research corporation a foundation for the advancement of science cottrell college science awards l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Research Corporation a foundation for the advancement of science COTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Research Corporation a foundation for the advancement of science COTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

  share
play fullscreen
1 / 26
Download Presentation

Research Corporation a foundation for the advancement of science COTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

lotus
316 Views
Download Presentation

Research Corporation a foundation for the advancement of science COTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Research Corporationa foundation for the advancement of scienceCOTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS

  2. HISTORY AND OVERVIEW • RESEARCH CORPORATION: Established in 1912 • MISSION: To advance science and science education through academic research • First grants in the 1920’s • Supported Lawrence, Van de Graaff, Goddard in the 1930’s

  3. HISTORY 2 • Had a role in patents, for example: Towne’s maser patent (1956) • Patenting divested to RCT in 1985 • Support for research in PUI’s began in 1971 and continues today • Remains RC’s largest program at $2.5-3.0 million per year

  4. COTTRELL COLLEGE SCIENCE AWARDS (CCSA) • Aim • To support significant research leading to the development of faculty and students at primarily undergraduate institutions

  5. Emphasis To support research proposals from 1) Beginning faculty (first 3 years) 2) Established faculty beginning a new research area, or returning to research after an hiatus

  6. Projects should lead to: • Faculty development • Significant research • Undergraduates in research • Peer-reviewed publications

  7. CCSA ELIGIBILITY • Institutional • Chemistry, physics, astronomy department or a combination • No doctoral degree in the discipline (MS OK) • Individual • Beginner, within first three years • Tenure-track or minimum of two-year appointment • Established, beyond third year of appointment • Developing a new idea or restarting an established program • Requires a preliminary letter proposal

  8. CCSA FUNDING RATE

  9. Chemistry and Physics proposalsubfields • We have sorted the physics and chemistry proposals received in 2004 in the CS and CC (non- PhD institutions) programs, into subfields. • The results are on the next two slides. • We do not have subfield preferences.

  10. PHYSICS

  11. CHEMISTRY Organometallics Physical Organic and Inorganic Chemistry Spectroscopy Computational Materials Environmental Synthetic Organic Chemistry Biological Chemistry

  12. WHAT FUNDS CAN BE EXPENDED ON • Equipment and supplies • Summer stipends (maximum) • PI - 8 weeks: $7,500 • UG - 10 weeks: $3,500 • FICA/Medicare: 7.65% • Other – travel to do research

  13. WHAT IS NOT FUNDED • Overhead or indirect costs • Most fringe benefits • Tuition and fees • Secretarial assistance, routine office supplies, and telephone charges • Most service or use charges for equipment • Travel to meetings • Publication costs

  14. BUDGET • According to format provided • Average award is ~ $35K • Average match is ~ $10 K

  15. MATCHING FUNDS • Not required, but expected • Viewed as a measure of an institution’s commitment to research • Must be institutional money for those same type of items RC is willing to fund • What if no match? • May affect outcome, but submit anyway

  16. MATCHING FUNDS II • Start-up counts only in the first year of appointment, even if multi-year • Common matches are for equipment and stipends

  17. INSTITUTIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE • Some institutional infrastructure is expected: basic equipment, shop access, travel to meetings, waste disposal • These cannot be offered as part of the match.

  18. CCSA RENEWAL AWARDS • Possible support for up to 2 more years • Additional criteria: • Productivity • Aggressiveness toward outside funding • Absence of major outside funding • Requires a letter request for consideration before first award is closed • Typically 5% of proposals

  19. ESTABLISHED FACULTY • To return to research after gap, or change of direction • High probability of success, if there is a track record of previous productivity • Approach us with a letter proposal, as indicated on our web site

  20. HOW TO IMPROVE YOUR CHANCES OF WINNING AN AWARD • Have a good scientific idea • Have your draft read and critiqued • If denied, request excerpts of reviews • Try again. Applicants succeed on 2nd, 3rd, and occasionally 4th tries

  21. SCIENTIFIC NARRATIVE • WHAT question are you trying to answer? • WHY is it important? What is the hypothesis? • HOW do you plan to answer the question ... • Scientifically? • With what resources?

  22. PROPOSAL PREPARATION • Develop your own ideas* • Use space efficiently – focus • Get feedback from colleagues, experts • Prepare and justify budget • CHECK TO SEE IF SUBMISSION IS ON LINE – LIKELY FOR NOV. 06.

  23. COMMON PROBLEMS • Not demonstrating independence of PhD and postdoctoral advisors • Exploratory focus • Failure to make case for significance • Poor prior publication record • Many spelling or grammatical errors • Lack of student involvement

  24. DEADLINES AND REVIEW • November 15 and May 15 • The 2-part review takes approximately six months • Notification typically takes place in October or May following submission

  25. AWARD DETAILS • Awards are typically expended in 2 or 3 years, but may remain open for 5 years • Annual progress and fiscal reports are required • The first payment of the award is released in June, after either a Fall or Spring award

  26. CONTACT INFORMATION • For other information check out our Web site www.rescorp.org • Call or visit with a program officer (520) 571-1111 • Silvia Ronco, Jack Pladziewicz, Ray Kellman in Chemistry • Leon Radziemski in Physics/Astronomy