Research Messenger
Volume 1 Issue 2
November 3, 2006
The University Grants Program
Colleagues
Decisions on funding internal grants are due to be made before the end of the fall semester. I wanted to use this issue of the Research Messenger to describe the program, its scope and purposes.
Background
Three autonomous internal funding mechanisms evolved over a period of decades to assist SDSU faculty in their scholarly pursuits. Funds for Research, Scholarship and Creative Activity (RSCA) came from the Chancellors Office and were distributed to and administered by the colleges. Those for the Faculty Grant Program (FGP) were allocated by Provost Marlin from state funds, and were administered by the Associate V.P. for Faculty Affairs. Funds for the Grant-in-Aid Program (GIA) were contributed by the Research Foundation from the indirect costs it collected on external awards, and were administered by the Vice-President for Research.
These programs had overlapping goals and constituencies, yet independent review bodies among whose members there was little communication. The system became increasingly unwieldy and reinforced sensible people for behaviors that advantaged them but stressed the system, such as submitting multiple applications of the same proposal. This led to a call to integrate the three components and to orchestrate the system from a single perspective.
Not surprisingly, the primary concern in doing so was the loss of local autonomy over the RSCA portion. Academic Affairs offered evidence that the distribution of funds over the years had been similar across colleges, whether administered locally (RSCA) or centrally (FGP and GIA). This mollified those who had been most reticent, and all eleven deans (seven colleges, plus undergraduate, graduate, IVC, and library) approved the creation of an integrated University Grant Program early in 2006.
Funds Available, Proposal Review, and the Competition
Funds available for the UGP in 2006-07 total $455,339. The three sources are contributing the following amounts:
- RSCA: $229,849. The allocation has not changed in more than 20 years, though it still represents our largest source of funds.
- FGP: $100,000. This is Provost Marlins allocation from her portion of the University's general budget.
- GIA: $125,490. This amount from the Research Foundation assumes that we will retrieve some $25,000 from unspent funds in awards from 2005-06.
The review criteria were listed in the call for applications. Reviews are performed by each colleges research committee, and these collegiate ratings will be honored by members of the university committee to the degree possible. The university committee--the University Grants and Lectureships Committee (UGLC) – includes representation from each college. Recommendations of the UGLC will come to Director of Research Affairs Camille Nebeker, Associate V.P. for Faculty Affairs Bonnie Zimmerman, and me.
We have received 150 applications for support. The maximum award is $10,000, so with available funds, we could support 45 (30%) at this level. While such a funding rate would make NIH and NSF applicants envious, it is not in the spirit of supporting scholarship across the university, so we will seek to be firm on budgets so that we can extend the funds across more applicants, with a goal of 75.
Successful Outcomes
The overarching purpose of UGP funds is to promote original scholarship at SDSU. To that effort, we bring three predilections:
Offer untenured faculty the resources they need to establish a successful program of research. This helps safeguard the initial commitment SDSU makes in hiring a faculty member: a start-up package that can equate to a few years salary in some disciplines, and which is lost if the person does not continue here. Even where financial resources are less at stake, the sense of collegiality and morale of a department is shaken by a negative tenure decision. Moreover, the success of younger faculty is projected over the longest careers at SDSU.
Provide seed funds that permit faculty to break into a project whose initiation may lead to greater support from extramural sources. The promise of expanded support is a central consideration, since a portion of these very funds will drive the UGP in future years.
Do our part to offset the bias of this nation to support science, technology, and engineering to the exclusion of the social sciences, arts and humanities. The U.S. will invest $137 billion in research this year. Three quarters will be for defense: defense against perceived human foes (~50%) and against microbes (~25%) through the Departments of Defense and HHS, respectively. Most of the remainder is for research in the physical and environmental sciences. The arts and humanities do not defend our country, they simply make our country worth defending. The value of that in Washington is presently 47 cents per capita for the NEH, 46 cents for the NEA. You spend more on a can of coke. A university is a place of creativity, and the arts and humanities are its agents. Those who administer the UGP will pay particular attention to serving the needs of faculty in these disciplines.
I recognize that the three statements above can be distilled to favor the young, favor the sciences, favor the humanities. If this implies that all will receive a sympathetic review, then the UGP will have served its purpose.
Tom Scott