Examples of successful proposals (Hawk ID required)
Current IFI Awardees  
IFI Review Panels

Arts & Humanities Initiative (AHI) Grant Program

Submission Deadline:  Monday, March 27, 2017

The Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development (OVPRED) invites applications to its Arts & Humanities Initiative (AHI) program for academic year 2017-2018.  This program encourages leading edge scholarship, creative activities, and interdisciplinary research. 

Please contact Cheryl Ridgeway (cheryl-a-ridgeway@uiowa.edu / 319-384-3332) in the OVPRED with questions.

 

Program Description
AHI Standard Grant Support up to $7,500 is available for individual or collaborative grants that focus on humanities scholarship and work in the creative, visual, and performing arts. 
AHI Major Project Grant  Provides funding up to $30,000 to conduct preliminary work and/or develop pilot data that represents novel and innovative projects to develop new collaborations and enable the PI/PD to submit competitive applications for external research grants or leverage substantial unit/departmental/collegiate support.
AHI Major Conferences/Ideation Meetings Provides funding up to $10,000 in support of new conferences, symposia, seminars, colloquia or workshops to address novel research issues, explore new research frontiers and/or initiate new interdisciplinary research. Applications that focus on existing conferences or have very limited participation are not considered responsive to this internal funding initiative.

 

Scholarly Book and Sound Recording Subventions: OVPRED provides funding to the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for scholarly book and sound recording subventions. Contact Marc Armstrong (marc-armstrong@uiowa.edu / 319-335-3994), Associate Dean for Research, for more information.

Proposals of high interest to OVPRED

  • Highly innovative, pushing-the-envelope ideas
  • Highly original and creative artistic projects
  • Multidisciplinary proposals
  • Applications that are considered high risk and not fundable by standard mechanisms
  • Proposals that initiate new scholarly and creative collaborations 
  • Applications to build teams that are necessary to seek large, multi-institutional/industry partnerships
     

Types of proposals that are not responsive to this initiative

  • Projects that incrementally advance existing research or scholarship
  • Bridging requests
  • Grants previously submitted to federal agencies that were not funded
  • Existing conferences or meetings
  • Travel to attend conferences, present findings, or perform or exhibit completed work, is not allowed
     

 

Deadline / Application SubmissionEligibility / Resubmissions / Budgets / Application Form /
Narrative Guidelines / CV or Biosketch / DEO Endorsement / Review Process /
Notification and Project Period /
Other Funding

 

Deadline

Monday, March 27, 2017, 11:59 PM

Application Submission

To begin the submission process, click here. Click on "Apply" on the right side and sign-in with your Hawk ID and password using the "University of Iowa Login" field.  If you have problems or questions, contact Cheryl Ridgeway (cheryl-a-ridgeway@uiowa.edu / 319-384-3332) in the OVPRED well ahead of the deadline.  

Eligibility

At the time of application, all UI personnel who are tenure-track or tenured faculty, clinical track faculty, research faculty, lecturers, and other staff members for whom research and scholarship are assigned as one of their primary job responsibilities and have at least a 50% university appointment during the academic year of the project are eligible to apply for funding.

The award is made to only one individual. Co-PIs are not allowed. Adjunct faculty, visiting faculty, postdoctoral fellows or scholars, associates, fellowship trainees, and graduate students are not eligible.

An applicant may appear as PI/PD on only one proposal per application cycle, but may be listed as a collaborator or consultant on other proposals.

Resubmissions

 Only one resubmission will be allowed for any application.  A one-page “Response to Reviewers” must be included in the revised submission (see Narrative Guidelines below).  The revised proposal will be considered only if significantly improved over the original submission and in response to comments from the initial review are appropriately addressed.  Indicate revised paragraphs in the project narrative with a line in the right-hand margin.

Submissions beyond the permitted single revision or revised applications submitted as new will be returned without review.

Budgets

Budget requests are for a 12-month period.  Funding commences at the time of the award letter.  Enter budget items, costs and justification as indicated in the electronic form.  Be as specific as possible, listing the need for personnel, travel, equipment, services, supplies, etc.  Explain why the requested item is essential for the proposed work.   Justification for each budget item should answer the question: “Why is this specific person/item necessary for the proposed project?”  Note: a description of the person/item is not a justification.

To view allowable budget items for all programs, please Click Here.  Do not submit a budget as part of the narrative PDF.

