Limited Submission Policy
Limited Submissions Grant & Fellowship Proposal Policy
Category: Main Campus Administrative Policy
Date Established: 3/14/2017
Responsible Office: Office of the Provost
Date Last Revised: 3/14/2017
Responsible Executive: Provost
Approval by: School Deans 12/05/2016
Date Posted: 3/14/2017
Please visit the Limited Submission Opportunities page to view current available opportunities and upcoming deadlines.
Policy: Faculty members interested in submitting a proposal to an external agency or foundation that limits the number of proposals per institution must submit a “pre-proposal” for internal review and approval prior to submitting a proposal to the funder. Whenever possible, these opportunities will be advertised to faculty in a timeframe that allows for sufficient time for the internal review process to occur and a decision communicated that allows the selected faculty member to prepare a high-quality proposal for submission.
Background and Policy Explanation: Limited submissions are grant or fellowship opportunities that allow for typically only one to three submissions per institution. NSF, NIH, NEH and many non-Federal agencies and sponsors have such requirements for specific opportunities. Limited submissions must therefore undergo peer review within the institution to select the proposal(s) that will be submitted. The Vice Provost for Research will send limited submission RFPs to all faculty on Main Campus with the subject line “Limited Submission Grant Opportunity”. The email will also be sent to the Law Center and Medical Center for distribution whenever relevant.
Interested applicants will submit a 1-3 page project summary and CVs for the principal investigator and if applicable, co-investigators, to one of two committees (described below) for internal review. Submissions must meet the internal deadline to provide an appropriate window for internal review.
The Review Process
University-wide Opportunities: If the opportunity attracts faculty or researchers from GUMC and the Main Campus science departments, the application is sent to the Dean for Research at GUMC who will forward for review by a standing committee (the External Award Review Committee) populated by members of GUMC and the Main Campus science departments. If the call for proposals attracts faculty members from other units (e.g., McCourt, MSB, Law) the review committee will add members from those fields. The Committee makes recommendations for which proposal(s) merit submission to the funder. If there is a ‘tie’ then the Dean for Research at GUMC and the Vice Provost of Research (Main Campus) review and resolve the tie. If a GULC faculty member is involved, the Dean of the Law School will be invited to weigh in on the final decision.
Main Campus Faculty Opportunities: If the opportunity involves members of the Main Campus only, then submissions are made to firstname.lastname@example.org, managed by the Vice Provost of Research, and the review is conducted by the Faculty Research Awards Committee, which is part of the Internal Grants Review Committee. Membership includes faculty from multiple disciplines. If additional expertise is needed, a member of the Internal Grants Committee or another faculty member will be solicited to conduct the review ad-hoc. Members of the same department/unit are recused from review; reviewers from closely related fields will be included. If there is a ‘tie’ then an additional review will be solicited.
Opportunities Driven by Funding Agency: Occasionally a foundation, corporation or individual will approach the University to invite proposals in a specific area (e.g., health, poverty). In these circumstances, the Office of Corporate & Foundation Relations conducts a university-wide search to identify faculty, programs and schools that align closely with the funder’s interest. They present these faculty and programs to the prospective donor, who determines those of most interest. For these donor-selected opportunities, Corporate & Foundation Relations provides additional information and schedules meetings between the funder and academic leadership and potential principal investigators.