uconn health

UConn Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) Research Initiative

Purpose:

The UConn JEDI Research Initiative aims to support innovative research, scholarship, and creative work in topic areas related to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI).  We seek to fund projects that have the potential to make significant contributions to ongoing scholarly/scientific/artistic conversations in these vitally important domains. Projects that aim to improve UConn’s competitiveness for emerging external funding opportunities related to JEDI or that propose novel interdisciplinary collaborations are particularly encouraged. Proposals from all disciplines are invited.

Topics that may be of interest under this initiative include:

  • Contributing factors to the growth/persistence of racism, bias, and/or inequities
  • The intersection of race, gender, class, sexuality, and/or ability
  • The impact of systemic racism or implicit bias on civic life
  • Development of research-based interventions designed to address/mitigate inequities
  • Novel approaches to raising awareness of or reflection on JEDI-related issues
  • Other topics consistent with the overall goal of understanding challenges related to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion and developing innovative solutions

Note: As the main purpose of this funding opportunity is to seed innovative research into JEDI-related topics, applications focusing on the implementation of internally focused JEDI trainings, events, speakers, etc. will not be considered under this program.

Timeline/Details:

  • Proposals are due August 15, 2022 by 12:00 noon (deadline has been extended)
  • Submissions should be made via the UConn Quest Portal.  The portal will open to receive applications by Monday, May 9.
  • Review will be conducted by a team of faculty and other scholars with expertise in JEDI-related research topics and methodologies.
  • Award notices are expected in February 2023.  Award setup will begin immediately after notice, pending the completion of compliance review.
  • Program timelines for FY23 have not yet been determined.

Award Categories:

  • Level 1 - Faculty/Institutional Development - awards up to $5K
  • Level 2 - JEDI Scholarly/Creative Expansion - awards up to $20K
  • Level 3 - JEDI Research Expansion - awards up to $60K

Level 1 – Faculty/Institutional Development for JEDI (up to $5K) – Details

  • Provides funding in support of faculty seeking to position themselves for work on JEDI-related projects in the future.  Level 1 awards can also provide seed funds for certain JEDI-related institutional initiatives.
  • This level is designed to provide funding in support of:
    • faculty skill development, particularly in JEDI/DEI theoretical approaches and/or research methodologies for social impact research
    • networking activities for development of novel interdisciplinary partnerships that will lead to future work on JEDI-related research projects
    • the purchase or development of survey instruments or datasets for use in JEDI-related research projects
    • Climate surveys necessary for external funding strategies and/or thoughtful plans of action for institutional change.  Please reach out to the OVPR for more information if you are seeking funding for this kind of project
  • Awards may be used over 1 year
  • 3-5 Level 1 awards are expected
  • Note: the OVPR Scholarship Facilitation Fund (SFF) has been established to support small scale pilot projects, requests for publication support, and other costs related to the initiation and completion of research (see guidelines for details).  Smaller projects that are a strong fit for the SFF should be submitted to that program instead.

Level 2 – JEDI Scholarly/Creative Expansion (up to $20K) – Details

  • Provides funding in support of scholarly and creative projects with strong promise to make substantive contributions to JEDI-related conversations/areas of inquiry
  • This level is designed to provide funding for the development of scholarly monographs, journal articles, mid-scale pilot projects, community engagement projects, creative works, exhibitions, and performances—provided such works make contributions to JEDI-related discourses
  • Projects that include novel collaborations across disciplines are encouraged
  • Awards may be used over 1-2 years
  • 2-3 Level 2 awards are expected

Level 3 – JEDI Research Expansion (up to $60K) – Details

  • Provides funding in support of research projects designed:
    • To expand our understanding of factors leading to racism, bias, injustice, and/or inequity
    • To deepen our knowledge about the impact of racism, bias, injustice, and/or inequality on the health and well-being of individuals, specific groups, and society at large
    • To develop/test novel interventions designed to ameliorate the harms caused by systemic bias, injustice, and inequality or to advance the values of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion
    • To implement research drawing on critical and/or justice-oriented methods and theories
  • This level is designed to develop and enhance the competitiveness of teams that are seeking external funding for JEDI-related projects.
  • Projects that transcend disciplinary boundaries, foster unique collaborations, or productively reshape fields of study/practice are strongly encouraged.
  • Awards may be used over 1-2 years.
  • 1-2 Level 3 awards are expected.

Additional Details and Eligibility

JEDI Research awards are available to individuals with a primary, full-time faculty appointment to UConn/UConn Health, within the following parameters:

  • Eligibility
    • Applicants (lead PIs) must be tenured/tenure-track, clinical, research, or in-Residence faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor or higher.  Faculty of other ranks or titles, postdocs, staff, and community partners may serve as co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants.
    • Applicants may be from any department or discipline within the University, so long as the project makes a strong contribution to research topics/critical conversations strongly related to JEDI.
  • Submission Limits:
    • Eligible faculty may submit only one proposal for JEDI funding as PI, across all tracks.  There are no limits to how many proposals an individual may participate in as a co-PI or collaborator.
    • The same project cannot receive funds from JEDI and other OVPR internal award mechanisms (SFF, REP, SCHARP, etc.).
  • Faculty Salary: Salary support for any faculty PIs/co-PIs/collaborators is not allowable.
  • Additional approvals: Release of awarded funds will be contingent upon approval/confirmation of appropriate IRB protocols (if applicable).

Proposal Guidelines – Level 1

Proposals for JEDI Level 1 Awards should contain the following elements and adhere to the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing, and single side pages.

  • Quest Portal forms:
    • OVPR Faculty Applicant Information Form – brief form gathering information about you, as the PI of the project.  Some information will auto-feed based on your NetID and past submissions in Quest.
      • Submitting PI Name
      • Home Department
      • School/College
      • Email
      • Phone
      • Faculty/Academic Rank
      • Primary Employer
      • Question - is your position contingent on grant funding?
    • JEDI Application form – brief form gathering basic information about the project for the purpose of competition management.
      • JEDI Level/Category
      • Special Reviewer Expertise needed
      • Size of team (besides yourself)
      • Name/affiliation/project role of team members
      • Project title
      • Amount Requested
      • Resubmission Y/N (has the project previously been submitted for internal or external funding?)
      • Project Abstract/Lay Summary
      • Future Funding Targets (not required for level 1)
      • Results from prior OVPR-funded projects
  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Applicant information, and a list of collaborators.
  • Project Narrative: Describe the project and its anticipated outcomes.  Project narratives should address the following and not exceed 1 page for Level 1 Awards. References should be included and do not count against page limits.
    • Area of need: Succinctly describe the area of need / gap that you wish to address through this project.
    • Proposed work/plan: Briefly describe the specific activities that you propose undertaking.
    • Project Rationale: Provide a brief rationale explaining how your proposed activities will address the need/gap that you’ve identified and how the project will enable future JEDI-related scholarly/scientific/creative contributions.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of JEDI funds.  Please use the OVPR Internal Funding Budget Template.xlsx.
  • Updated CVs for all key project contributors that include recent work or work that is most relevant to the project proposed.

Proposal Guidelines – Level 2

Proposals for JEDI Level 2 Awards should contain the following elements and adhere to the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing, and single side pages.

  • Quest Portal forms:
    • OVPR Faculty Applicant Information Form – brief form gathering information about you, as the PI of the project.  Some information will auto-feed based on your NetID and past submissions in Quest.
      • Submitting PI name
      • Home department
      • School/College
      • Email
      • Phone
      • Faculty/Academic rank
      • Primary employer
      • Question - is your position contingent on grant funding?
    • JEDI Application form – brief form gathering basic information about the project for the purpose of competition management.
      • JEDI level/category
      • Special reviewer expertise needed
      • Size of team (besides yourself)
      • Name/affiliation/project role of team members
      • Project title
      • Amount requested
      • Resubmission Y/N (has the project previously been submitted for internal or external funding?)
      • Project abstract/lay summary
      • Future funding targets (optional for level 2)
      • Results from prior OVPR-funded projects
  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Applicant information, and a list of collaborators
  • Project Narrative: Describe the project and its anticipated outcomes.  Project narratives should address the following and not exceed 2-3 pages for Level 2 Awards. References should be included and do not count against page limits.
    • Project framing: Provide background on your project's field of study/practice to provide context for the work you are proposing.
    • Proposed Work: Describe the work you wish to accomplish through this project, scholarly/artistic approaches you may be drawing on, the specific activities you are proposing, and the expected products of the project (e.g. performances, exhibitions, publications, community-based projects, media, public engagements, etc.).
    • Impact/Outcomes: Explain the contribution your proposed activities will make to advancing JEDI-related goals/discourses, describing expected outcomes, their significance for your area of inquiry and society in general, and also your plans for extending/sustaining the impact of the work beyond the funding period (could include seeking follow-up external funding or plans for activities that build on the work proposed in the current project).
    • Access and Resources: If the project requires special technical expertise or resources, describe how this need will be addressed.  If the project requires access to archives/collections/resources at another institution, describe the arrangements that have been made to gain access to them.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of JEDI funds.  Please use the OVPR Internal Funding Budget Template.xlsx.
  • Updated CVs for all key project contributors that includes recent work or work that is most relevant to the project proposed.

Proposal Guidelines – Level 3

Proposals for JEDI – Level 3 funding should contain the following elements and adhere to the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing, and single side pages.

