Social Sciences Division

Local Business Center

September 29, 2005
To: SSD Faculty and Administrators
From: Adrienne Thomas
Re: Grant proposals that require additional space and technology resources

To Download the PDF of this document click here.

The Local Business Center and the Dean’s office have worked together to articulate concerns to be addressed during review of research grant proposals. One set of questions involves projects that require additional resources for space and technology. These needs should be addressed at the proposal stage so they can be accommodated in the event of funding. This document describes a process that allows a knowledgeable and timely assessment and review of such proposals within the Division.

Indications

Faculty Service Representatives and the LBC Grants Specialist normally learn of proposed additional space and technology needs by reviewing Attachment 1C of the Proposal Transmittal Form. Grant applicants need to ask whether existing space and technology resources are sufficient to carry out the proposed work and to answer the space and technology question on Attachment 1C accurately.
If Attachment 1C is not completed correctly, the need for additional space or technology may be construed from a proposal’s budget, justification, facilities page, summary or narrative. The FSR will be able, in the event of such a proposal, to discuss this with the PI and can advise the Grants Specialist. Simultaneously, the Grants Specialist may reasonably question FSRs when the proposed work seems to involve significant new activity.

Space

For proposed significant increases in space, the Associate Dean for Capital Planning and Programs (Mary Brandon) should be consulted. She will be able to assess the demand for additional space in light of availability. FSRs and the Grants Specialist should ask the PI for details and then share these with Mary. Large center grant proposals or any other large increase in support staff or activity may require additional space. Mary will confer with the department chair when appropriate. It may be necessary to negotiate shared space.
It is important to have a record of any concerns regarding space before the proposal is submitted, but such concerns will usually not be sufficient to hold up a proposal at the Divisional level.

Technology

For proposed significant increases in technology, the Director of SSD Computing Services (Mike Zachar) should be consulted. As with space, details should be requested from the PI and then shared with Mike. Proposals for additional technology may come from any department in the division, as the social sciences make use of statistical software, satellite photos, 3-D imaging, Geographical Information Systems, etc. FSRs and the Grants Specialist should watch for such vocabulary as “script,” “develop an application,” “server,” or for any unusual software. Such requirements may exceed the infrastructure provided by SSD computing. An example of a specific concern would be the development of a website that is to be hosted in perpetuity. Also to be considered is a rule-of-thumb three-year period of utility for hardware; if a project includes the purchase of new equipment and the project period is longer than three years, then the budgeting of replacement equipment should be considered.
If a proposal requires a technology facilities statement, Mike Zachar can provide one. As different projects will have varying access to technology such statements will be project specific rather than a generic boilerplate.
As with space, technology concerns should be recorded before the proposal is submitted, but are not expected to hold up a proposal at the divisional level.
One post-award concern is with re-budgeting from technology to other areas and subsequent requests that SSD Computing Services provide technology that was to have been funded by a grant. FSRs will be aware of any such re-budgeting and can discuss this with the PI and with Mike.

Cross Departmental/Divisional Approval

Members of the SSD faculty may be involved in proposed projects in other, non-SSD Divisions or schools. SSD administrators do not normally review applications and Proposal Transmittal Forms for grants submitted through other divisions. Thus if the new work requires additional space or technology resources in SSD, then faculty must make specific requests to their Chair and SSD administrators. SSD is only obligated to what it has explicitly agreed. Concurrence to an SSD faculty member’s effort in a non-SSD proposal is not a commitment to provide additional resources.

Monitoring

The SSD Grants Specialist (Adrienne Thomas) will monitor the application of this policy and procedure and will recommend modifications as needed.

__________________________________________________________________

(1)Dean’s office, Department Chairs, Center Directors, Faculty Service Representatives.