Faculty–Community Partner Grant Program

Purpose & Criteria

The USF Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships’ (OCEP) Research That Matters Faculty–Community Partner Grant Program seeks to promote activities that involve partnerships between USF and the broader community. OCEP administers a small grant program to provide support for research that focuses on community identified issues, and is intended to support pilot work on a research project that has the potential for a long lasting impact and the possibility to draw funding from external sources.

To receive funding, proposed research must meet the following criteria: (1) include partnerships in the community; (2) demonstrate the potential to lead to longer-lasting community engaged activities; (3) include a rigorous and feasible research design; and (4) demonstrate the potential to receive external funding. OCEP welcomes and encourages applications from all disciplines and departments within USF Tampa.

For more information on best practices for conducting community-engaged research, see Appendix A: Characteristics of Quality Community-Engaged Scholarship beginning on page 7 of this document.

Eligibility Requirements

All faculty with research appointments are eligible to be funded. Faculty who received a Research that Matters grant in 2013 or 2015 are not eligible to apply in this cycle.

Faculty who are not tenured or tenure-track must submit a letter from their department head or dean confirming that the applicant (1) is employed in a regularly renewable position with a research appointment, (2) is paid as a USF faculty member, and (3) will be regularly renewed upon satisfactory performance in terms of independent research accomplishments and other contractual obligations.

Funding

Funding for this grant program is derived from the USF OCEP budget. Proposals may request up to $4,000. A portion of the grant award must be allocated to the community partner (unless the community partner indicates that financial support is not needed). No more than 50% of the funds can be used for faculty salary support. 10% of the total award amount will be withheld until an end of year final report is received.

Review Procedures

Each proposal will be reviewed by a committee consisting of OCEP staff and USF faculty. Special reviewers may be added to the overall review committee to ensure adequate expertise on the content area of each proposal.

The OCEP Director, acting upon the recommendations from the review committee, will make the final determinations as to awards and award amounts. OCEP reserves the right to make awards for amounts less than requested.

Applicants will be notified by May 13, 2016 regarding the award status and amount. Funding will be made available beginning July 1, 2016 for a project period of up to 12 months.

Allowable Costs

·  Equipment and supplies required for the project that are unavailable to the applicant.

·  Travel for the applicant or research assistants, only if necessary to conduct the project.

·  Operating expenses related specifically to the project.

·  Student stipends for working on the applicant’s project.

·  Costs incurred by the community partner as a direct result of participation in the research project.

·  Other costs as approved by OCEP.

·  All purchasing and hiring must follow USF guidelines.

Unallowable Costs

·  Training and consultation for equipment and software.

·  Travel to attend conferences or to present the results of this work.

·  Funding from this grant cannot be used to supplement regular salary over 100%. Extra compensation is not allowed.

·  Food or participant incentives for research subjects.

For other restrictions on the use of recurring E and G funds, please consult with the OCEP.

Submission Procedures

Interested applicants may submit only one (1) project proposal. Proposals that are incomplete, do not adhere to instructions, or received after the deadline will be returned to the applicant and not considered.

All applications must be typed, double-spaced, saved as a PDF, and submitted electronically to by 5:00pm on April 18, 2016. The application cover page should be scanned after obtaining the required signatures and submitted electronically with the application materials.

Applicants are reminded that their proposal may be read by some individuals outside their discipline. Please use language that can be understood by all reviewers.

Please contact the Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships at (813) 974-4829 if you need assistance with submitting your application.

Conditions of Receiving an Award

Institutional Review Board Approval

If the proposed research involves human subjects, approval by the Institutional Review Board must be secured prior to OCEP releasing funds.

Reporting Requirements

Within one month after the grant completion, award recipients must submit to OCEP a Final Report form, outlining the final outcomes and products, as well as listing all personnel and agencies involved with the project. More information about the final report format will be provided to each PI. Additionally, OCEP will ask to store a copy of your final report and/or copies of publicly disseminated products (papers, presentations, etc.) on its publicly accessible Research that Matters document repository in Scholar Commons.