  • Quest Portal forms:
    • OVPR Faculty Applicant Information Form – brief form gathering information about you, as the PI of the project.  Some information will auto-feed based on your NetID and past submissions in Quest.
      • Submitting PI Name
      • Home Department
      • School/College
      • Email
      • Phone
      • Faculty/Academic Rank
      • Primary Employer
      • Question - is your position contingent on grant funding?
    • JEDI Application form – brief form gathering basic information about the project for the purpose of competition management.
      • JEDI Level/Category
      • Special Reviewer Expertise needed
      • Size of team (besides yourself)
      • Name/affiliation/project role of team members
      • Project title
      • Amount Requested
      • Resubmission Y/N (has the project previously been submitted for internal or external funding?)
      • Project Abstract/Lay Summary
      • Future Funding Targets (required for level 3)
      • Results from prior OVPR-funded projects
  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Applicant information, and a list of collaborators
  • Project Narrative: Describe the project and its anticipated outcomes.  Project narratives should address the following and not exceed 5 pages for Level 3 Awards. References should be included and do not count against page limits.
    • Project framing: Provide background on conversation/area of inquiry with which your project will engage to provide context for the work you are proposing.  Be sure to clearly identify and describe the problem/issue/gap in knowledge/obstacle to be overcome that your project will address.
    • Proposed work: Describe the work you wish to accomplish with this project. Explain the scholarly/scientific approach and any theoretical or methodological framework you are applying, the specific activities that you propose undertaking to advance your project, and the anticipated outputs or products of that work.  Proposals should specifically address the ways in which the project is innovative/novel/transformative compared to existing work in your area of inquiry.
    • Impact and outcomes: Explain how your proposed activities will address the JEDI-related problem/issue/gap/obstacle you’ve identified, describing expected outcomes, their significance for your area of inquiry and society in general, and also how the work done in this project will prepare your team to be competitive for the external funding opportunities you are targeting.
    • Expertise/Skills, Access, and Resources: If the project requires special technical expertise, describe how this need will be addressed.  If the project requires access to particular resources or study populations, describe the arrangements that have been made to gain access to them.  If your project includes collaboration, describe how the skills and expertise of each team member contributes to the success of the project and explain how the collaboration is innovative/novel compared to what is common within your discipline.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of JEDI funds.  Please use the OVPR Internal Funding Budget Template.xlsx
  • Updated CVs for all key project contributors that includes recent work or work that is most relevant to the project proposed.

Budget Guidelines

  • Allowable costs include: graduate research assistant salary (AY and Summer), Storrs/Regional Campus faculty summer salary ($3K limit, 9/10-month faculty only), postdoc or other research assistant salary, undergraduate researcher salary, Storrs/Regional Campus faculty course buyouts (approval letter from department head required), fringe costs, equipment purchases, travel to conduct research or meet with collaborators, materials and supplies, participant costs, contractual services.
    • Note: Course buyout funding will be limited to one per PI/co-PI per award and will be limited to the minimum adjunct rate for the course being bought-out (not a percentage of the PI’s salary).  PIs requesting buyouts must explain why release time is vital for the project.
  • Unallowable costs include: clerical or administrative personnel salaries, including personnel whose primary purpose is to explore funding sources and/or prepare funding applications; faculty academic year salary; institutional memberships in professional organizations; travel to professional meetings to present the results of the research; travel to explore extramural funding opportunities; costs associated with the publication of results of the research, including page charges, purchase of reprints, or journal costs.  Generally speaking, basic office equipment such as computers/laptops/tablets are not supported on OVPR awards unless the equipment meets a specialized need within the project which cannot be met through equipment from other sources.

Please use the OVPR Internal Funding Budget Template.xlsx

Review Criteria for Level 2 and Level 3 Awards

Significance/Importance

The "significance" criterion evaluates the degree to which the project as described addresses an scholarly/artistic/scientific challenge that is well defined, well contextualized, and of great importance/consequence for the field.  Reviewers will consider:

  • The degree to which the proposal clearly defines the issue/gap/challenge the project will address
  • The degree to which the proposal clearly contextualizes/situates the area of focus within the large field of study or practice
  • The degree to which the area of focus is of high importance for JEDI-related discourses
  • The degree to which success within the area of focus can advance JEDI-related goals/discourses and improve competitiveness for JEDI-related external funding (if applicable)

Approach/Timeline

The "approach/timeline" criterion evaluates clarity, coherence, and theoretical/methodological soundness of the specific activities the applicant proposes.  Reviewers will consider:

  • The degree to which the proposal describes the work to be accomplished in a clear and sufficiently detailed manner
  • The degree to which the activities are described as part of a coherent plan of action that is well reasoned and sound
  • The degree to which any theoretical or methodological frameworks employed in the work are clearly articulated, well conceptualized, appropriate to the context, and appropriately applied
  • The degree to which the plan of work includes a well developed and reasonable timeline for completion

Innovation/Novelty

The "innovation/novelty" criterion evaluates whether the project stands out as particularly groundbreaking or innovative in comparison to other work in this domain.  Reviewers will consider:

  • The degree to which the project proposes creative/fresh approaches to JEDI-related challenges
  • The degree to which the proposed activities/methodologies are groundbreaking rather than incremental improvements on/expansions of established approaches

Feasibility and Resources

The "feasibility" criterion evaluates whether the project is achievable as described, given available resources and expertise.  Reviewers will consider:

  • To what degree is the project, as described in proposal, achievable?  Are there any concerns about feasibility?  If so, does the proposal anticipate possible problems and articulate alternative approaches?
  • If specialized skills or special access are required for completion of the project, to what degree does the proposal establish their availability?

Team

The "team" criterion evaluates the expertise of those participating in the project, their fitness for the work proposed, and the strength/importance/innovation of any collaborative efforts proposed.  Reviewers will consider:

  • The degree to which the members of the team well prepared and well suited to carry out the project
  • The degree to which the members of the team have complementary expertise
  • If the project includes a novel collaboration, compared to what is common in their discipline(s), to what degree does this unusual collaboration add something meaningful to the project?

Project Evaluation Guidelines

After JEDI awards are made, the OVPR would like to check in with awardees periodically to evaluate project progress and to learn about the impact of the work that has been done.

In the short term, the OVPR will follow up with awardees at the end of each year during the award period.  If the award was given for multiple years, we will ask for a brief update on how your project is progressing and for an updated budget for the following year.  If significant budget changes are needed at any point within an award period (i.e., because of unanticipated delays, new costs, significant shifts of funding between categories), awardees may contact research@uconn.edu to work out a revised budget.

After the award period has ended, we would like to continue receiving updates on outcomes as a result of the award.  We understand that the full realization of many projects may appear some time after the funded work is complete.  Therefore, the OVPR will reach out to awardees (via email) to request follow-up reports on JEDI projects annually for several years following the completion of the award period.  We’ll be interested in hearing about the results of your project, the significance of those results, and gathering statistics about graduate students supported, publications, external awards received, other projects launched, etc.

Program Contacts

  • Administrative contact: Matt Mroz, PhD, OVPR Internal Funding Coordinator. research@uconn.edu; 860.486.6378

 

Clinical Research and Innovation Seed Program (CRISP)

Purpose

UConn’s Clinical Research and Innovation Seed Program (CRISP) is a targeted seed funding program for FY22 created to: 1) help unlock the research creativity of UConn/UConn Health faculty who serve in clinical roles and 2) to support faculty who are doing human subjects research and working with clinical populations.

CRISP aims to support faculty in clinical roles who have compelling research ideas they would like to pursue.  Clinical faculty at UConn and UConn Health are world-class practitioners in their areas of expertise, but due to their clinical and teaching responsibilities, they often do not have the resources or opportunity to develop research programs that can lead to external funding.  CRISP is designed to provide the seed funding or development resources needed for clinical faculty to get exciting research projects started.

Faculty who work with human subjects and clinical populations know that this work can be challenging and sometimes cost-prohibitive, particularly for those who are in the early stages of projects or who are seeking pilot data to support large-scale external submissions.  CRISP also aims to provide the support needed to launch significant human subjects/clinical research projects and to move them towards external funding success.

While not a requirement of all proposals, the CRISP program supports collaboration across disciplines and between UConn and UConn Health faculty.  Given external funders’ growing interest in supporting interdisciplinary and convergent research, the demonstrated excellence of our faculty, and the complementary expertise available across disciplines, proposals that include novel interdisciplinary and cross-campus partnerships are particularly encouraged.

To assist faculty who are considering creating new cross-campus partnerships, OVPR is sponsoring a panel discussion on UConn/UCH Cross-Campus Research Collaboration on Thursday, March 3 from 12-1pm.  This panel aims to address UConn/UCH system and procedural questions and challenges that arise in cross-campus research by sharing our faculty success stories.  Register for this event!

Program Timeline

  • Program opens 2/16/22. Applications can be submitted through the UConn Quest Portal
  • Proposal deadline Friday, 4/1/22 (12 noon)
  • Awards expected in January 2023
  • Program timeline for FY23 has not yet been determined

The CRISP program offers awards in three different tracks, one focused on clinical faculty-initiated research, and two open to both clinical and non-clinical faculty that is focused on human subjects and clinical research.

