in Baton Rouge during March 3 panel members Provide a ranking of those proposals highly recommended for funding

28. RCS monetary & time limitations • Although RCS applicants may request up to a total of $200,000 over a 3-year period, for FY 2008-09, first-year awards ranged from $22,290 to $70,119. • No RCS project may request more than three years of support.

29. Key elements of successful RCS proposals • The applicants must fit the “profile.” • The proposal must have a basic (fundamental) research component -- purely descriptive or data gathering efforts will not be funded. • The proposed research must meet national standards of excellence in terms of scientific and technical merit. • The proposal must be submitted in an area or discipline in which federal R & D funds are anticipated to be available. • The proposal must realistically assess any barriers to the applicant’s attainment of national competitiveness. • The proposal must contain a plan for overcoming barriers stated in the proposal. In other words, “If you fund me now, this is how (and why) BORSF funding will help me bring federal R & D money to Louisiana by the close of my project.”

30. RCS proposals submitted & funded FY 2008-09 Success Rate 16%

31. GOALS of the ITRS • Fund research with significant near-term potential for the development and diversification of Louisiana’s economic base • Establish or enhance a Louisiana business or industry that will attract significant revenue to the State

32. ITRS proposals should include • Significant private-sector (or federal) funding of the proposed research or, at a minimum, a plan showing how the proposed research will generate significant private-sector or federal funding in the near future. • Plan to show how proposed research could lead to near-term establishment or enhancement of an existing Louisiana business or industry, and attract significant revenues to the State.

33. ITRS proposals • Are required to have an “up front” matching commitment from the private/federal sector, at least for the first year. A plan to secure subsequent year matching commitments must be addressed in the budget section. • For proposals that require equipment to complete the goals of the grant, applicants must provide a cash match equal to or greater than 25% of the cost of the requested equipment. The cash match may come from institutional or industrial sources.

34. ITRS target areas Proposals are accepted only from the areas identified by the BoR Industrial Targets Advisory Committee as follows: • Medical and Biomedical • Micromanufacturing • Data and Telecommunications • Environmental Technologies • Food Technologies • Materials • Existing Principal Industries such Petrochemicals and Agribusinesses • Louisiana Culture and History

35. ITRS disciplines • Agriculture, aquaculture, animal science • Biotechnology & healthcare • Chemical, materials, petroleum engineering • Computer & information sciences • Materials & mechanical engineering • Environmental sciences & technology/urban development

36. ITRS monetary & time limitations • Although applicants may request up to a total of $350,000 over a three-year period, for FY2008-09 first-year awards ranged from $35,000 to $93,000. • The total request for the first year may not exceed $150,000, and the total request for each successive year may not exceed $100,000. • No ITRS project may request more than three years of support.

37. ITRS – eligible faculty All faculty at Louisiana institutions of higher education, including senior researchers, having research ideas that might promote significant near-term economic development, are eligible to apply for ITRS funding.

38. Key elements of successful ITRS proposals • Top-quality scientific and technical merit, with a viable research component • Evidence of significant private sector support, preferably from a Louisiana company--failing that, a plan demonstrating that the proposed research will generate such support in the near future • A convincing argument that the proposed research will lead to the near-term establishment or enhancement of a Louisiana business or industry, and thereby result in significant revenues for the State

39. R&D ITRS proposals submitted & funded, 2008-09 Success Rate 23%

40. Disallowed budgetary items The scope of the R&D program does not permit: • Purchase of office furniture or routine office equipment; • Construction of facilities; • Maintenance of equipment; • Routine renovations, expansions, or upgrading, etc. • Shortfalls or deficits in budgets, scholarships, or tuition, augmentation of salaries of individuals regularly assigned duties, etc.

