SPH Delta Omega Research Enhancement and Development Initiative (REDI)
Program Guidance for January 2018 Solicitation
In line with Delta Omega goals, the Texas A&M School of Public Health (SPH) strives to support faculty in their research activities, including assistance in the development of new extramurallysupported investigator-initiated research. SPH recognizes that preliminary data or proposal development activities are often needed to prepare competitive applicationsto various funding agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), and the National Science Foundation (NSF).
The SPH Delta OmegaResearch Enhancement and Development Initiative (REDI) awards small intramural grants to generate pilot data and proposal development activities (e.g., bringing interdisciplinary teams together for larger funding initiatives) in support of applications with the expectation that the awardees will apply for extramural grant funds.
Due Date:
Letters of Intent (LOIs) stating the tentative title, research objectives, and named investigators are due to Linnae Hutchison at by 11:59PM January 31, 2018.The LOI is required.
Completed Applications(PDF) are due by 11:59PM on February 28, 2018. Applications missing this deadline and/or those not following guidelines will not be accepted. Applications should be e-mailed to Linnae Hutchison at by the deadline. Submission time will be documented by email receipt.Award notices are anticipated by early May 2018.
Term: The funding period of this solicitation is June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019. Projectsare envisioned to be short-term (e.g., six months in duration, but may be up to 12 months in length). Funds are cost-reimbursable and will not be released until a copy of the IRB/IACUC approval or exemption is provided to the Office of Research.Extensions up to three months may be allowed with justification from the Principal Investigator and subject to approval by the SPH Associate Dean for Research.
Eligibility: Funding support through the SPH REDI program is available to SPH tenure-track and tenured principal faculty to develop and enhance their academic careers through research program development. Non-tenure track research faculty are eligible for these grants in special circumstances provided their application includes the recommendation and support of a SPH tenured or tenure-track mentor. Preference is given to new investigators (e.g., completion of terminal degree in the last 5years) at the assistant professor level to help initiate their research programs. Applications from Assistant Professors must identify a research mentor (preferably from SPH or within TAMU system) and the mentor must submit a formal commitment letter. Additionally, established investigators at higher academic ranks who wish to transition to a new area of research or pursue an innovative opportunity may also apply.NOTE: PriorREDI program grantees are not eligible to apply for this 2018 round of funding.
Types of Research: The REDI awards support innovative research with a high probability of resulting in significant ($100,000) in extramural funding in the near future (less than 2 years from completion of the REDI award.) Projects must be inter-disciplinary in nature (minimum two investigators across departments or other academic units within or external to the School).
Availability/Use of Funds: Approximately $100,000 is available in FY2018 to support innovative inter-disciplinary projects. The maximum award amount per project is $25,000total.Indirects are not allowed.
Allowable Costs: REDI funds may be used to support salary/fringe of a Graduate Research Assistant or equivalent engaged in the support of this project, supplies directly related to the project, travel within the United States, equipment (>$5,000) with detailed justification, data purchases, specialized software, incentives, and/or computers for non-faculty research personnel working on the project with justification.Computers must be purchased 6 months prior to project’s termination.
Unallowable costs: Faculty salary, international travel unless required by SPH investigator for the data collection (subject to prior approval), consultants, subcontractors, meals, alcohol, entertainment costs, cell phone costs, student tuition/fees, general office supplies, and costs not directly related to the approved project goals and objectives are not allowed.REDI funds will not be transferred to other units in the TAMU system or externally. Funds are retained at SPH.
Number of Awards: Up to four awards.
Number of Applications: One application as Principal Investigator.
Reporting: Awardees are required to submit the following reports within 10 business days of the due date. Failure to submit required reports according to this timeline will result in a restriction of the funds until the reports are received.Continued funding is dependent upon satisfactory progress.Progress reports are anticipated to be brief (e.g., three to five pages per report).
Report 1: Three month Progress Report due August 15, 2018
Report 2: Semi-annual progress report due November 29, 2018
Report 3: Final Report due May 31, 2019
Other: REDI grantee presentation (to be scheduled tentatively May 2019)
Section A: / 3 page maximum for items 1-9 of Section A.Project Title / Provide descriptive title
PI, Co-Is,
and Mentor / List name and affiliation of PI, Co-Investigators, and Mentor. By virtue of proposal submission, the PI affirms the named investigators and mentors are aware of and support the submission. A letter from primary mentor is required for assistant professors.