Track 1 (Clinical Faculty-Initiated Research) Details and Eligibility – $10K

  • Awards available: up to 10 awards of up to $10K are anticipated to support projects initiated by clinical faculty members
  • Eligibility: limited to full-time UConn/UConn Health faculty serving in clinical roles.  Open to those at any campus with Assistant/Associate/Full Professor titles (including titles such as Clinical Assistant Professor), within the following constraints:
    • UConn Health – open to faculty who spend at least 60% of their time on clinical or teaching responsibilities.
    • UConn (Storrs and Regional Campuses) – open to faculty who have Assist/Assoc/Full Clinical Professor titles or faculty with other titles who have clinical credentials and who spend at least 60% of their time on clinical or teaching responsibilities.
    • Investigators from JAX or CCMC are eligible to participate providing they have affiliate status with either UConn Health or UConn.
  • Award Period: Awards will be made for activities that can be completed during a one-plus year award period (anticipated 6/1/2022-6/30/2023).
  • Anticipated outcomes: Track 1 will fund activities that support/enable clinical faculty to engage in their own research projects and to prepare them for seeking NIH (K- or R-series) awards and/or external funding from foundation, industry and other sponsors
  • Sample activities: Track 1 funds could be used for:
    • Project-related materials and supplies
    • Student Research Assistant salary (Graduate or Undergraduate. If you’d like to promote a student research position to undergraduates, please take advantage of services offered by UConn’s Office of Undergraduate Research.)
    • Participant incentive costs
    • Facility / instrumentation use costs
    • Training programs designed to enhance research-related skillsets
    • Programs to facilitate collaboration or mentorship
    • Please see budget guidelines for further detail about what is and is not allowable
  • Faculty Salary: Salary support for any faculty PIs/co-PIs/collaborators is not allowable.
  • Submission limits: Eligible faculty may submit only one proposal to CRISP as PI, across all tracks. There are no limits to how many proposals an individual may participate in as a co-PI or collaborator.
  • Additional approvals: Release of awarded funds will be contingent upon approval/confirmation of appropriate IRB protocols.

Track 2 (Human Subjects and Clinical Populations Research) – $30K-$60K

  • Awards available: 6-8 awards between $30K and $60K are anticipated to support pilot/exploratory human subjects and clinical research.
  • Project focus: Projects in Track 2 should be primarily focused on work with human subjects that has clinical focus (e.g., clinical populations, clinical phenomena, clinical training, clinical trials, etc.).
  • Anticipated outcomes: Awards at this level are intended to seed early career investigators, established investigators looking to change research directions or re-establish research programs, feasibility studies, or to explore novel collaborations among established investigators.
  • Eligibility: PIs must be full-time UConn/UConn Health faculty. Open to those at any campus with Assistant/Associate/Full Professor titles (including titles such as Clinical Assistant Professor).
    • Investigators from JAX or CCMC are eligible to participate providing they have affiliate status with either UConn Health or UConn.
  • Award Period: Awards will be made for activities that can be completed during a one-plus year award period (anticipated 6/1/2022-6/30/2023).
  • Team Composition: Projects that include cross-campus and clinical faculty involvement are especially encouraged, but not required.
  • Faculty Salary: Salary support for any faculty PIs/co-PIs/collaborators is not allowable.
  • Submission limits: Eligible faculty may submit only one proposal to CRISP as PI, across all tracks. There are no limits to how many proposals an individual may participate in as a co-PI or collaborator.
  • Additional approvals: Track 2 finalists may be asked for additional information about human subjects research plans before awards are finalized. Release of awarded funds will be contingent upon approval/confirmation of appropriate IRB protocols.

Track 3 (Human Subjects and Clinical Populations Research) – $60K-$100K

  • Awards Available: 1-4 awards between $60K-$100K each are anticipated to support larger-scale human subjects and clinical research projects.
  • Project focus: Projects in Track 3 should be primarily focused on significant work with human subjects research with clinical populations.
  • Anticipated outcomes: Projects should target specific external follow-up funding, from the NIH (R21, R01, etc), foundations, industry, or other sponsors. Awards at this level are intended to catalyze activities that are larger/more ambitious than what is currently being done by a particular PI/Team.
  • Eligibility: PIs must be full-time UConn/UConn Health faculty. Open to those at any campus with Assistant/Associate/Full Professor titles (including titles such as Clinical Assistant Professor).
    • Investigators from JAX or CCMC are eligible to participate providing they have affiliate status with either UConn Health or UConn.  For Track 3, teams lead by JAX or CCMC investigators must include a collaborator from UConn or UConn Health.
  • Award Period: Awards will be made for activities that can be completed during a one-plus year award period (anticipated 6/1/2022-6/30/2023).
  • Team Composition: Projects that include cross-campus and clinical faculty involvement are especially encouraged, but not required.
  • Faculty Salary: Salary support for any faculty PIs/co-PIs/collaborators is not allowable.
  • Submission limits: Eligible faculty may submit only one proposal to CRISP as PI, across all tracks. There are no limits to how many proposals an individual may participate in as a co-PI or collaborator.
  • Additional approvals: Track 3 finalists may be asked for additional information about human subjects research plans before awards are finalized. Release of awarded funds will be contingent upon approval/confirmation of appropriate IRB protocols.

Proposal Guidelines

Proposals for CRISP Awards should contain the following elements and follow the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing and single-side pages.

  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Principal investigator(s) with contact information, List of other team members (including department, title, area of expertise), Specific follow-on funding mechanism targeted (if applicable).
  • Project Description: Proposals should address the following areas (adapted from general NIH Research Plan guidelines). Track 1 proposals should be 2-3 pages in length; Track 2 and 3 proposals should be no more than 5 pages.  Page totals include the specific aims page but do not include references, which do not count against the page limits.
    • Specific Aims (Track 1, half page max; Tracks 2 and 3, 1-Page max): Provide a summary of the goals of the project, the need being addressed, expected outcomes, and anticipated impact of the work.  Include a brief description of the specific objectives of the project.
      • For Track 1, the project can either be focused on research aims or on training/career development aims in support of research goals.
      • For Tracks 2 and 3, the aims must be focused on human subjects research.
    • Significance: Describe the research problem being addressed, the rationale behind the proposed work, how the proposed work relates to existing work in the field, and the significance of the work for the field.
      • Track 1: If training/career development activities are being proposed, this section can be used to address the applicant’s scientific background and how the proposed activities advance the applicant’s career goals.
      • Track 3: Include discussion of how the work you are proposing will position you/your team to be competitive for your targeted external funding mechanism.
    • Innovation: Describe and justify the novelty (of approach, population, research question/problem, etc.) of the work proposed
      • Track 1: If training/career development activities are being proposed, this section may be omitted.
    • Approach: Describe the research strategy and methodology to be used to accomplish the specific aims of the project, including project timelines and key milestones.
      • Track 1: If training/career development activities are being proposed, use this section to provide details about the specific activities proposed
      • Tracks 2 and 3: applicants should ensure that sufficient information is provided about proposed human subjects studies so that plans and strategies can be evaluated.  Additional information may be requested of finalists before awards are finalized.
    • Environment: Describe the facilities and other resources available that are necessary for the completion of the project. If there are any commitments needed to access spaces or resources, letters of support are needed to demonstrate that appropriate approvals have been obtained.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of CRISP funds. Please use this budget template.
  • Biosketches / CVs for all PIs and Co-PIs: Please include an updated biosketch consistent with NIH format.
  • NIH-style letters of support from facilities providing specific support during the CRISP award period.  Given that these are internal awards, letters of support can be quite brief, and serve only to demonstrate that PIs have made any necessary arrangements needed to secure access to facilities and other resources.  If no specific arrangements need to be made to gain access to a resource, no letter of support is needed.

Budget Guidelines

Below are general guidelines regarding allowable/unallowable costs that are consistent with other OVPR internal funding opportunities.  If you have a budget need that does not fit within these guidelines, you may include it, but we ask that you provide strong justification in support of the request.  Please use this budget template.

  • Allowable costs include: graduate research assistant salary, postdoc or other research assistant salary, undergraduate researcher salary, fringe costs, equipment purchases, travel to conduct research or meet with collaborators (travel approval may be required), materials and supplies, participant support costs, animal/animal care costs, contractual services, costs related to training (Track 1 only).
  • Unallowable costs include: subawards to other institutions; faculty member salaries; clerical or administrative personnel salaries, including personnel whose primary purpose is to explore funding sources and/or prepare grant applications; service/maintenance contracts on equipment; laboratory renovations, or other infrastructure renovations; institutional memberships in professional organizations; travel to professional meetings to present the results of the research; travel to explore extramural funding opportunities; costs associated with the publication of results of the research, including page charges, purchase of reprints, or journal costs.

Review Criteria

  • Significance:
    • Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field?
    • Is there a strong scientific premise for the project?
    • If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved?
    • How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
  • Investigators:
    • Are the PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project?
    • If the project is collaborative or multi-PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise?
  • Innovation:
    • Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies?
    • Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense?
    • Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
  • Approach:
    • Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed?
    • Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented?
    • If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed?
    • If the project involves human subjects and/or clinical research, are those plans justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?  Are there appropriate plans to protect human subjects from research risks?
  • Environment:
    • Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success?
    • Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed?
    • Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
  • Budget – Are funds to be used efficiently and effectively to achieve project goals?

Post-award Considerations and Reporting

  • Reporting requirements: PIs will need to prepare a brief report summarizing project progress at the end of the award period.
  • Further reports on project outcomes may be requested in the future to track return on investment.

Program Contacts

  • Administrative contact: Matt Mroz, PhD, OVPR Internal Funding Coordinator. research@uconn.edu; 860.486.6378

 

New England University Collaboration on Renewable and Sustainable Energy (NEUCORSE)

Purpose

UConn’s NEUCORSE initiative is designed to catalyze collaboration among universities in New England to address our nation’s urgent need for renewable and sustainable energy.  Building on UConn’s existing strengths in clean energy engineering, this program seeks to support the development of cross-institutional teams with the expertise and capacity to successfully tackle the most challenging scientific and technical problems in this area.  NEUCORSE awards should be thought of as planning grants that will provide seed funding and support team development activities to prepare teams for larger-scale activities in the future.   We welcome proposals focusing on any topic that is relevant to the larger goal of developing renewable and sustainable energy solutions and that can be best addressed through sustained, interdisciplinary efforts within New England.  It is expected that proposed teams be diverse, including investigators from underrepresented groups and a mixture of early-career and more senior investigators.  It is also expected that the planning activities proposed include activities that prepare for future work that will have significant broader impacts, including workforce development.