Electronic Application Form

The electronic application form requires completion of five sections: 1) general information, 2) CVs or biosketches of internal/external collaborators, 3) abstract and focused questions in text boxes (see below), 4) budget information, and 5) the combined Project Narrative and PI/PD curriculum vitae.*

Text Boxes:  Provide the following information in the appropriate text box.  Some material requested may appear to be redundant with the Project Narrative, but the Text Box information should be considered as the Executive Summary of the proposal.  

1)  Abstract/Project Summary (350 word limit):  Provide a brief overview of the proposal.  Include the main procedures and activities of the project that are comprehensible to non-specialists and, if successful, the expected impact of the project;
2)  Justification (350 word limit):  Describe why OVPRED should invest in your project.  If applicable, elaborate on how existing sources of support will be leveraged to expand, extend or innovate towards a new or novel research, scholarly or creative project. Describe what distinguishes your project from literally hundreds of others.  Identify new collaborations, if applicable, that extend your project into areas that have not previously been established.  Provide details about how your proposed work will respond to departmental, collegiate or institutional strategic priorities.

* A brief CV or biosketch is required for the PI/PD, and each collaborator (internal or external to the University of Iowa).  See Curriculum Vitae or Biosketch Guidelines below.

Project Narrative Guidelines

The required Project Narrative (to be uploaded to the electronic application site) must contain sections 1-5 (1-6 for resubmissions) in the order indicated, with each section clearly identified.  Type font must be 11-point (or larger) Times, Times New Roman or Arial, and margins must be at least .75 inches. A “Response to Reviewers” section is required for resubmitted proposals.  Indicate revised paragraphs in the narrative with a line in the right-hand margin.

1.  Project Description 
2.  Innovation
3.  Collaboration (optional for Standard Grant applications) 
4.  Feasibility and Timeline 
5.  Outcomes and Impact 
6.  Response to Reviewers (One-page limit -- resubmissions only. See resubmission guidelines above.)

Page Limitations:  The narrative may not exceed 4 single spaced pages (5 pages for resubmissions), inclusive of all sections, diagrams, images, graphs, and bibliography.  Narratives that exceed the page limits will be returned without review.

Narrative Content:  The content of the Project Narrative should address the questions outlined in the review criteria specifically applicable to the AHI grant under application.  See the paragraph on Review Process for details. 

Narrative Language:  It is essential that applicants write their proposals in a language that is comprehensible to nonspecialists. The PI/PD is strongly advised to write in straightforward language that emphasizes why the area of investigation is important and how the individual or team will conduct the research or scholarly activity. To that end, limit the amount of highly discipline-specific jargon. Minimize the number of abbreviations. Define all abbreviations.  Restrict description of overly technical components of your project.  Remember that most reviewers will not be experts in your field of study. Your objective is to assist the reviewer in understanding the goals, feasibility and overall impact of your project. Concentrate your efforts on defining the big idea.

Supplemental Materials (Optional):  Applicants proposing audio-visual or digital projects may insert a link to web hosted materials within the narrative.  Alternatively, applicants may upload the appropriate file where indicated in the online form related to audio, visual or digital projects.  Since reviewers tend to be most attentive to the narrative, applicants should be sure to develop a narrative that can stand on its own.

Letters of Support (Optional): One to two brief (no more than one page in length) letters of support may be included at the end of the narrative packet and are not counted against the page limitation.

Curriculum Vitae or Biosketch Guidelines

A Curriculum Vitae (CV) or biosketch is required for the PI/PD and all collaborators.  The PI/PD’s CV or biosketch is to be combined with the 4 page (5 pages for resubmissions) narrative and uploaded as one pdf attachment where indicated in the electronic submission site.  Collaborator CVs or biosketches are to be uploaded only where indicated in the online application form.

The CV should be no longer than 4 pages.  The following elements are required:

  • Education history;
  • Academic, corporate and other significant positions held;
  • Relevant peer-reviewed publications or creative projects; 
  • Funding support (all active internal and external funding support, recently completed funding support (last 3 years), and any pending support.  Include all support from federal, state, foundation, departmental, university, and start-up funds.  Citations of sources of support listed above must contain dates of funding, PI/PD, direct dollar amounts, and a brief but clear description of the work supported by the awards; if none, please so state; and 
  • List all previous AHI or seed grant awards held in the past five years. 

Applications not following the prescribed formats outlined above may be rejected.  You are encouraged to send an email to ifi-questions@uiowa.edu or call 319-384-3332, if you have questions about any of these programs.

