If you are not receiving notification of the latest issue of the SPAR Update, subscribe to the reminder service. Type "Update Subscribe" in the subject line.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 ---------------------------<<>>----------------------------

1. SPAR Workshop on NIH and Grants.gov
2. NIH Announces the Posting of Updated FAQs on Financial Conflict of Interest Requirements for All NIH-Supported Institutions
3. NSF issues "Dear Colleague Letter" on Broader Impacts Proposal Requirements
4. NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education (GK-12)
5. Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Program

 ---------------------------<<>>----------------------------

1. SPAR Workshop on NIH and Grants.gov

The Office of Sponsored Programs and Research will provide a workshop on the National Institutes of Health and how NIH uses Grants.gov, the federal online grant submission web portal. Attendees will be guided through the NIH Commons, and Grants.gov to get a sense of what to expect when using both the NIH and Grants.gov systems to submit proposals and manage their grants..

Two sessions will be offered:
Thursday, April 17, 2008, 2:00 - 3:30 p.m.
and
Wednesday, April 23, 2008, 2:00 - 3:30 p.m.

Both workshops take place in the SPAR Conference Room
106 University Hall

Anyone interested in attending these workshops is encouraged to contact the
SPAR Office to reserve a place:
spar@bgsu.edu
OR
372-2481

[return to top]

 ---------------------------<<>>----------------------------

2. NIH Announces the Posting of Updated FAQs on Financial Conflict of Interest Requirements for All NIH-Supported Institutions

This Notice announces the availability of updated and expanded FAQs related to the Responsibility of Applicants for Promoting Objectivity in Research for which PHS Funding is Sought as described in Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Subpart F (for grants and cooperative agreements) and Responsible Prospective Contractors as described in Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 94 (for contracts).

Given the increasing complexity of the financial interests held by biomedical researchers, the Public Health Service (PHS) and the Office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) published two regulations in 1995 establishing standards and procedures to be followed by institutions that apply for research funding from PHS agencies, including the NIH. The regulation is aimed at ensuring that the design, conduct, or reporting of research funded under grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts will not be biased by any conflicting financial interest of the investigators responsible for the research. 

As part of NIH’s continuing educational efforts to improve and enhance compliance with FCOI requirements, we compiled answers to the most frequently asked questions regarding the implementation of these regulations.  We hope these will clarify issues that may arise. The FAQs may be accessed on the Office of Extramural Research, Conflict of Interest Page at:  http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/coi/index.htm. 

Inquiries

Grants:
Division of Grants Compliance and Oversight
Office of Policy for Extramural Research Administration, OER
National Institutes of Health
Telephone: 301-435-0949
Email: FCOICompliance@od.nih.gov

Contracts:
Darryl S. Grant
Procurement Analyst
Division of Acquisition Policy and Evaluation
Office of Acquisition Management and Policy
Phone: (301) 496-2874
Email: grantda@od.nih.gov

[return to top]

 ---------------------------<<>>----------------------------

3. NSF issues "Dear Colleague Letter" on Broader Impacts Proposal Requirements

This DCL replaces NSF 02-161.

April 7, 2008

Dear Colleague,

Proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation (NSF) are evaluated through the use of two merit review criteria, which all proposals must address explicitly.  These criteria are intellectual merit and broader impacts. Through its merit review process, NSF ensures that proposals submitted are reviewed in a fair, competitive, transparent, and in-depth manner.

In light of NSF’s commitment to the broader impacts criterion, proposers should carefully consider ways to incorporate rigorous, meaningful and innovative broader impacts activities (e.g., broadening participation) that integrate with the research being proposed.  It is expected that project activities related to broader impacts will be of the same caliber as those addressing the intellectual merit criterion.  They should be based on good scholarship, and be designed to achieve clearly stated goals and metrics, while possessing the appropriate expertise and resources available for implementation.  Thus, a simple listing of outreach activities, or reference to inclusion of research personnel who are members of underrepresented groups, falls short of the rigor required to satisfactorily address this criterion.

We would like to call the community’s attention to several sections of all proposals that require the broader impacts criterion to be specifically addressed: the Project Summary, the Project Description, and the Results of Prior Support section. 

Project Summary:
As instituted by Important Notice 127 and noted in the current Grant Proposal Guide (GPG II.C.2.b.), it is required that the Project Summary must clearly address in separate statements (within the one page limit) both the intellectual merits and the broader impacts of the proposed activity.  These should be further elaborated upon in the Project Description.  Proposals that do not separately address both criteria will be returned without review.

Project Description:
Further, as also noted in GPG II.C.2.d., the Project Description must describe, as an integral part of the narrative, the broader impacts resulting from the proposed activities, addressing one or more of the following as appropriate for the project: how the project will integrate research and education by advancing discovery and understanding while at the same time promoting teaching, training, and learning; ways in which the proposed activity will broaden the participation of underrepresented groups, (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.); how the project will enhance the infrastructure for research and/or education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships; how the results of the project will be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding; and potential benefits of the proposed activity to society at large.

Results of Prior Support:
Finally, if any PI or co-PI has received NSF funding in the past five years, a Results of Prior Support section is required (GPG II.C.2.d.iii.). Each PI and co-PI who has received more than one award (excluding amendments) must report on the award most closely related to the proposal. The following information must be provided:

1. the NSF award number, amount and period of support;
2. the title of the project;
3. a summary of the results of the completed work, including, for a research project, any contribution to the development of human resources in science and engineering;
4. publications resulting from the NSF award;
5. a brief description of available data, samples, physical collections and other related research products not described elsewhere; and
6. if the proposal is for renewed support, a description of the relation of the completed work to the proposed work.