 

Program Timeline

  • Program opens 9/27/21.
  • Submissions to be made through the UConn Quest Portal.  Follow the link to submit an NOI.  For each subsequent stage (LOI, full proposal), you can log in to Quest and "continue" your application to access new tasks.
  • Notification of Intent to Submit (NOI) due 11/8/21. The NOI will give the OVPR a sense of how many teams are interested.  If a sizable number of NOIs are received, the OVPR may request a brief pre-proposal as part of an initial screening process.
  • Pre-proposal deadline 11/15/21, if required. Responses will be given by 10/22/21.
  • Full proposal deadline 12/13/21, by invitation only. Invitations will be provided either after the NOI stage or the pre-proposal stage.
  • Program is not being offered in FY23, but it is expected to run again in Fall 2023  (FY24)

 

Program/Award Details:

  • 3-4 awards of $75K-$100K will be made.  One year award periods are expected (generally 1/1/22-12/31/22), though alternate timelines can be proposed.
  • Teams must, at minimum, consist of a UConn/UConn Health PI and an academic partner from a New England institution.  Other academic or industry partners are also welcome.
  • It is the expectation that this funding mechanism will help develop bridges between institutions that have active groups working in areas of interest and to build on existing collaborations.  Applications from teams that do not have some level of previous collaboration are encouraged to consider other OVPR Internal Funding Programs.
  • Funds can be used to support research activities at UConn/UConn Health and team development activities for the full team.  Salary for external partner faculty and funding for research activities at other institutions must be supported by those institutions.
  • Review of full proposals will be carried out by a team of experts in the area of renewable and sustainable energy.
  • NEUCORSE-funded teams should be preparing to submit to significant external funding targets.  Some of the funding opportunities of greatest interest are the NSF ERC, the DOE EFRC, and potential opportunities for regional collaboration that may come as part of the reconfiguration of the NSF.  Other large-scale funding targets in this area can also be considered.  Applicants are expected to address their external funding strategy as part of their applications.

Eligibility

The NEUCORSE Program is available to UConn / UConn Health faculty members, within the following parameters:

  • UConn Primary Appointment: PIs must be full-time faculty whose primary appointment is at UConn/UConn Health. Investigators with primary appointments to CCMC, Jackson Labs, TIP companies, or other institutions are not eligible to lead projects, but they may be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.  Proposals that include external Co-PIs should be careful to describe how responsibility for the project will be divided between institutions, and they must describe how costs related to the participation of external partners will be covered.
  • Effort and Salary: Although no minimum effort level is required for NEUCORSE projects, a UConn/UConn Health PI/Co-PI must have departmental research time available during the award period or address in the application how they will handle the time commitment required by the project. PIs/Co-PIs must each make significant and distinct intellectual contributions to the design and direction of the project. Generally speaking, awards are only available to UConn/UConn Health tenure-track and clinical faculty and in-Residence faculty at the Storrs/Regional campuses. UCH in-residence faculty and research faculty are not eligible to apply as PI but can be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.
  • Application Limits: Eligible faculty may submit multiple proposals, so long as each are scientifically distinct. Investigators may also serve as collaborator on multiple projects.

Proposal Guidelines

Proposals for NEUCORSE Awards should contain the following elements and follow the structure and guidelines indicated (adapted from NSF Planning Grant proposals for programs like the ERC).  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing and single side pages.

  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Principal investigator(s) with contact information, List of other team members (including institution, department, area of expertise), Specific funding mechanism targeted, Target submission date
  • Project Description: Proposals should address the following areas and should not exceed 5 pages in length:
    • Targeted future activities and rationale for collaboration: Describe the core research questions and approaches the team is being formed to explore, the significance of that work, and why sustained interdisciplinary efforts like those you are planning are necessary for having the impact you anticipate.
    • Team Rationale: Describe the approach you are taking to assemble a team prepared to be successful in the work you’ve described above.
    • NEUCORSE Grant Activities and significance: Describe the research and team development activities to be supported with NEUCORSE funds and how these activities build on and expand any existing collaborations.  Specifically highlight the new activities the NEUCORSE grant would enable.
    • Anticipated Impacts: How will the activities you propose advance the development process and prepare your team to successfully meet your scientific and broader impact goals and to be competitive for significant external funding in this area.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of NEUCORSE funds.  You can use this budget template.
  • Biosketches / CVs for all PIs and Co-PIs: Please include an updated biosketch consistent with NSF format.
  • NSF-style Letters of support from any facilities providing support during the NEUCORSE award period

Budget Guidelines

Below are general guidelines regarding allowable/unallowable costs that are consistent with other OVPR internal funding opportunities.  Given the unique nature of the NEUCORSE mechanism, we understand that these guidelines may not include all budget items that are necessary to enhance competitiveness for your work.  If you have a budget need that does not fit within these guidelines, you may include it, but we ask that you provide strong justification in support of the request.  You can use this budget template.

  • Allowable costs include: graduate research assistant salary, Postdoc or other Research Assistant salary, Undergraduate Researcher salary, Course buyouts (approval letter from Department Head required), Fringe costs, equipment purchases, travel to conduct research or meet with collaborators (travel approval may be required), materials and supplies, participant support costs, animal/animal care costs, contractual services
  • Unallowable costs include: subawards to partner institutions, faculty member salaries, clerical or administrative personnel salaries, including personnel whose primary purpose is to explore funding sources and/or prepare grant applications; service/maintenance contracts on equipment; laboratory renovations, or other infrastructure renovations; institutional memberships in professional organizations; travel to professional meetings to present the results of the research; travel to explore extramural funding opportunities; costs associated with the publication of results of the research, including page charges, purchase of reprints, or journal costs.

Review Criteria

  • Targeted Future Activities
    • Significance/Merit—Does the team being formed aim to address significant scientific questions / technical problems in the area of renewable and sustainable energy?  Is the proposed approach promising and methodologically sound?  Does this work require sustained, interdisciplinary efforts that draws on the resources of the New England region?
    • Innovation/Novelty – Does this project approach the problem in a new/innovative way?
    • Environment/Resources – Are available resources/facilities sufficient to successfully complete the work? Are external partners adequately supported by their institutions?
    • PI/Team qualifications – Who will be working on this project, and how are they uniquely suited to accomplish this work?  Does the team have the required expertise to be successful?  Does the team demonstrate interdisciplinary and diversity?
  • Proposed NEUCORSE Activities
    • Significance/Merit—are the proposed research and development activities well-designed/conceptualized?  Do they build on existing collaborations and extend them in ways that expand the capacity of the team?
    • Feasibility of Approach – are the proposed research and development plans feasible and likely to succeed?
    • Outcome – will the activities proposed adequately prepare the team to achieve their scientific and broader impact goals and to be competitive for significant external funding in this area?
    • Assessment – Does the project have a reasonable plan for measuring and determining success?
    • Budget – Are funds to be used efficiently and effectively to achieve project goals?

Post-Award Considerations

  • Reporting requirements: PIs will need to prepare a brief report summarizing project progress at the end of the award period.
  • Further reports on project outcomes may be requested in the future to track return on investment.

Program Contacts

  • Administrative contact: Matt Mroz, PhD, OVPR Internal Funding Coordinator. research@uconn.edu; 860.486.6378

 

  • Program Director: Mark Aindow, PhD, Executive Director for Innovation, External Engagement, and Industry Relations. m.aindow@uconn.edu; 860.486.1339

OVPR-RDS Event Registration

Thank you for your interest in our event! Please provide some information about yourself so we can can complete your registration.

  • Registrant Information

  • Please select the job title that best describes your current position
  • Please use your University Email Address
  • Please list your home department
  • Please let us know if you have any comments for the presenters or if you require any accommodations in order to participate
  • Please check the box next to the workshop(s) you would like to attend.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Important Notice on Proposal Submission Policy

Revision Date: March 8, 2021 – revisions in italics

As an applicant organization, UConn/UConn Health has an institutional responsibility to verify the accuracy, validity, conformity, and eligibility of all applications submitted to a sponsor on behalf of the University. We have been exploring how to ensure the best delivery of services, meet sponsor and institutional policy requirements that were highlighted in the recent NSF audit, and to ensure that the University has sufficient time to review and certify proposals and increase the number of successful applications. To that end, we have conducted a survey of all faculty who submitted grant proposals within the last two years, listened to the research community’s comments at town halls, and solicited input from the President, Provost, deans, associate deans for research, the President’s Research Advisory Council, University Senate, and other faculty groups.

This listening process revealed that one of the main challenges for both investigators and staff is the bottleneck that occurs immediately prior to proposal submission. In recent years, nearly two-thirds of proposals submitted (with all components ready) are received by Sponsored Program Services (SPS) within one working day or less of the sponsor deadline.

Numerous proposals are being submitted just barely in time, meaning there is little time for a thorough review. Additionally, proposals that have been submitted to SPS far in advance also routinely lack a timely and thorough review because other proposals with an earlier deadline came in and “cut the line.”

To begin to remedy the proposal submission bottleneck, beginning May 5, 2021, the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) will implement the current policy on internal deadlines for the review and submission of sponsored project proposals. The process change aims to reduce last day proposal submissions and will prioritize proposals as received. Once the policy is implemented, final administrative components of a proposal must be received by SPS Pre-Award at least five full business days in advance of the submission due date (along with a draft of the scientific components). The final submission ready proposal is due to SPS no later than noon the day before the sponsor deadline.

