Update t o the Faculty Senate on Research Activities

1. Update to the Faculty Senate on Research Activities Kelvin K. Droegemeier Office of the Vice President for Research, Norman Campus 10 October 2011

2. Context • Broad challenges to Research and Creative Activity • Increasingly high costs (equipment, facilities, start-up) • Unfunded compliance mandates • Flat or declining Federal agency and private foundation budgets • Retention of faculty • Preserving the value of inquiry-driven scholarship • Synergy between teaching and scholarship

3. Good Progress in FY11 • AchievedCarnegie Very High Research classification • Record expenditures: $90.4 million, up $4.7 million from FY10 (increase of 25% in past 3 years) • Nearly as many proposals submitted (857) as in FY10 (868, a record), requesting $394.5 million (record) • Site of Department of the Interior Regional Climate Science Center ($4 million/5 years) • NOAA Cooperative Institute ($75 million/5 years) was renewed • Some other major grant news • $25 million grant from Department of Education (GEAR-UP) • $10.7 million I-ARPA grant (Norah Dunbar, Communications) • Competitive ranking for $10.4 million NIH COBRE (Ann West, Chem/Biochem). Would be a first for the Norman Campus • $1.2 million NSF MRI grant (Bing Zhang, Zoology) • Created the Corix Institute to focus on water issues • Corix Endowed Chair in Sustainability • Oklahoma Water Survey • WaTER Center • New center for sustainability research

4. Importance of Strategic Investment

5. Beyond the Dollars • Numerous faculty outcomes and achievements and honors • Guggenheim • Fulbright • Articles in Nature, Science • Humboldt Foundation Award • Lew Hunter Award for Outstanding Screenplay Feature • Beverly Hills Film Festival Golden Palm Award for Best Screenplay • Numerous books, articles, conferences, performances, exhibits

6. Stated Goals at this Time Last Year • Continue momentum from Aspire 2020 • See success with and build out the Center for Research Program Development & Enrichment(CRPDE) • Create a Faculty Challenge Grant Program • Create a Strategic Initiative in Defense/Security/Intelligence (DSI) • Create a center to support Applied R&D • Create a Centers Initiative • Create a Research Liaison Program • Re-compete the USOs • Create a VPR Office Faculty Awards Program • Create a FacultyResearch Incentives & Rewards Program • Create a VPR Web Site • Overhaul the Research Council Funding Portfolio • Create a New Budgeting and Tracking Process in the VPR Office

7. Our Stated Rationale Last Year for These Goals • Targeted investments and new support programs to assist faculty • Structured budgetary planning • Expanding the opportunity space for all disciplines • Enhancing the visibility of research • Incentivizing and rewarding success

8. Accomplishments • Continued momentum from Aspire 2020 • Saw notable success with and build out the Center for Research Program Development & Enrichment(CRPDE) • Created a Faculty Challenge Grant Program (seed funding) • Created a Strategic Initiative in Defense/Security/Intelligence (DSI) • Created a center to support Applied R&D (CARD) • Launch a Centers Initiative • Created a Research Liaison Program • Re-competed the USOs • Created a VPR Office Faculty Awards Program • Create a FacultyResearch Incentives & Rewards Program • Created a VPR Web Site • Overhauled the Research Council Funding Portfolio • Created a New Budgeting and Tracking Process in the VPR Office

9. Other Activities in FY11 • Completed the facilities and equipment portfolio inventory and assessment • Numerous issues being addressed by Facilities Management, VPR Office • Named an Undergraduate Research Program Coordinator (no new money) • Hired Cluster of four new faculty in Electrical and Computer Engineering as part of the Strategic Initiatives in Radar and DSI Research • Building a new Radar Innovations Center • Developing a formal policy for Research Strategic Initiatives • Building Devon Hall clean room • Formalizing a policy governing Strategic Research Initiatives • Continued extensive regular communication from the VPR Organization to faculty and administrators • Are coordinating and helped fund eleven start-up packages • Coordinated and helped fund more than a dozen faculty retention packages • Creating a program to assist colleges and departments in preparing nominations for prestigious national and international awards

10. Competitiveness – The ability for OU to compete more effectively in the national and international marketplace of ideas, people and resources. • Engagement – The ability for OU to engage across its programs, and with other organizations, aligning interests, building relationships, establishing mechanisms for pursuing new activities, and communicating OU’s strengths and capabilities to multiple sectors. • Culture – An inspiring environment and institutional personality that incentivizes and rewards creativity and bold, transformative thinking, and that maintains accountability with the highest standards of excellence in all scholarly endeavors. Transforming Research Engagement Transforming Research Competitiveness Nation’s Foremost Public Comprehensive Research University Of Our Size Transforming Research Culture

11. Objective #1 – Transform Research Competitiveness • The ability for OU to compete in the national and international marketplace of ideas, people and resources.

