EVALUATION

The evaluation of the review subcommittees will govern the selection of Research Council Seed Grants, based on the information submitted by the deadline of Wednesday, October 16, 2013. Announcement of awards will be made in early January 2014. 

The Vice President for Research will make the final decision on the grants based upon the Research Council’s evaluations. The evaluative comments will be shared as constructive feedback, if requested. The criteria upon which the evaluation of proposals is based are: 

1. CLARITY AND QUALITY OF THE PROPOSAL:
a. Is the proposal well written and logically presented?
b. Are the ideas and their significance clearly articulated, and in a manner that is understandable and appreciated by a researcher/scholar not in the same discipline?

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPOSED RESEARCH TOPIC:
a. What is the likelihood that the research effort may be the beginning of something that could have an important influence on the field? (i.e. evidence that the research question addresses a critical barrier to progress in the field) Do the proposed outcomes represent a new paradigm for concepts in this area of research?
b. What is the intellectual merit of the proposal?

3. METHODOLOGY: 
a. Are the methods proposed for conducting the investigation appropriate?
b. Do the methods proposed show innovative thinking?
c. Will the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses yield findings that can satisfy the objectives of the project?
d. Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?

4. EXTERNAL SPONSORSHIP OR OTHER VALUE-ADDED OUTCOMES:
a. Does the investigator outline clear plans to seek external sponsorship of their work?
b. Is it clearly articulated why funding this project is necessary to gaining external funding?
c. If not planning to seek external sponsorship for their future work:
i. Does the investigator explain why such sponsorship is not appropriate or available?
ii. Does the investigator describe what other value-added activity is planned?
Examples include:
• Activities related to scholarly and research activities, including field research and visits to archives and special collections.
• Preparation of novel databases for scholarly studies.
• Preparation of primary scholarship or creative work for publication, exhibition, or performance (books, artworks, musical compositions and performance); typically these subventions depend on a contract with a publisher, a commission, or a contracted exhibition or venue.
iii. Does the investigator propose a timeline for production of a measurable outcome or product?

5. THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FORMAT OUTLINED IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS.

REPORTS


ALL awardees are required to file a final report electronically to research@udayton.edu summarizing the RCSG project no later than September 30.  If you are applying for RCSG funding you must attach a copy of this report with your proposal.


Form for Reporting


The report submitted at the completion of the project should include plans to search for external funding.  If there is a proposal for a Seed Grant the following year by the same applicant, the final report on the previous year’s grant, including responses to the two questions A and B under VI, Funding, in Proposal Requirements are used as a basis for evaluation of the proposal.