Exceptions include short turnaround RFPs, last minute sponsor requests, or a last minute opportunity to join a proposal under submission by another institution. Also, each UConn investigator will be given one pass to use in the event they are not able to meet the internal five-day deadline. As is the current practice, SPS Pre-Award will make every effort to submit these proposals when possible. Please visit the OVPR website for additional information and FAQs regarding the internal deadline policy.

To increase faculty support related to proposal preparation, the OVPR will be taking the following additional steps:

  • The OVPR is working to address situations where investigators do not have dedicated administrative support for the preparation of a proposal; we will continue to increase staff training opportunities, extend faculty service offerings, and work to simplify the submission process.
  • The OVPR will implement a dashboard to increase transparency and provide information on the status and order of review.
  • The OVPR will provide additional research development services, such as grant editing and proofreading, proposal review, large and complex grant support, and research funding consultation. Further information regarding these services and how to request them is available on the OVPR Research Development section of this website.
  • The OVPR will continue to work with and incorporate feedback from faculty working groups.  Upon recommendation of the University Senate, the President formed a sponsored projects working group to identify impediments to the expeditious review of sponsored project proposals in advance of deadlines.  The group’s report is available on the University Senate website.

 

Development, review, and submission timeline:

Full Business Days Before Submission Deadline

>6 days: PI provides application components to local grants administrator (or Faculty Services)

5 days: Complete application (plus draft scientific components) and IPR submitted to SPS

5-2 days: SPS reviews proposal and provides feedback

2 days: Corrections made and all approvals in place

Noon day before deadline: Final proposal and PI authorization to submit to sponsor provided to SPS

1-0 days before deadline: Proposal submitted

SPS is responsible for ensuring that applications are compliant and that institutional and sponsor guidelines are met including administrative, management, and scientific information. Please contact Paul Hudobenko (hudobenko@uchc.edu/UConn Health) or Mark Reeves (mark.reeves@uconn.edu/Storrs and Regionals) with questions as we move to a consistent and sustainable process.

Thank you for your continued cooperation in our collaborative efforts to advance UConn’s mission through innovative research, scholarship, and creative pursuits.

 

Proposal Development, Review, and Submission Timeline

Full Business Days Before Submission Deadline

>6 days: PI provides application components to local grants administrator (or Faculty Services)

5 days: Complete application (plus draft scientific components) and IPR submitted to SPS

5-2 days: SPS reviews proposal and provides feedback

2 days: Corrections made and all approvals in place

Noon day before deadline: Final proposal and PI authorization to submit to sponsor provided to SPS

1-0 days before deadline: Proposal submitted

 

RDS Contacts

Meet the Research Development Services Team!

Under the leadership and direction of interim Vice President for Research, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship Pamir Alpay, the Research Development Services team is excited to put their talents and experience to work partnering with UConn/UConn Health investigators to increase faculty grant-seeking success.

 

Bethany Drews Javidi, MA – Large/Complex Proposal Development Specialist

Bethany Drews Javidi has worked in proposal development at UConn since fall of 2013, primarily in the School of Engineering (SoE), where she supported numerous large-scale research and education proposals to a range of agencies, including NSF, NIH, the US Departments of Education, Energy, Defense, and Transportation, and others. She also cultivated junior faculty grantsmanship skills through NSF CAREER proposal development workshops and mentoring, which led to 20 NSF CAREER awards to SoE faculty since 2016.

Matthew Mroz, PhD – Manager, Research Development Services

Matt is responsible for the management of the OVPR’s portfolio of internal seed and commercialization funding opportunities, the selection processes for Limited Submission grant and award opportunities, Grantwriting Training, and the coordination of proposal development support services.  Matt earned his doctorate in English from UConn in 2015 (research interests: English Renaissance Literature and Rhetoric), and he has teaching and administrative experience in early modern literature and rhetoric and composition.

Caitlin O’Connell, PhD – Research Development Specialist

Caitlin provides proposal development support to faculty, including consultation, editing, and document management. Prior to joining the OVPR, she worked as a postdoctoral research associate in Allied Health Sciences. She completed a PhD in Pathobiology at UConn, where her research focused on vaccine safety. She began her career with a B.S. in Biology from Stonehill College.

RDS Proposal Development Policies

  • Policies – Prerequisites
    • We consider investigators to be our partners in this process. Having access to thoughtful and complete responses to our requests for information enables us to provide the highest level of support possible.
    • Incomplete requests will be returned to the PI. Requests that are resubmitted may not retain their original position in the service queue. Any questions regarding prerequisite documents may be sent to ovpr-rds@uconn.edu.
  • Policies – Project Timelines
    • Our Service Descriptions give estimated timelines that are based on the minimum length of time required for completion of service after approval of your request. Some services may require additional meetings, background research or consultation efforts that can add to project timelines.
    • Maintaining scheduled timelines is a joint effort between RDS and the investigators. We will make every effort to accommodate your schedule into our workflow. As part of our project onboarding process, we will agree on a timeline with the PI. Please be aware that we may need to curtail support if mutually agreed upon deadlines aren’t met.
    • Requests submitted within 14 days of the proposal due date are unlikely to receive service.
  • Policies- Sharing of funder reviews and comments
    • Access to funder comments or reviews is helpful to our team to understand how we can enhance the competitiveness of submissions and improve our services. For this reason, researchers who submit proposals after receiving support from RDS are asked to provide follow-up information on the outcome of their proposal submission, including funder reviews or comments.
    • Any funder data, reviews, or comments will be used ONLY by the RDS staff to assess our services and monitor the funding landscape. These documents will remain confidential and will not be shared or used for any other purpose.

Request Research Development Services

Request Process

All requests will be routed through the Proposal Development Request webform (NetID required for submissions). Requestors will receive a confirmation email after submitting the form. We will follow up with an email if more information is needed to evaluate the request. Please submit requests as early as possible.

Request RDS Service

Evaluation Process

Requests for support will be evaluated by the Research Development Services team on a regular basis.  Investigators should expect to receive a response from RDS within 3-5 days.  Due to limited resources, not all requests can be supported at this time. Factors such as RDS team capacity, other potential support resources, project scope and timeline, and strategic imperatives will be considered during evaluation.  Hanover Research and other external partners/consultants will be used to extend the capacity of the RDS team as needed.  RDS services are supported by the OVPR and are open to all UConn/UConn Health faculty free of charge.

Priority will be given to:

  • Proposals that align with institutional, school/college, and OVPR priorities
  • Large, complex, and multidisciplinary proposals

Questions?  Please contact the RDS team at OVPR-RDS@uconn.edu

Proposal Development Services Offered

Please click to expand the sections below in order to learn more about the Research Development Services (RDS) available.

RDS services are supported by the OVPR and are open to all UConn/UConn Health free of charge.

Consultation to determine fit with funding opportunity

What we provide: A phone call or video chat to discuss how your proposed research meets the described funding opportunity and the funder’s overall priorities, as well as margin comments on your document to enhance competitiveness. We may also suggest that you contact a funding agency program officer or other experts and can provide suggestions on what to say during this discussion.

What you provide: The funding opportunity you are interested in applying to (website link or PDF document) and a one-page concept paper or specific aims document describing your research and how you will respond to the funding opportunity.

Timeline: This consultation requires a minimum of one week. We recommend that this step is completed several months before the proposal due date.

Brief review of an early draft

What we provide: High-level comments on narrative structure and content. Changes will be tracked and notes made in the margin of your document. Comments may relate to alignment with funder objectives, the logical flow of the narrative, completeness, and general grantsmanship suggestions.

What you provide: A completed draft of the project narrative or description and the funding opportunity you are interested in applying to (website link or PDF document). For any resubmissions/revisions, please also provide the previous submission and any reviews or comments from the funder.

Timeline: This brief review requires a minimum of two weeks. We recommend that the review is completed one to two months before the proposal due date to allow time for modifications.

In-depth review of a completed draft

What we provide: High-level comments on narrative structure and content. Changes will be tracked and notes made in the margin of your document. Comments may relate to alignment with funder objectives, the logical flow of the narrative, completeness, and general grantsmanship suggestions. Review of written supporting documents if provided by the PI. Line edits for improved wording, grammatical structure, etc. are available upon request, scheduling permitting.

What you provide: A completed draft of the project narrative or description, the project abstract or summary, and other supporting documentation you would like to have reviewed. Please also provide the funding opportunity you are interested in applying to (website link or PDF document). For any resubmissions/revisions, please also provide the previous submission and any reviews or comments from the funder.

Timeline:  High-level comments on narrative structure and content should take place 1-2 months before the proposal is due. Follow-up review with line edits should take place within three weeks of proposal submission.

Mid-scale proposal development support ($1M-$5M)

What we can provide:

  1. Planning support – review of funding opportunity (proposal requirements), analysis of funding agency expectations, establishing proposal development timeline
  2. Writing and editing – document review, writing support as needed (generally non-scientific sections)
  3. Document management – coordinate with PI, research team, and budget and administrative support staff

What you provide: The funding opportunity you are interested in applying to (website link or PDF document), your anticipated team of PIs/personnel, and a one- to two-page concept paper describing your research and how you will respond to the funding opportunity.

Timeline: This service should be requested at least 3-6 months prior to the proposal due date.

Large and complex proposal development support ($5M+)

What we can provide:

  1. Planning support – review of funding opportunity (proposal requirements), analysis of funding agency expectations, establishing proposal development timeline
  2. Organizational – coordination among research team, external partners, administrative staff, etc.; tracking progress towards proposal completion; keeping process on track.
  3. Writing and editing – document review, writing support as needed (generally non-scientific sections)
  4. Document management – coordinate with PI, research team, and budget and administrative support staff

What you provide: The funding opportunity you are interested in applying to (website link or PDF document), your anticipated team of PIs/personnel, and a one- to two-page concept paper describing your research and how you will respond to the funding opportunity.