Dissemination of Project Results

The awardee is expected to participate at OCEP’s annual Research that Matters conference. Publications resulting from this grant must include the following acknowledgement: “This work was supported, in part, by funds provided by the University of South Florida Office of Community Engagement and Partnerships.”

Instructions for Preparation of the Proposal

1.  Cover Page: Fill out cover page. Print and obtain required signatures.

2.  Project Summary: Not to exceed 200 words. The summary should provide an overview of the project objectives, methods, analysis, and anticipated results.

3.  Proposed Budget: Requests must not exceed $4,000 total.

Item Category / Item Description / Quantity / Cost / Total / Funding Requested from OCEP:
Faculty salary/
fringe
GA salary/
fringe
Community Partner
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
Other
External Funding
Total project budget:
Total funding requested from OCEP (not to exceed $4,000): / 0

a.  Salaries: List the names and positions of all personnel to be funded by the project. Faculty summer salary is allowable, but overload or extra compensation is not. Fringe benefits must be included in any salary amount requested. The basis for salary compensation should be included. PI salary and benefits may not exceed 50% of the total budget

b.  Community Partner: Itemize any community partner stipends.

c.  Equipment: List each piece of equipment requested. Equipment requested must be otherwise unavailable to the PI and must be justified on the basis of a specific need defined by the project proposed. Any equipment purchased with USF funds remains the property of the University.

d.  Supplies: Identify expendable supplies to be used by the project.

e.  Travel: Requests for travel funds will be considered only if the travel is central to a specific goal of the project. Include the name and location of the destination and the specific purpose of the trip(s).

f.  Other: Any additional costs not mentioned above. Food may not be purchased with grant funds.

g.  External Funding: List any external funding source, pending or approved, that may impact the award of a Faculty–Community Partner Grant. If this proposal has been submitted to any other potential funding source, the PI should keep OCEP informed of any developments affecting the funding status during the review process.

4.  Budget Justification: Explain the relevance of each budget item to the outcomes of the project. Please provide sufficient details of how you arrived at the cost.

5.  Project Narrative: The narrative should not exceed five double-spaced pages (not including references) and must include the following.

a.  Introduction and Objectives.

b.  Significance: Explain the significance of this project. Please discuss the possible impacts of the research project beyond the 12 month funding cycle. Also, explain why this research is a viable project for external funding.

c.  Methods: Describe the methods that will be used to carry out the project. Include sufficient detail to judge the project’s merit and appropriateness for achieving the objectives of the project.

d.  Collaboration with Community Partner: Describe the collaboration between you and your community partner(s). This description should explain how this partnership is based upon reciprocity of benefits, how the community partner has been involved in the planning, and the community partner’s role in analysis of data, interpretation of results, and dissemination of findings or products.

e.  Project Timeline: Briefly describe the plan for implementing the project with a chronology of significant activities, events, or milestones.

6.  Curriculum Vitae / Résumé: Include curriculum vita or résumés for principal investigator(s) and key personnel. CVs and résumés must be limited to three pages for each PI or key personnel.

7.  Other Support: List all external and internal support received in the past two years. Include title, date, and amount of award.

8.  Letter of Commitment: Include a scanned signed and dated letter from your community partner outlining the partner’s commitment to participate in the planning and implementation of this project.

5

Faculty–Community Partner Grant Program

Application Cover Page

Title of Proposal: ______

______

Principal Investigator: ______Email: ______

Faculty Rank: ______Year Started at USF: ______

Address / USF Mail Point: ______

______

College and Department: ______

Name of Community Partner Organization: ______

Community Partner Address and Contact Information: ______

______

______

Total Funds Requested: $______

Desired Starting Date (must be July 1, 2016 or later): ____ / ____ / ____

Endorsement Signatures

______

Principal Investigator Date

______

Community Partner Date

______

Department/Division Chair Date

Faculty–Community Partner Grant Program

Checklist

Deadline to submit application: 5:00 pm on Monday, April 18, 2016

ÿ  Cover Page. Must include all required signatures.

