The Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Assessments and Outcomes
3 Assessments and Outcomes
Pages 37-48
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 37... ...
28. Measuring the effect of the programs in the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
|
From page 38... ...
These obstacles, however, have not precluded assessments of EPSCoR programs. To the contrary, agency and participant reports often present a range of performance metrics that allow proponents to lay claim to EPSCoR's transformative impact on statewide research capacity and competitiveness.
|
From page 39... ...
In addition, few independent studies have evaluated eligibility criteria or presented comparisons of the effectiveness of the programs across agencies.39 Nor have they considered the impact of a growing set of program objectives or assessed whether national demand can support an increasing number of research universities. While such shortcomings warrant independent evaluations, a lack of data present significant additional obstacles.
|
From page 40... ...
support. As a result, the growth of the aggregate federal S&E support could outpace the addition of EPSCoR funding to EPSCoR states, leaving the share of EPSCoR states' federal S&E funding stagnant."41 41 Yonghong Wu, "Tackling Undue Concentration of Federal Research Funding: An Empirical Assessment of NSF's Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
|
From page 41... ...
Available data do not suggest that EPSCoR programs have appreciably improved overall competitiveness of the EPSCoR states by these measures. At NSF, the success rate of proposals for all grants from EPSCoR states has consistently remained 3 to 5 percent lower than those from non-EPSCoR states since 1990 (see Figure 3-3)
|
From page 42... ...
Figure 3-4. Some FY 2012 eligible EPSCoR states have done better than others in increasing their submission rates while minimizing a reduction in success rates.
|
From page 43... ...
Universities in EPSCoR states have been submitting more research proposals, which is an indicator of increased research activity, and some universities have won competitions for major research 43 Examples of research centers include: Montana State University, Mississippi State University, and Clemson University, which have been chosen to host Engineering Research Centers; the University of Alabama, University of Southern Mississippi, University of Nebraska, University of Oklahoma, and University of Arkansas, which have been chosen to host Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers. These and other centers types have also been awarded to other EPSCoR states; this list is not exhaustive.
|
From page 44... ...
They praise the EPSCoR program for helping to foster significant changes in the priorities, policies, aspirations, and the administrative structure of participating universities. Improvements include establishing chief research officers, creating positions for grant-writing experts, forging stronger private-sector relationships, and highlighting the role that research universities play in state economic growth.
|
From page 45... ...
EPSCoR programs face formidable challenges in helping eligible institutions compete for an increased share of federal R&D funds. Although universities pursuing federal R&D dollars are increasingly investing their own resources to build research infrastructure to enhance their competitiveness, public universities are generally facing shrinking appropriations from their states.46 These reductions are exerting downward pressures on faculty and staff salaries and increasingly impeding the ability of universities to attract top faculty and/or research staff.
|
From page 46... ...
While scant data exist on faculty mobility patterns associated with state budget cutbacks, anecdotal evidence suggests that public research universities have been losing some outstanding faculty to private research universities (see Box 31)
|
From page 47... ...
Data, however, show that EPSCoR has not had a significant impact on the aggregate share of federal academic R&D funds received by eligible states or the aggregate award rate of research proposals from EPSCoR states. Additional progress on competitiveness measures would require EPSCoR to overcome structural factors such as the size or population of the states that play such large roles in determining university research competitiveness.
|
From page 48... ...
States that are committed to strengthening research capacity can demonstrate their desire by maintaining support over the long term and taking other actions to encourage research.
|
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.