Timeline: This service should be requested at least 6 months prior to the proposal due date.

Now available! – Proposal Proofreading

What we provide:  A full read-through of the proposal by a member of our proofreading pool to identify and correct typos, formatting errors, or minor grammatical issues.  Track changes will be used to allow the investigator an opportunity to review all changes made prior to the proposal moving forward.

What you provide: A final version of all proposal documents the investigator would like reviewed.  Documents provided should be as close to a final polished form as possible; the proofreading service is intended to give proposal documents a final review, not more substantive revision and editing.

Timeline: Proposal proofreading requires a minimum of 3-5 business days. We recommend that this step is requested no later than 10 business days before the proposal due date to the sponsor (5 business days prior to the SPS Pre-award internal deadline).

 

Research Development Services (RDS): Proposal Development Services Overview

Overview

As a University, we’ve committed to work together to substantially grow UConn/UConn Health’s capacity for high-level research, scholarship, and creative endeavors.  As part of its Research Development (RD) efforts, the Office of the Vice President for Research now offers proposal development services to increase the competitiveness of proposals UConn/UConn Health investigators submit to funders.  The services offered include consultation, brief and in depth proposal reviews, and large and complex proposal support.  They are open to all UConn/UConn Health faculty free of charge.

Proposal development services build on the success of OVPR RD initiatives such as grantwriting training and seed funding programs by providing grantwriting support, including grantsmanship reviews, proposal editing, and project management support for large and complex proposals.  These services are designed to ensure that high-quality science and scholarship proposed by UConn investigators can be as competitive as possible.

To learn more about the role and mission of our Research Development Services team, the services we offer, and UConn’s priority areas for research growth, please explore our website.

RDS Proposal Development Mission

The mission of the Research Development Services (RDS) team is to support the research growth of the University by increasing the competitiveness of proposals submitted by UConn/UConn Health investigators seeking external funding.  We prioritize support for proposals that align with one or more of the University’s strategic priorities.  We aim to provide targeted support of the proposal development process, using our skills and experience to extend and refine the capacity of UConn/UConn Health faculty to develop and submit larger and more compelling proposals.  Our goal is to provide high-level support in our areas of expertise, including:

  • Technical writing and editing
  • Interpreting and applying the requirements and proposal conventions of major funders, funding programs, and funding opportunity announcements
  • Knowledge of grantsmanship strategies
  • Project Management
  • Familiarity with UConn/UConn Health research capacities, faculty, resources, and systems

The role of the RDS team in the proposal development process

Investigators are the driving force behind the writing and submission of grant proposals.  Without the scientific/scholarly expertise, ambition, and dedicated work of PIs, proposals don’t get done!  However, we also know that PIs rarely work alone as they seek external funding; proposal preparation and submission is usually a team effort.  Let’s take a look at the different players in the grantseeking process and see how research development fits in.

Scientific/Scholarly Team: The PI(s) and their team(s) of collaborators are the creative center of the grantwriting process.  Together, they set the direction of the work, draft technical sections of the proposal, and work to ensure that the research proposed is of high scientific/scholarly merit, consulting when necessary with other disciplinary experts.

Budget and Administrative Support: The staff in the investigators’ departments, school/college office, or in OVPR Faculty Services are essential members of the team who assist with the preparation of budgets, proposal assembly, and other administrative aspects of the proposal development process.

SPS Pre-award: The staff in Sponsored Program Services, while not involved in the creation of a proposal, are responsible for conducting a final compliance review and certification of the proposal, and in most cases are responsible for its final submission to the sponsor.

Research Development Services Support: The Research Development Services team provides an additional layer of proposal development support, filling gaps between what the PI team is responsible for and what the budget and administrative support team is responsible for.

  • While not necessarily scientific/scholarly experts in the PI(s) field(s), the RDS team are experts in writing, editing, and organization and in the requirements/expectations of funders. The RDS team can join with the PI team to help produce proposal narratives that are clearer, more compelling, and better aligned with funder expectations—i.e. proposals that are more fundable!
  • For larger and more complex proposals, the RDS team can provide a project management function for the proposal development process. RDS can help set and manage timelines, facilitate group interactions, assist with document management, and help coordinate connections among the differing areas of budget and administrative support that may be involved with a large/complex proposal.

UConn COVID-19 Rapid Start Funding (COVID-RSF) Program

Note: The guidelines below are for the first cycle of COVID-RSF funding, which is now closed.  Click here for updated and expanded COVID-RSF2 (COVID-19 Research Seed Fund) guidelines.

 

Purpose

COVID-RSF is an initiative of the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) that supports the development of promising projects related to COVID-19.  Many funding agencies have responded to the pandemic by creating emergency/rapid funding mechanisms that address key scientific problems related to the detection, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of this disease.  A recent and notable example is the NIH RADx-rad program, which seeks to advance capabilities related to COVID-19 testing.

This internal funding mechanism seeks to identify and support novel technologies and approaches with strong potential to be competitive for emergency funding opportunities addressing COVID-19.  Proposals should be able to make a compelling case that the technology/approach is unique and can have a significant impact on COVID-19 related challenges in the near term.  Given the rapidly-changing nature of the COVID-19 funding landscape, projects with the potential for this kind of impact will be considered regardless of whether a specific external funding opportunity currently addresses it.

COVID-RSF seeks proposals for potentially high-impact projects that are ready to launch in a short period of time.  As such, early-stage seed projects or other developmental work will not be competitive.  Applications will be collected and rapidly reviewed in early September, with funding to be released by October 1.  It is expected that COVID-RSF funding will be used to support a short ramp-up period for these highly-competitive projects while they are being submitted and considered for rapid-response external funding.

To give a sense of the NIH’s current interests related to COVID-19, some of the topics addressed by the recent RADx-rad program include:

  1. Wastewater detection of SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19)
  2. Exosome-based Non-traditional Technologies Towards Multi-Parametric and Integrated Approaches for SARS-CoV-2
  3. Chemosensory Testing as a COVID-19 Screening Tool
  4. Predicting Viral-Associated Inflammatory Disease Severity in Children with Laboratory Diagnostics and Artificial Intelligence (PreVAIL kIds)
  5. Multimodal COVID-19 surveillance methods for High Risk Populations in densely populated facilities
  6. Novel Biosensing for Screening, Diagnosis and Monitoring of COVID-19 From Skin and The Oral Cavity
  7. Automatic detection and tracing of SARS-COV-2
  8. RADx-rad will also have a Data Coordination Center (DCC) which will provide management, direction, and overall coordination across RADx-rad awardees in areas such as data sharing, data management standards, terminologies, and common data elements.

Other topics from across all disciplines will also be considered, so long as they have potential to make an immediate impact on the detection, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of COVID-19.

 Timeline:

  • Proposals (brief whitepapers, plus budget and biosketches) due Friday, Sept 11 2020 by 12 noon. Program now closed.
  • Submissions should be made via the UConn Quest portal.
  • Award notices expected by Sept 18.  Award setup will begin immediate after notice, pending the completion of compliance review.

Program/Award Details:

  • Several awards of up to $50K will be made
  • As these are rapid-response grants, it is expected that projects would spin up quickly following award and the scope-of-work completed within a few months.  Projects with a scope longer than 6 months are strongly discouraged.

 

Eligibility

The COVID-RSF Program is available to UConn / UConn Health faculty members, within the following parameters:

  • UConn Primary Appointment: PIs must be full-time faculty whose primary appointment is at UConn/UConn Health. Investigators with primary appointments to CCMC, Jackson Labs, TIP companies, or other institutions are not eligible to lead projects, but they may be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.  Proposals that include external Co-PIs should be careful to describe how responsibility for the project will be divided between institutions, and ideally they will include cost-sharing commitments from external partners
  • Effort and Salary: Although no minimum effort level is required for COVID-RSF projects, a UConn/UConn Health PI/Co-PI must have departmental research time available during the award period or address in the application how they will handle the time commitment required by the project. PIs/Co-PIs must each make significant and distinct intellectual contributions to the design and direction of the project. Generally speaking, awards are only available to UConn/UConn Health tenure-track and clinical faculty and in-Residence faculty at the Storrs/Regional campuses. UCH in-residence faculty and research faculty are not eligible to apply as PI but can be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.
  • Application Limits: Eligible faculty may submit multiple proposals, so long as each are scientifically distinct. Investigators may serve as collaborator on multiple projects.

Proposal Guidelines

Proposals for COVID-RSF Awards should contain the following elements and follow the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing and single side pages.

  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Principal investigator(s) with contact information, List of other team members, Specific funding mechanism targeted, Target submission date
  • White Paper: Briefly describe the project, how it will be conducted, and anticipated outcomes. White papers should address the following areas and should not exceed 2-3 pages in length:
    • Core Research Questions to be addressed and their significance
    • Currently available resources and personnel and how they will support the project
    • Proposed activities under COVID-RSF Award and how they will advance the project towards the goal of impacting the fight against COVID-19.  If you have a specific funding mechanism in mind for follow-up funding, also address how the work under this award will improve competitiveness for that mechanism.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of COVID-RSF funds.  You can use this budget template.
  • Biosketches / CVs for all PIs and Co-PIs: Please include an updated biosketch consistent with NIH (max 5 pg)/NSF (max 2 pg) format.  If your field is not typically funded by NSF/NIH, please include a brief CV following your discipline’s conventions.
  • NSF/NIH-style Letters of support from any facilities providing support during the COVID-RSF award period

Budget Guidelines

Below are general guidelines regarding allowable/unallowable costs that are consistent with other OVPR internal funding opportunities.  Given the unique nature of the COVID-RSF mechanism, we understand that these guidelines may not include all budget items that are necessary to enhance competitiveness for your targeted external mechanism.  If you have a budget need that does not fit within these guidelines, you may include it, but we ask that you provide strong justification in support of the request.  You can use this budget template.