ÿ  Project Summary. Not to exceed 200 words.

ÿ  Proposed Budget and Justification. All budget items must be clearly justified. No word limit. Single-spaced outline format is acceptable.

ÿ  Project Narrative. Not to exceed five double-spaced pages.

ÿ  Curriculum Vitae/Resume. Limited to three pages for each PI or key personnel.

ÿ  Other Support. Describe all external and internal support received in the past two years.

ÿ  Letter of Commitment. A scanned signed and dated letter from your community partner outlining the partner’s commitment to participate in the planning and implementation of this project.

Print hard copies of all documents, obtain required signatures, scan and save the entire application as a PDF, and then email the PDF to before the above deadline.

Projects will be evaluated using this rubric:

Research that Matters

FACULTY–COMMUNITY PARTNER GRANT PROGRAM 2016

Research Proposal Evaluation Form

For each of the evaluation criteria below, please provide a numeric score and brief comments. (Scale: 5= Excellent; 4= Very Good; 3= Good; 2= Fair; 1= Poor)

Proposal Title: ______

Principal Investigator: ______

Reviewer: ______

Criteria: / Score: / Comments:
Clarity of objectives and project plan
Significance of work to the applicant’s field
Strength of community partnership*
Potential to make an ongoing impact in the community
Potential to lead to external funding
Overall quality of the proposal**
Total Score:

* Does the project narrative set forth a partnership that is reciprocal in nature? Is it clear that the community partner has a meaningful role in project planning, implementation, and interpretation of the results?

** Factors to take into consideration include, but are not limited to: quality of writing, coherence, organization of ideas, whether the project is compelling.

Appendix A: Characteristics of Quality Community-Engaged Scholarship

Characteristics of Quality Community-Engaged Scholarship

Adapted from: Jordan, C. (Editor). Community-Engaged Scholarship Review, Promotion &

Tenure Package. Peer Review Workgroup, Community-Engaged Scholarship for Health

Collaborative, Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, 2007.

Copyright © 2007, Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. This report may be reproduced in whole or in part as long as it is properly cited.

Definitions

What is “community engagement”?

Community engagement is “the application of institutional resources to address and solve challenges facing communities through collaboration with these communities.”

Citation for above definition and figure: Commission on Community-Engaged Scholarship in the Health Professions. Linking Scholarship and Communities. Seattle, WA: Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, 2005.

How is engagement different from “outreach”?

Outreach has traditionally been associated with the dissemination of information to public audiences. Such dissemination has taken numerous forms but it is typically one-way communication rather than an exchange. Engagement implies a partnership and a two-way exchange of information, ideas, and expertise as well as shared decision making.

What makes an activity “scholarship”?

The following list of characteristics of scholarship is adapted from Recognizing Faculty

Work, by Robert Diamond and Bronwyn Adam (1993):

§  The activity requires a high level of discipline expertise.

§  The activity breaks new ground or is innovative.

§  The activity can be replicated and elaborated.

§  The work and its results can be documented.

§  The work and its results can be peer reviewed.

§  The activity has significance or impact.

More simply stated, scholarship is work that is public, peer reviewed and available in a platform that others may build on. Faculty take a scholarly approach when they systematically design, implement, assess and redesign an activity, drawing from the literature and best practices in the field (Association of American Medical Colleges, Advancing Educators and Education: Defining the Components and Evidence of Educational Scholarship.

https://services.aamc.org/Publications/showfile.cfm?file=version86.pdf)

Scholarship is, at its heart, about contributing to a body of knowledge. Such contributions could be in the form of the creation of new knowledge or the dissemination of knowledge.

Creation of knowledge is not just research. Integrating existing knowledge in new ways, making linkages, applying knowledge in new ways, or coming up with new methods would also be considered part of creating knowledge. Simply conducting a research project might not be considered scholarly unless the project results are documented, able to be reviewed by peers (including practitioners, policy makers, community members, etc. if appropriate) and disseminated.