ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers – Institutional Transformation Catalyst (ADVANCE IT Catalyst)
The Research Office, Office for Research Development is requesting letters of intent for the National Science Foundation- ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers (ADVANCE) program.
Office for Research Development Letter of Intent submission deadline: Monday, August 10, 2015
Agency Letter of Intent due: October 5, 2015
Agency Deadline: November 3, 2016
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,000,000
Estimated Number of Awards: 20
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1
Synopsis of Program:
The goals of the ADVANCE program are (1) to develop systemic approaches to increase the representation and advancement of women in academic STEM careers; (2) to develop innovative and sustainable ways to promote gender equity in the STEM academic workforce; and (3) to contribute to the development of a more diverse science and engineering workforce. ADVANCE also has as its goal to contribute to and inform the general knowledge base on gender equity in the academic STEM disciplines. The Institutional Transformation (IT) track is meant to produce large-scale comprehensive change and serve as a locus for research on gender equity and institutional transformation for academic STEM. The Institutional Transformation Catalyst (IT Catalyst) track is meant either to conduct self-assessment or to implement unique strategies – either adapted from those found effective in the IT track or ones designed to be responsive to the unique environments of eligible institutions – and evaluate their effectiveness
In an effort to provide the highest level of excellence and viability for funding, a review process will be put in place if more than one proposal is submitted. The finalist will be asked to represent Oregon State University and to submit their proposal to the NSF- ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers- Institutional Transformation Catalyst (ADVANCE IT Catalyst) programs by the NSF letter of intent deadline.
Information: Mary Phillips, Director, Office for Research Development at firstname.lastname@example.org
General guidance for preparation of letters of intent to the Research Office:
COVER SHEET (1 page)
- Solicitation Name and Descriptive Title
- Project Summary: 3 or 4 sentences or bullet points that provide an overview of the objective of your proposed research, how you plan to do it, and the expected outcome.
- Unique Aspects: 3 or 4 sentences or bullet points that highlight how your research/approach is different/better.
- Key PI/co-PIs: 5 or 6 sentences or bullet points that highlight team expertise as it relates to the project.
- Budget: Example: The total cost of the project is anticipated to be $ X, with $ Y being requested from the NSF. NSF funds will be used for: $ A for personnel; $ B for operations, and $ C for broader impacts/subcontracts etc.
- Justification for NSF support: One paragraph explaining why this research fits with the RFP and strategic goals of NSF.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (1 - 4 pages)
- Problem statement : Clear and concise statement of 1) research question(s) and how the project will address the research question(s); 2) what technical barriers need to be overcome to perform the research; and 3) how the proposed research can lead to the advancement of research/knowledge in this area.
- Conceptual framework: Conceptual framework describing, for example, how the synthesis of various project components, approaches, and participant expertise are linked together to address the problem of interest. Graphics may be used.
- Proposed activities: Describe the project to be undertaken and provide the technical specifications of the research activities and timelines that will be undertaken.
- Expected results: Describe the outcome you anticipate from the research. (Remember your initial motivation for wanting to do this!)
- Peer Groups: Who else is doing something similar, why their discoveries are useful for you, and what discriminates you.
- Broader Impact/Metrics for Success: What metrics are the most appropriate for evaluating the success of the proposed project (e.g., peer-reviewed papers, policy-directed efforts, databases, models, development of new resources, etc.)? If successful, who would most likely use the knowledge or tools developed?
- Fundraising: List any matching fund requests, industry commitments etc. List any similar current proposals pending.
Suggested Reviewers: (1 page) Optional – but as you write envision who might be a reviewer of your proposal or the Program Officer.
- Reviewer 1: Area of expertise
- State why you think this person would be a good reviewer.
- Submit electronically as a PDF document to: email@example.com