  • Allowable costs include: graduate research assistant salary, Postdoc or other Research Assistant salary, Undergraduate Researcher salary, Course buyouts (approval letter from Department Head required), Fringe costs, equipment purchases, travel to conduct research or meet with collaborators (Provost approval may be required), materials and supplies, participant support costs, animal/animal care costs, contractual services
  • Unallowable costs include: faculty member salaries, clerical or administrative personnel salaries, including personnel whose primary purpose is to explore funding sources and/or prepare grant applications; service/maintenance contracts on equipment; laboratory renovations, or other infrastructure renovations; institutional memberships in professional organizations; travel to professional meetings to present the results of the research; travel to explore extramural funding opportunities; costs associated with the publication of results of the research, including page charges, purchase of reprints, or journal costs.

Review Criteria

  • Timing – Is the project capable of spinning up immediately?
  • Significance/Importance – Does this project address a significant scientific question / technical problem?
  • Innovation/Novelty – Does this project approach the problem in a new/innovative way?
  • Feasibility of Approach – Does this project have a clear and methodologically sound approach?  Is the plan of work described likely to succeed?
  • Environment/Resources – Are available resources/facilities sufficient to successfully complete the work?
  • PI/Team qualifications – Who will be working on this project, and how are they uniquely suited to accomplish this work?  Does the team have a strong track record of external grant success?
  • Outcome – Does the project promise to produce significant value / high impact?
  • Assessment – Does the project have a reasonable plan for measuring and determining success?
  • Budget – Are funds to be used efficiently and effectively to achieve project goals?

Post-Award Considerations and Reporting

  • Reporting requirements: PIs will need to prepare a brief report summarizing project progress within six months.
  • Further reports on project outcomes may be requested in the future to track return on investment.

Program Contacts

    • Administrative contact: Matt Mroz, PhD, OVPR Internal Funding Coordinator. research@uconn.edu;
    • Program Director: Mark Aindow, PhD, Executive Director for Innovation, External Engagement, and Industry Relations. m.aindow@uconn.edu

UConn COVID-19 Research Seed Funding (COVID-RSF2) Program

Note: The guidelines below are for the second cycle of COVID-RSF funding.  Click here to for the first cycle guidelines.  The COVID-RSF program is now closed and no additional funding cycles are anticipated.

Purpose

COVID-RSF (Rapid Start Funding) and COVID-RSF2 (Research Seed Funding) are initiatives of the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) that support the development of promising projects related to COVID-19.  Given the enthusiastic and high-quality response to the first COVID-RSF cycle (37 white papers were received, resulting in 5 awards of up to $50K each), Vice President Maric has allocated additional funds to support COVID-19 related research.  The OVPR anticipates offering an additional 10 awards of up to $10K each.

This new competition, COVID-RSF2, expands the scope of the previous call to include longer-term projects and additional topics.  In addition to seeking mature projects promising very near-term impact on the detection, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of COVID-19, we also welcome proposals for earlier-stage COVID-19 seed projects, small scale pilot projects, projects related to the social and medical impact of COVID-19, and other related topics.

Applications will be collected and rapidly reviewed in mid-to-late October, with the goal releasing funding by early November.

 

Timeline:

  • Proposals (brief whitepapers, plus budget and biosketches) due Friday, October 16, 2020 by 12 noon.
  • Submissions should be made via the UConn Quest portal.
  • Award notices expected by October 30.  Award setup will begin immediate after notice, pending the completion of compliance review.

 

Program/Award Details:

  • Up to 10 awards of up to $10K will be made
  • Standard award period will be November 2020 through December 31, 2021.

 

Eligibility

The COVID-RSF2 Program is available to UConn / UConn Health faculty members, within the following parameters:

  • UConn Primary Appointment: PIs must be full-time faculty whose primary appointment is at UConn/UConn Health. Investigators with primary appointments to CCMC, Jackson Labs, TIP companies, or other institutions are not eligible to lead projects, but they may be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.  Proposals that include external Co-PIs should be careful to describe how responsibility for the project will be divided between institutions, and ideally they will include cost-sharing commitments from external partners
  • Effort and Salary: Although no minimum effort level is required for COVID-RSF2 projects, a UConn/UConn Health PI/Co-PI must have institutionally-funded research time available during the award period or address in the application how they will handle the time commitment required by the project. PIs/Co-PIs must each make significant and distinct intellectual contributions to the design and direction of the project. Generally speaking, awards are only available to UConn/UConn Health tenure-track and clinical faculty and in-Residence faculty at the Storrs/Regional campuses. UCH in-residence faculty and research faculty are not eligible to apply as PI but can be named as Co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on an eligible PI’s project.
  • Application Limits: Eligible faculty may submit multiple proposals, so long as each are scientifically distinct. Investigators may serve as collaborator on multiple projects.
  • COVID-RSF Resubmissions:  Faculty who submitted white papers for the previous COVID-RSF mechanism are eligible to resubmit if they wish, provided the white papers and budgets are appropriately reconfigured to be commensurate with a $10K award.

Proposal Guidelines

Proposals for COVID-RSF2 Awards should contain the following elements and follow the structure and guidelines indicated.  All length guidelines assume 1” margins, 11-12pt fonts, single spacing and single side pages.

  • Cover Page: Title of Project, Principal investigator(s) with contact information, List of other team members, Specific funding mechanism targeted, Target submission date
  • White Paper: Briefly describe the project, how it will be conducted, and anticipated outcomes. White papers should address the following areas and should not exceed 2-3 pages in length:
    • Core Research Questions to be addressed and their significance
    • Currently available resources and personnel and how they will support the project
    • Proposed activities under COVID-RSF2 Award and how they will advance the project towards the goal of impacting the fight against COVID-19.  If you have a specific funding mechanism in mind for follow-up funding, also address how the work under this award will improve competitiveness for that mechanism.
  • Budget describing and justifying use of COVID-RSF2 funds.  You can use this budget template.
  • Biosketches / CVs for all PIs and Co-PIs: Please include an updated biosketch consistent with NIH (max 5 pg)/NSF (max 2 pg) format.  If your field is not typically funded by NSF/NIH, please include a brief CV following your discipline’s conventions.
  • NSF/NIH-style Letters of support from any facilities providing support during the COVID-RSF award period

Budget Guidelines

Below are general guidelines regarding allowable/unallowable costs that are consistent with other OVPR internal funding opportunities.  If you have a budget need that does not fit within these guidelines, you may include it, but we ask that you provide strong justification in support of the request.  You can use this budget template.

  • Allowable costs include: graduate research assistant salary, Postdoc or other Research Assistant salary, Undergraduate Researcher salary, Course buyouts (approval letter from Department Head required), Fringe costs, equipment purchases, travel to conduct research or meet with collaborators (Provost approval may be required), materials and supplies, participant support costs, animal/animal care costs, contractual services
  • Unallowable costs include: faculty member / professional staff salaries, clerical or administrative personnel salaries, including personnel whose primary purpose is to explore funding sources and/or prepare grant applications; service/maintenance contracts on equipment; laboratory renovations, or other infrastructure renovations; institutional memberships in professional organizations; travel to professional meetings to present the results of the research; travel to explore extramural funding opportunities; costs associated with the publication of results of the research, including page charges, purchase of reprints, or journal costs.

Review Criteria

  • Significance/Importance – Does this project address a significant scientific question / technical problem?
  • Innovation/Novelty – Does this project approach the problem in a new/innovative way?
  • Feasibility of Approach – Does this project have a clear and methodologically sound approach?  Is the plan of work described likely to succeed?
  • Environment/Resources – Are available resources/facilities sufficient to successfully complete the work?
  • PI/Team qualifications – Who will be working on this project, and how are they uniquely suited to accomplish this work?  Does the team have a strong track record of external grant success?
  • Outcome – Does the project promise to produce significant value / high impact?
  • Assessment – Does the project have a reasonable plan for measuring and determining success?
  • Budget – Are funds to be used efficiently and effectively to achieve project goals?

Post-Award Considerations and Reporting

  • Reporting requirements: PIs will need to prepare a brief report summarizing project progress at the conclusion of the project.
  • Further reports on project outcomes may be requested in the future to track return on investment.

Program Contacts

    • Administrative contact: Matt Mroz, PhD, OVPR Internal Funding Coordinator. research@uconn.edu;
    • Program Director: Mark Aindow, PhD, Executive Director for Innovation, External Engagement, and Industry Relations. m.aindow@uconn.edu

Guidance for Fall 2020 Lab, Field, and Human Subjects Research

As we approach the beginning of another unprecedented time in UConn’s history, my team and I have provided guidance on several topics related to the continued resumption of research. Since May, researchers have shown that with proper procedures, adherence to guidelines, and community commitment, it was possible to return to the critically important research projects happening throughout UConn. Throughout this process, the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR) has adhered to President Katsouleas’ message that in order to educate our students in a pandemic, we must all work together and to provide a safe learning environment. Students returning to UConn campuses must also commit to the “UConn Promise” to help keep the UConn community safe, including strictly abiding by rules that require a campus quarantine to start the semester, face mask usage at all times, and keeping physical distance from one another. Similar requirements of masking and distancing are mandated by the state for off-campus residents, as well as quarantines for those from most outside states. These guidelines will not only help to keep our students in the classroom, they will help to keep researchers in the lab, field, and clinic.