41. R&D review process • Request for Proposals is issued in August • Notices of Intent due - September 11. • Full proposals submitted - ITRS on October 31; RCS on November 7. • Mail Reviews from experts with knowledge in the specific field of application (2 per proposal) assess scientific and technical merit. RCS only. • Subject-area panels (2 to 4 experts) formed to prioritize all proposals in a given subject area--each panelist individually evaluates proposals and subject-area rank order is developed via conference calls. • Final Review Panel (3 members) of out-of-state experts formed. • Panel convenes in Baton Rouge to develop a final rank order of merit for proposals. • A written report containing the rankings & funding stipulations is forwarded to the Sponsored Programs Committee and the full BoR, which makes final award decisions in April.

42. Availability of funds • RCS • First-year money available for • FY 2009-10: $1.35 M • ITRS • First-year money available for • FY 2009-10: $585,000

43. R&D program opportunities AWARDS TO LOUISIANAARTISTS AND SCHOLARS SUBPROGRAM (ATLAS)

44. ATLAS goals • Provide support for major scholarly and artistic productions with potential to have a broad impact on a regional and/or national level • Enable publication and/or presentation of supported work within a limited period of time • Strengthen the artistic, research and educational bases of Louisiana institutions

45. ATLAS eligibility & available funds Eligible Applicants • Any Louisiana faculty member completing a project in arts, humanities or social sciences; eligibility is determined by the project’s subject matter, not the departmental affiliation of the applicant Eligible Activities • Activities related to the completion of an important artistic or scholarly work with emphasis on the completion of substantive works Examples: Major fine arts exhibitions, significant works of fiction, poetry, film, drama, and scholarly monographs • Only projects involving the production of original works. Editions, projects, recordings of existing music, theatrical productions, etc., are eligible only when significant new creative and/or academic engagement is demonstrated Available Funds:Approximately $450,000 for FY 2009-10

46. ATLAS time limitations & budget • Maximum of one (1) year of support • $50,000 maximum from ATLAS • ATLAS funds can be used for salary support (up to 50% of an academic year plus one summer), student assistance (graduate and undergraduate), supplies, publishing costs, research travel, and consultants • Disallowed charges include indirect costs, purchase of office furniture or routine equipment, construction, ongoing operating costs, etc. • Cost sharing: The applicant’s institution is required to match 1:1 any salary support (including summer) requested from ATLAS

47. ATLAS Proposals • Ingredients • Brief (maximum 5 pages) narrative account of career, context for the project, and work plan • List of publications and/or productions • Prospectus and substantial sample from the work-in-progress • Proposals should clearly demonstrate • The scholarly and/or artistic merit of the proposed work • The necessity, importance, originality, and potential academic/ artistic impact of the proposed work • The current stage of the work and a detailed timetable for completion

48. ATLAS evaluation criteria • Four criteria, not weighted (see RFP Appendix C) • Intellectual/artistic significance of the project • Quality of the applicant’s previous work or promise of quality based on preparations for the current project • Quality of the conception, definition, organization, and description of the project • Feasibility of the proposed plan of work and likelihood that the applicant will complete theproject

49. ATLAS review process • October 8, 2009: Notices of Intent due (mandatory) • November 23, 2009: Full proposals due • December 2009 – March 2010: Review of proposals by out-of-state experts • Subject-area panels assess and prioritize all proposals in the broad eligible disciplines (Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences). Proposals are ranked and the top projects recommended for further consideration by the final panel • Final review panel assesses all proposals forwarded by the subject-area panels, rates and ranks them, and makes final funding recommendations • April 2010: Final decisions by the Board regarding funding of recommended projects

50. Summary of 2008-09 ATLAS competition SUBMISSIONS: 41 Humanities: 25 Arts: 9 Social Sciences: 7 TOTAL AMOUNT REQUESTED: $1,846,843 FUNDED PROJECTS: 14 Humanities: 8 Arts: 3 Social Sciences: 3 TOTAL AMOUNT AWARDED: $631,559* * ATLAS budget allocation in 2008-09 was $450,000, which allowed funding of10proposals. One-time surplus funds in R&D funded 4 additional projects.