12. Objective #2 – Transform Research Engagement • The ability for OU to engage across its programs, and with other organizations, aligning interests, building relationships, establishing mechanisms for pursuing new activities, and communicating OU’s strengths and capabilities to multiple sectors.

13. Objective #3 – Transform Research Culture • An inspiring environment and institutional personality that fosters and rewards creativity and bold, transformative thinking, and that maintains accountability with the highest standards of excellence in all scholarly endeavors.

14. Changes to the Norman Campus Research Council Programs

15. Background • The Research Council consists of 15 Norman (and Tulsa) Campus faculty who meet monthly (http://vpr-norman.ou.edu/research-council) • In fall 2009, new VPR tasked an ad hoc committee, including the current RC chair and the two past chairs, with conducting a comprehensive review of all internal VPR funding programs and compare with many other universities

16. VPR Funding Portfolio • Current (bold administered by the Council) • PI Research Investment Program (budget ceiling of $10,000) • Arts and Humanities Creative Activity Program • Over $1200 Requests • Small Grant Program • Junior Faculty Fellowship Program • Potentially Transformative Research Program • Book Publication Subvention Program • 1/3rd Travel Program • Reprint Program • Weaknesses • Too many programs  confusing, programs too prescriptive, funding levels too low, expectations and impacts tracking is weak, programs unchanged for several years. Overall, programs not viewed as optimal for helping faculty • Conflicts of interest exist in the review process

17. Outcome • The committee gathered and analyzed a great deal of data and prepared a report in spring 2010, which included several recommendations • Internal funding should be better coordinated among OU units than has occurred in the past. • The RC should develop a more flexible approach to changes in internal funding methods and mechanisms • Specific new funding categories should be immediately implemented. • Funding to support research time should be expanded. • Internal support for potentially fundable projects -- currently supported through PI investment awards -- should be coordinated through the VPR'’s office, in particular by drawing on support from the newly established office to support Proposal Development.

18. Outcome • A separately budgeted line should be created to support larger grant activities and initiatives. Those would include the following overlapping categories: • Innovative and transformational research • More expensive internal research projects • Multi-year research projects • The VPR office should continue to keep the budget together in relation to different parts of the university • We also strongly recommend that the RC model be continued in which a broad and diverse review team evaluates all proposals. • We recommend continued discussion -- and potential development -- of an endowment that would partially or completely support various categories of RC funding. • There is currently ongoing the analysis of an OU Research Climate survey, to which a number of OU faculty responded in spring, 2010. The findings of that survey, when available and when analysis is completed, should be studied in relation to the recommendations in this document.

19. New Research Council Portfolio • Developed after exhaustive study and lots of communication with faculty • Faculty Investment Program (FIP) • Junior Faculty Fellowship Program • Book Publication and Open Access Subvention Program • Faculty Travel Support Program • Characteristics of FIP • Budgets up to $15,000 • Far less prescription – goal isn’t necessarily to obtain external funding • Much greaterflexibility(e.g., course release if approved, etc) • Proposals less than $3K go to CRPDE  Council focuses on larger strategic investments • Proposals reviewed by Council plus an external (to Council) expert reviewer who has no vote • CRPDE to assist PIs in developing proposals; high expectations/accountability • Discussions with Deans, Provost, Faculty Senate Exec; Council will vote at October meeting • Notification of new program has been issued and program will launch January, 2012 • Conflict of interest policy also developed for implementation in January, 2012

20. Conflict of Interest Policy • The Research Council has, for decades, allowed its members to review proposals submitted by colleagues in the same department • This hasn’t been a major issue – the Council has operated with great integrity and is VERY thorough and fair in its assessments • However, such conflicts • Are inconsistent with national norms and do not set a good example for faculty, especially those early in their career • Are arguably unfair • Cannot easily be dismissed if a proposal review is contested • The Council has never operated with a formal review policy, which likewise is undesirable • Thus, the Council has developed a COI policy that has been reviewed by the Provost, HSC VPR, ORS, CRPDE, Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Legal Counsel

21. Key Points: Conflict of Interest Policy • Research Council members may not request Council funding during their term of service • Research Council members must recuse themselves from the review process (and leave the room) if they are • Are formally appointed within the department(s)/programs(s) in which the principal investigator or other listed investigators has a formal appointment; • Are named as an investigator with the submitting investigator(s) on projects pending before or currently funded by the Council, by other University entities, or by external sources including State and Federal agencies; • Have a financial interest or formal relationship with any company or other non-University organization involved in the proposal; • Are related to the proposal author or coauthor, nominee, or participant in the activity under review; • Believe that participating in the discussion will compromise the integrity of the process.

