Faculty Research Support Program (FRSP)
Bridge Funding Program
I. Objective: To provide modest financial support for faculty research and scholarship during times when externally funded research programs are between funding cycles. Funds will be used to maintain research programs at a level adequate to ensure continuing viability. (See detailed description of Bridge Funding Procedures for more details).
II. Award Criteria & Terms:
- A Principal Investigator on a grant funded for at least three consecutive years (on the same grant or project) by a national funding agency with a bona fide scientific peer-review (e.g., NIH, NSF, American Heart Association) and whose application for continued support from that or another national funding agency with a bona fide scientific peer-review (e.g., NIH competing renewal) has not been funded, shall be eligible for bridge funding.
- 50/50 cost match required from College and/or Department.
III. Application Deadlines: Ongoing throughout the calendar year.
IV. Proposal Package
A principal investigator who meets the Bridge Funding Guidelines (see Office of Research and Economic Development Website) can submit a letter of request to the Office of Research and Economic Development. The request must contain the following:
- Account number and name of the interrupted grant,
- Amount of bridge funding requested and the allocation (including pertinent information about personnel, equipment maintenance or service contracts, supplies, etc.),
- Justification/rationale for the requested funding,
- A requested start and end dates for bridge support (maximum of one year),
- The budget pages for the final year of the previously funded, but lapsed, grant; a copy of the cover sheet and abstract of the unfunded grant,
- The anticipated schedule of reapplication for external funding,
- A copy of the review from the agency (e.g., NIH, NSF, etc.) that rejected the application for external funding,
- A statement from the principal investigator’s Dean committing to support 50% of the requested funds, and
- The signed statement at the end of the application: “I certify that I have applied for extramural funds on [date] and will continue to reapply within the next 12 months.”
Willful misrepresentation of the budget for requested bridge funding will result in loss of eligibility for bridge funding.
Proposals that do not strictly adhere to all requirements will be returned without review. For all application types, pages must be letter size, 8.5×11 inches, Arial 11 point or Times New Roman 12 point, single-spaced with 1-inch margins.
All proposals submitted for consideration must contain the components listed below under each award type, and must be in the specified order. All awardees MUST submit to the Office of Research and Economic Development a final report within 30 days of completion. Failure to submit a final report disqualifies the individual(s) from future FRSP funding for a period of 5 years.
V. Application and Review Process
Applications will be reviewed by peer faculty, with the VPR Advisory Research Council making funding recommendations to the VPR.
For Bridge Funding: Funding determination will be made by the respective Dean and the Vice President for Research.
- The FRSP scoring system for uses a 9-point scale. A score of 1 indicates an exceptionally strong application with essentially no weaknesses. A score of 9 indicates an application with serious and substantive weaknesses with very few strengths; 5 is considered an average score. Ratings are in whole numbers only (no decimal ratings).
- The following three core review criteria will be used:
Significance: Does the project address an important problem or critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? For Seed Funds and Major Research Initiatives Course Buy-Out: How likely is it that external funding will be obtained?
Innovation: Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or creativity paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? 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 aims of the project? 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?