The Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Program Structure and Operation
2 Program Structure and Operation
Pages 25-36
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 25... ...
1. Despite largely shared goals, the federal agencies that operate the programs of the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
|
From page 26... ...
In a sense, NIH is a missionoriented agency that tailors its IDeA program to its overall research agenda. The NIH IDeA program, therefore, tends to emphasize basic and translational research and focuses less on the broader activities that have come to characterize NSF EPSCoR in more recent years.
|
From page 27... ...
<38th percentile of USDA funding Not 10% of AFRI Up to 2 USDA FASE $26.4M Not used recipients required budget years Program NSF requirement and Not required DOD DEPSCoR $0M Required discontinued in < 1.2% DOD funding after FY 2009 FY 2010 [SOURCES: NSF Survey of Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions (WebCASPAR) ; Direct communications with program managers at agency EPSCoR offices ; DEPSCoR – Assessment of the Defense Experimental Program To Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCoR)
|
From page 28... ...
The direct ties between biomedical research and public health inherent in the research pursued by NIH IDeA grant recipients often provide an advantage in efforts to solicit public and political support. Due to the diverse subject matter of the research it funds, similar public support is sometimes more 21 NIH IDeA laboratory funding includes investments in faculty development and recruitment, equipment, facilities renovation, postdoctoral studies and development, bioinformation training, release time, and training for grant management.
|
From page 29... ...
Broad descriptions of the NIH IDeA program are more difficult to find than for NSF EPSCoR. More often than not, NIH IDeA notes that its objectives are to build capacity and competitiveness among institutions in eligible states and jurisdictions for the purpose of acquiring NIH funds.
|
From page 30... ...
The funds for which they compete, however, are "sheltered" and thus not available to non-EPSCoR states. Proposal Submission The NSF EPSCoR and NIH IDeA proposal submission and review processes reflect each agency's effort to achieve both program and agency goals.25 For example, NSF's requirements that participating states create EPSCoR governing committees, prepare strategic plans for science and technology, and identify nonfederal matching funds are designed to build scientific capacity and foster collaboration among universities, state and local governments, and the private sector.
|
From page 31... ...
Proposals are not vetted by the state governing committees before their submission to the NIH, although for the Institutional Network of Biological Research Excellence program, NIH ultimately chooses just one research proposal from each state.28 Unlike NSF, moreover, NIH does not require matching funds from the state to cover a portion of the grant.29 Because NSF EPSCoR proposals address broader state strategies for capacity enhancement, NSF creates review committees with a diversity of expertise. In contrast, because NIH COBRE proposals focus more tightly on a specific research project, NIH chooses reviewers with directly related expertise as it would for any subject-specific research proposal.
|
From page 32... ...
See U.S. National Science Foundation Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
|
From page 33... ...
NSF EPSCoR required the creation of state governing committees, in part, to help address this challenge. Each state governing committee seeks to meld EPSCoR research grant proposals to the state's strategic science and technology and higher education plans.
|
From page 34... ...
Some state committees double as the board for higher education or as subcommittees on these boards. Metrics While a few state committees outlined concrete goals with due dates and quantifiable metrics for measuring success, most provided a standard list of general output measures.
|
From page 35... ...
Only a small number of respondents, however, provided information about how these measures had been collected, where that information was being stored, or how it was being used. One state even mentioned that information was gathered "by word of mouth." The committee was convinced that the states had made a conscientious effort to enhance research activities, and received anecdotal evidence pointing to their success.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.