While most labs have already resumed activities under the current process, which requires approval from the OVPR, some faculty and students may have questions about what is required to continue or initiate new research projects in the fall. As of August 31, 2020 when the campus reopens, obtaining written approval from the OVPR for Resuming Research Activity is no longer necessary to engage in research on any of UConn’s campuses. The following guidance outlines additional aspects of conducting research at UConn for the Fall Re-Opening.

 

Guidance for Fall 2020 Lab, Field, and Human Subjects Research

  • Approval from the OVPR for “Resuming Research Activity” will no longer be required for conducting research at any UConn campus.
  • Labs and research programs must continue to develop and maintain a written COVID-19 Research Safety Plan (Lab and Field Research COVID-19 Safety Plan or Human Subjects COVID-19 Safety Plan), but submission and approval of Research Safety Plans to the OVPR will no longer be required. Departments and administrative offices are required to perform a detailed risk assessment, set site-specific prevention protocols, and to have the resulting safety plan approved by their leadership. If your department does not already have an approved COVID-19 safety plan in place, please use the Return to Campus COVID-19 Protection Plan template to prepare to return to work on campus.
  • Research personnel must continue to be trained on the plan and documentation of the training must be maintained.
  • Research personnel must continue to complete COVID-19 Research Safety Training from the Division of Environmental Health and Safety. Documentation of completion must be retained as part of Research Safety Plan documentation.
  • Research Safety Plans may be amended as necessary. If a plan is amended, all personnel must be retrained on the amended plan and training must be documented.
  • Research Safety Plans should continue to address federal and state guidelines and requirements.
  • Lab and research personnel must follow University wide and campus specific COVID-19 requirements.
  • Research Safety Plans must allow for distancing of at least six feet, with the goal of maintaining an overall personnel density of 50% or less of the pre-COVID occupancy/density. If this is not possible then the Safety Plan must justify why and specify what measures will be put in place to minimize the potential of exposure.
  • For research involving human subjects, Research Safety Plans should should be developed based on the clinical requirements of UConn Health, even if those projects take place on another UConn campus. If this is not possible, the Research Safety Plan must justify why and specify what measures will be put in place to minimize the potential of exposure.
  • Labs and research programs should maintain a process to know when personnel are working in the labs or research areas. Labs and research programs may develop their own methods to achieve this goal. Signed daily logs will no longer be required as the only acceptable method. Other acceptable methods include key card access, electronic check-ins, or use of location-based apps. Some schools and colleges may also have processes in place for monitoring building density and access.
  • Labs and research programs should continue to have and refine plans to immediately halt or ramp down research activities, if required.
  • The summer requirements/processes for undergraduates to participate in research will no longer be required. Guidance for Fall Undergraduate Research and Independent Study Courses has been issued.

While we reopen UConn for academic activities, we thank you for your dedication to the health and safety of your labs and the UConn community. If you have additional questions, more information can be found on the OVPR website or by emailing ovpr@uconn.edu.

Innovation Funding Opportunities

Below you will find a list of funding opportunities for research faculty and students in the areas of Agricultural Sciences, Animal Sciences, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Food Sciences, and opportunities for startups.  If you would like to have an opportunity added to the below list please contact: Taylor Renaud

Agricultural Sciences

Program

Deadline

Description

Bayer Partnering Opportunities Admission Dates Vary Bayer’s vision of #HealthForAll, #HungerForNone drives our need to strengthen innovation capabilities in all areas of agriculture. We know we can’t accomplish this alone, so we’re always interested to hear about novel, early-stage scientific innovations that can contribute to feeding the world without starving the planet. You have our commitment to take a look, match with our R&D priorities and provide you timely feedback.
BASF Admission Dates Vary Join us in our efforts to innovate for a sustainable future: we welcome you to bring in your expertise to help with our ongoing challenges. Beyond that, we regularly offer opportunities for external collaboration in temporary campaigns. Additionally, in our open collaborations, you may find a perfect match with your profile. Take initiative and get in touch with us.
Rolling Admissions Nitrogen is a key requirement for crop growth and building healthy soil supports sustainable crop production. The aim of this project is to identify and validate microbiome health technologies which reduce the reliance on synthetic agrochemicals applied to and/or improve soil health in potato, oat, citrus and corn crops, whilst maintaining yield and quality.
NATURAL SYSTEMS FOR REDUCTION IN PESTICIDES, FUNGICIDES, AND FERTILIZERS ON KEY CROPS Rolling Admissions Mondelēz International seeks natural, safe means for increasing growth of key crops such as wheat and cocoa and/or to fight common insect pests and diseases such as fusarium head blight in wheat and Vascular Streak Dieback black pod, pink disease and witches´ broom in cocoa.

Animal Sciences

Program

Deadline

Description

Education

Program

Deadline

Description

Life Science

Program

Deadline

Description

C-Path’s TRxA First Global Request for Proposals March 31st, 2023 TRxA is interested in using small molecules for therapeutics in the areas of:  Neuroscience; Immunology and Hematology;  Infectious Diseases; Safety Science; Rare/Orphan Diseases; and Pediatrics. Awards will range from 250K to 1M, depending on the stage of project. 
Novel Highly Tumour-restricted Antigens and Antibodies for Cancer Therapy May 2nd, 2023 Cumulus Oncology are are interested in identifying and engaging with academics who have monoclonal or multivalent antibodies that target highly tumour-restricted antigens which have the potential for therapeutic activity in cancer.
Seeking Research and Technologies Related to in vivo Direct Reprogramming May 9th, 2023 Astellas Pharma is seeking research related to direct reprogramming to achieve transdifferentiation of cells to another functional type.
Merck Investigator Studies Program Rolling Admissions Areas of interest at Merck include: Cardiovascular, Immunology, Infectious Disease, Non-Alcoholic SteatoHepatitis, Neuroscience, Oncology, Patient Engagement, Diversity and Health Literacy, Respiratory, SARS CoV-2/COVID-19 TREATMENT, Surgery, and Vaccines.
Merck Business Development Rolling Admissions Open-ended way to connect with Merck’s Business Development team. Use this link to submit any non-confidential information for areas that do not fit neatly into the Merck Investigator Studies Program sections.
AstraZeneca open innovations Rolling Admissions Multiple opportunities.  Please refer to website for details.
Rare Treatment Accelerator (RTA) Rolling Admissions The Rare Treatment Accelerator program connects academic groups, patient groups and early-stage biotechs with Healx to unlock the power of repurposed drugs for rare diseases. Working together, we can quickly turn your research, insights and promising repurposing assets into treatments that will benefit rare disease patients.
Pfizer-Vaccines Areas of Interest Rolling Admissions Qualified researchers are invited to submit research proposals, according to the guidance and instructions found on www.pfizer.com/ISR. A proposal requesting Pfizer support (e.g., funding and/or drug supply) is not a guarantee of acceptance or approval of that proposal. Decisions on support for submissions are made by the applicable Pfizer Global Reviewers. 
Pfizer- Inflammation and Immunology Areas of Interest Rolling Admissions Qualified researchers are invited to submit research proposals, according to the guidance and instructions found on www.pfizer.com/ISR. A proposal requesting Pfizer support (e.g., funding and/or drug supply) is not a guarantee of acceptance or approval of that proposal. Decisions on support for submissions are made by the applicable Pfizer Global Reviewers. 
Pfizer- Rare Disease Areas of Interest Rolling Admissions Qualified researchers are invited to submit research proposals, according to the guidance and instructions found on www.pfizer.com/ISR. A proposal requesting Pfizer support (e.g., funding and/or drug supply) is not a guarantee of acceptance or approval of that proposal. Decisions on support for submissions are made by the applicable Pfizer Global Reviewers. 
Pfizer- Internal Medicine Areas of Interest Rolling Admissions Qualified researchers are invited to submit research proposals, according to the guidance and instructions found on www.pfizer.com/ISR. A proposal requesting Pfizer support (e.g., funding and/or drug supply) is not a guarantee of acceptance or approval of that proposal. Decisions on support for submissions are made by the applicable Pfizer Global Reviewers. 
Cyclica Academic Partnership Program

 

Rolling Admissions Ligand Design Award
Generate novel compounds with desired ADMET properties that are specific to your target(s) of interest while avoiding anti-target(s)Ligand Express Award
Screen existing compounds for mechanisms of action, ADMET predictions, or repurposing opportunities. Cyclica is committed to award at least two labs at the University of Connecticut

 

Physical Sciences

Program Deadline Description
   
IN-PART Global Challenge Campaign Rolling Admissions The research or technology could be anything that provides a positive step forwards for sustainability within plastics, polymers and polymers in liquid formulations (PLFs), by using raw materials that are renewable or sustainable, processes that minimize environmental impacts, and alternatives to plastics that are biodegradable or recyclable. 
Halo Science-Expanded temperature ranges for adhesives Rolling Admissions The sponsor is seeking novel approaches to expand the temperature range of these commercial adhesives to temperatures below 4 C°. Potential solutions from adjacent industries are of significant interest, including novel materials, innovations in manufacturing processes and engineering solutions. Possible partnerships include contract research, providing grant monies, or other forms of investment.

Solutions of interest include:

Materials substitution, multifunctional materials, engineered products, or novel material structures
Curing agents or additives that lower the operational temperature window
Modifications to current manufacturing processes
Coatings, surface treatments, sealing agents, or other post-processing solutions would be considered but are of a lower priority than other methods

BASF Admission Dates Vary Join us in our efforts to innovate for a sustainable future: we welcome you to bring in your expertise to help with our ongoing challenges. Beyond that, we regularly offer opportunities for external collaboration in temporary campaigns. Additionally, in our open collaborations, you may find a perfect match with your profile. Take initiative and get in touch with us.
Shell N/A See website for more details.

Other Opportunities

Program Deadline Description