22. Review Process • Proposal authors will disclose possible conflicts of interest • ALL proposals will be reviewed by two Council members (the entire Council always discusses every proposal) • ALL proposals will have at least one reviewer who is un-conflicted and generally familiar with the topic area • Non-Council reviewers, when used, will not vote • Everyone receiving Council funding will be obligated to review three proposals in the two years following receipt of funding

23. Center for Applied Research and Development (CARD) • Mission • Provide a physical and administrative infrastructure to increase substantially applied research and development on the OU Norman Campus • Initial Goals • Open new spaces of opportunity for researchers and students across all disciplines • Establish appropriate administrative frameworks (e.g., contract vehicles) that support business processes and personnel on types of applied research and development contracts that are not presently being pursued • More effectively translate research outcomes into practicable solutions for society.

24. Center for Applied Research and Development (CARD) • Structure • Formally part of the University (not a separate administrative entity) • Administratively housed in the Norman Campus VPR Office as a campus-wide resource • Designated specifically for applied R&D projects • Initial administrative support using existing VPR staff (will be administratively lean) • Special SRI structure (API, or Applied Program Incentive) being developed to incentivize participation and provide foundational support to CARD • Substantial percentage to dean and individual faculty/researchers involved • Projects can fund graduate and undergraduate students, faculty, staff researchers in all disciplines, not only DSI-related activities

25. Center for Applied Research and Development (CARD) • Leadership • James Grimsley, Director (half-time)

26. CRPDE Staff Adding to CRPDE Staff! New Associate Directors: Nancy Devino (Tulsa) Todd Fuller (Norman) Center Administrator: Cindy Clark Interdisciplinary Research Consultant/Graduate Assistant: Quyen Arana

27. A Few Other Items… • Thematic mapping of OU’s research and creative activity • VPR Awards Program – we need nominations!!! • Faculty Leadership Academy

28. Going Back to the Aspire 2020 Slides From • Two Years Ago . . . • OU has considerable unrealized potential and thus tremendous opportunity to • Think bigger – well beyond our traditional horizons – toward problems that require new approaches, frameworks and support mechanisms • Raise expectations and implement more effective processes for accountability and productivity measurement • Seek and obtain funding for national centers and large projects • Dramatically increase our engagement with Federal agencies, especially DOD and DOE • Submit higher quality, more competitive proposals overall • Develop more effective ways of investing in research to promote growth and prominence • Establish additional Federal presence in Norman • Develop new support infrastructures and contracting vehicles • Engage more effectively with industry, HSC and NIH activities • Be more active in driving the national research agenda • Build local and national awareness of our research capabilities • Recognize that the “let 1000 flowers bloom” model long used in academic research is no longer effective as the primary philosophy of achieving institutional success

29. . . . Leads Us to Our Emphasis for • the Next Few Years • Continued strong push on DSI, particularly engaging non-physical science and engineering – continuing to unlock the potential resident within existing faculty • Strong push on CARD, building linkages with agencies, labs and industry and bringing in fully soft-funded non-faculty researchers • See notable success in establishing national centers(a new USO requirement), either in response to solicitations or via us creating our own opportunity • Develop one or two substantial core areas of interaction with HSC • Begin working toward one or two more research “pillars” for the Norman Campus in addition to weather/climate • Possibilities? Energy, biosciences, natural resources/sustainability, water…

30. Emphasis for the Next Few Years • Move to the next level in Undergraduate Research across the Norman Campus • Continue investing in core areas of strength and develop new areas • Implement Incentives and Rewards for big ideas and achievements (fix SRI?); broaden pitch (e.g., local  national foundations) • Synergy rather than competition between teaching and research • Launch Broader Impacts Initiative – an opportunity to be a national role model • Organize thematically to enhance interdisciplinary collaboration for attacking problems at the boundaries • Create Faculty LeadershipAcademy • Provide assistance to colleges and departments in nominating faculty for prestigious awards

31. Summary Thoughts • We are seeing substantial progress in research and creative activity owing to the hard work of faculty!! • This progress is reflected not in numbers alone, but in scholarly output, achievements and recognition of people – what our University IS! • The three Aspire 2020 goals remain valid – transform our competitiveness, engagement and research culture • We want to do everything we can to unlock the additional potential resident within faculty in all disciplines to achieve all that is possible for faculty individually and for OU institutionally • How does this happen? • Having a solid plan and being strategic • Workingtogether– faculty, chairs/directors, deans, VPs in ALL COLLEGES • Providing necessary resources • Removingbarriers, perceived and real, and continuing to change our culture

32. For a Much More Complete Review, See the Video of the Annual Norman Campus Research Discussion athttp://vpr-norman.ou.edu/presentations/state-norman-campus-research-2011