Call for Proposals
2009-2010 POD Network Grant Program
(Proposals due: Monday, June 15th, 2009)

Eligibility

• One principal investigator (PI or Co-PI) must have been a POD member for at least the previous 12 months, and the POD member’s role in the project must be substantial. 

• Previous grant recipients are eligible to submit another proposal only after 3 years have passed since the submission date of the previous proposal.  After that time, previous recipients who have submitted the required reports may submit a proposal for an unrelated new project or a related project that represents a considerable advancement of the previous project.

• Eligible expenses (not exhaustive list):
  Wages, consulting or data analysis fees, equipment, supplies, travel for conducting research.

• neligible projects & expenses (not exhaustive list):
  Dissertation research, conference/institute travel and fees, an individual’s scholarship that is not of relevance to a large proportion of the POD membership, implementation of a new program (face-to-face or online), routine operation expenses.

Previously funded projects (sample list)

• Burdick, Dakin, Gathering POD’s Oral History

• Chism, Nancy, IUPUI, Professionalizing the Entry Preparation of Educational Developers

• Schönwetter, Dieter J., University of Manitoba, & Donna Ellis, University of Waterloo, Peeling Back the Layers: Competencies in U.S. and Canadian Graduate Student Development Programs and Developers' Preparation to Teach Them

• Schroeder, Connie, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, SoTL Program, Institutional Initiatives, and Faculty Development: Researching Models, Attributes, and Practice

Proposal Review & Evaluation Criteria
All grant proposals undergo blind review.  Please limit identifiable information to the Cover Page.  The committee will not review proposals that include information identifiable to an individual, center or institution, except on the cover page.

POD Grants Committee: Laurel Willingham-McLain, Chair; Angela Linse, Dakin Burdick, Dieter Schönwetter, Carolyn Oxenford; Virginia S. Lee, Liaison to Executive Committee

Reviewers will use the following criteria to evaluate grant applications:

1. Importance & scope of the project Strong proposals will successfully argue for the centrality or critical nature of the issue addressed.  The text should include a brief literature review and indicate how this project adds to the existing research and promises to have a sustained impact on the POD community. Strong proposals will demonstrate that other POD members and institutions are interested in and will be able to access and use the results of the project.  Cross-institutional projects are encouraged but not required.

2. Proposal rationale and description  Each proposal should include explicit objectives for the project, a one-year timeline, an indication of who will perform the various roles, and a description of the intended products. 

3. Probability of success

   • Evidence of sufficient institutional support

   • Evidence of PI’s and CoPIs’ prior experience with a similar project or ability to undertake the project (e.g., through academic preparation or prior work experience).

   • Proposed year-long time line is sufficient to achieve objectives

4. Budget and justification  Each item in the budget should be associated with an amount and a brief justification for its inclusion.

5. Evaluation and dissemination  

   • Clear and feasible plan for evaluating the success of the project.  Are the identified evaluation methods likely to provide evidence that the objectives have been achieved

   • Plan for dissemination beyond the required submission of a POD conference proposal or a To Improve the Academy chapter  (reminder: acceptance of proposals and manuscripts is not guaranteed).

Awardee Expectations
All recipients are expected to:

• Conduct the research as proposed, to the best of their ability, and to keep the POD Grants Committee Chair apprised of changes that might need to be made in their plans

• If Internal Review Board approval is required or advised, keep the Chair informed of IRB status

• Provide a brief mid-year report by February 1, 2010

• Submit a one page final report that describes: a) project activities, b) impact on recipients’ professional development, and c) usefulness to faculty and TA development community by September 1, 2010

• Submit a POD Conference proposal or a manuscript to To Improve the Academy in 2010 or 2011 based on the findings of your grant work (all conference proposals and manuscripts will undergo peer review; acceptance is not guaranteed)

• Acknowledge the funding from POD when presenting and publishing the findings

• Be willing to serve on POD Grants Committee in future years

Grant Submission Process

• Follow the format outlined in the POD Grant Proposal Checklist 2009-2010

• Proposal due date:  Monday, June 15, 2009

• Proposals accepted only in MS Word 2003-2007 format

• Document naming convention: PISurname.doc

• E-mail your proposal to Grants Committee Chair, Laurel Willingham-McLain

• Use subject heading:  2009 POD Grant Proposal

• Applicants will be notified of the decision by August 3, 2009