Significance /
- Describe the gap in public health research.
- Describe how the proposed study addresses the defined research gap.
Innovation /
- Describe how the proposed study is innovative.
Approach /
- Provide an overview of the research approach including, as appropriate, setting, population, measurements and analytical strategies.
- Identify your collaborators and mentor(s) and their relevant backgrounds. Describe mentor’s experience in receiving funding from the mechanisms targeted.
Outcomes /
- Describe how this project increases competitiveness for external funding.
- Identify specific mechanisms and funding sources you plan to submit to as a result of this seed funding.
Milestones/
timeline /
- Provide up to a one year timeline of key project milestones indicating readiness for application for external funding.
- Include timeline for submission of proposal to external funding source(s).
Budget/
Resources /
- State the total amount requested and provide a one page budget and justification. Template included in application. This section is not counted in page limits.
References Cited /
- Up to 10 References Cited. Not counted in page limits.
SECTION B: / Provide an abbreviated NIH Biosketchfor PI (up to 5 pages in current NIH format available at ).
SECTION C: / Letter of Support from Primary Mentor (1 page) for applications from Assistant Professors.
Application Requirements: Applicationsshould adhere strictly adhere to the REDI guidance requirements. Proposals exceeding page limits for any section or that do not follow guidance for each section will be withdrawn as non-responsive
Application Requirements: Applications should not exceed 9 pages total to include sections A (3 pages maximum), B (5 pages maximum), and C (1 page max if relevant) below. Non responsive applications will be administratively withdrawn.
Formatting:Please see application form for guidance. Margins may be no less than one-half inch (.5 inches) throughout, single spacing, no less than 11 point Arial or Georgia font. The application should be submitted as a single PDF document via e-mail.
Review Process: Responsiveapplications are reviewed and scored by an external review panel with respect to scientific merit (significance, innovation, and approach). A composite score will be calculated based on the responses to the application requirements. Blinded summary scores and comments will be available upon request. After reviews are completed, the Associate Dean for Research will forward the review panel recommendation(s) to the SPH Dean. With concurrence of the Associate Dean for Research, the Dean will designatethe applications that will be funded, based on the Review Panel’s recommendations and availability of funds.An example of the review criteria is attached.
Questions: Please refer application questions to . Questions and responses will be compiled and posted as FAQs on the SPH Office of Research website at
Review Criteria 2018*
Applicant Name: ______
Study Title: ______
Summary Strengths and Weaknesses:Criteria / Score (1-9) / Scoring is based on a 1-9 scale:
(1=Exceptional, 2=Outstanding, 3=Excellent, 4=Very good, 5= Good, 6=Satisfactory, 7= Fair, 8=Marginal, 9=Poor)
The score based on how well the application addresses each criteria as defined by following set of questions:
Significance / Does the proposed project address a significant gap in public health research?How will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or public health practice be improved by achievement of the specific aims?
Investigators / Does the PI and assembled team have the appropriate training and experience to pursue this line of study? If Assistant Professor level, has a mentor been identified? Is there evidence of mentor commitment? Has the mentor received funding from the targeted research funding mechanism?
Innovation / Is the study innovative and novel? Does the study challenge current research by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches, interventions, or methods across multiple disciplines?
Approach / Is the overall approach appropriate for the research proposed? Are potential alternative strategies proposed? Are risks managed?
Outcomes/
Milestones / What is the probability that the seed funding support will lead to submission of competiveness external funding? Is the future funding plan clearly defined? Is there a clear timeline of milestones including submission to external funders? Can the work be completed in the timeline proposed?
Composite Score / What is your overview impression of the proposal? (1-9 scale)
Budget/
Resources / Select one:
__Approved
__Approved with revisions
__Not approved / Are the resources requested appropriate to support the proposed project? Are there other (non-seed funding) institutional resources available to support this research?
*Adapted from NIH review criteria.
Date: ______Reviewer ID:______
REDI 2018_1-4-2018 Page 1 of 4