DEO Endorsement

Once the application is electronically submitted, the OVPRED will send an automatic email to the PI/PD’s DEO shortly after the deadline with a link to the endorsement form. Applicants do not need to request a DEO endorsement prior to submission; however, it is strongly recommended to consult with your DEO prior to submission to inform them of your project.  If the DEO is also an applicant, the request will instead be sent to the collegiate associate dean for research. DEO endorsement comments are required and are considered by the review panel as part of the evaluation process.

Review Process

All applications will be evaluated by peer-review teams composed of University of Iowa faculty.  Recommendations will be made to the Vice President for Research and Economic Development, who will make the final determination of awards.  Applications will be reviewed based on the criteria described below.

AHI Standard Grant Review Criteria:  AHI Standard Grant applications should be responsive to the specific review criteria below.  OVPRED seeks to identify applications that are both innovative and impact the field, discipline, or broader community defined in the proposal.  Applications that complement, challenge or expand relevant studies should be the focus of AHI proposals.

Project Description

  • Is the goal or central problem of the project clearly identified?
  • How does the project complement, challenge, or expand relevant studies in the field?  What is the major contribution of the project?
  • Is the research plan clearly described?
  • If applicable, what are the results from previous AHI Grants? 
  • Will this project result in a completed work, or the completion of a stage in the development of a work?
  • Is a short list of bibliographical references relevant to the application included?

Innovation

  • What is the novel, unique, or creative component of the project?
  • If the project brings together individuals from diverse disciplines, how does the proposed work enhance those disciplines and what is the benefit of the collaboration?
  • If the project stems from a single scholar or artist, how does the proposed work enhance the PI/PD’s scholarship or creative experiences?

Collaboration (Not a requirement for the Standard Grant)

  • What new key collaborations are identified? 
  • How does the application bring together individuals from other disciplines to develop and advance a scholarly, creative, or research project?

Feasibility and Timeline

  • Are the qualifications, competencies, and achievements of the PI/PD (and collaborators, if appropriate) suited to carry out the project?
  • Does the proposal address access to essential resources, environment (personnel, space, facilities), and budget to support the desired outcomes?
  • Is it likely that the project will be completed in the proposed timeline? 
  • What critical milestones are provided to assure progress along the timeline?

Outcomes and Impact

  • What is the overall impact of the project?
  • Who derives direct or indirect benefit from the project? What are the next steps for the project once internal funding has been completed?
  • Has the applicant indicated potential sources of external funding?
  • Has the applicant considered opportunities to share discoveries with a wider public or audience?

Response to Reviewers (resubmissions only)

  • How has the revised proposal been significantly improved and how has the proposal addressed comments from the initial review?
     

AHI Major Project Review Criteria:  AHI Major Project applications should be responsive to the specific review criteria below.  OVPRED seeks to identify applications that are highly innovative and impact the field, discipline, or broader community defined in the proposal.  Applications that focus on incremental scholarship or long-standing research directions are not responsive to the internal funding initiatives.  Major Project applications are also expected to emphasize innovation, collaboration and multiple disciplinarity.

An important goal of this funding mechanism is to provide essential funds that will enable UI researchers to develop pilot data or take other steps that will position them to prepare competitive external research grant proposals for larger research projects.

Project Description

  • What is the new big idea of the major project? 
  • Is the proposed scholarly, research, or creative project clearly described?
  • Are important elements of originality and significance identified? 
  • When appropriate, is a statement of the hypothesis to be tested provided? 
  • Is applicable preliminary information or data in support of the project provided?
  • Are the approach and methodology sound and clearly described? 
  • How will the impact of the project be evaluated? 
  • Are potential pitfalls and alternative approaches provided? 
  • Is a short list of bibliographical references relevant to the application included?

Innovation

  • What is the novel, unique, or creative component of the project? 
  • How does the innovative idea promote new research directions, scholarly capabilities or creative works? 

Collaboration

  • What new collaborations are identified? 
  • How does the application bring together individuals from other disciplines to develop and advance a scholarly, creative, or research project?

Feasibility and Timeline

  • Specifically comment on a) the likelihood that the project will be completed in the proposed timeline, b) the qualifications and achievements of the PI (and collaborators) to carry out the project, and c) the essential resources, environment (personnel, space, facilities), and budget to support the project’s desired outcomes.
  • What specific milestones are provided to assure progress along the timeline?

Outcomes and Impact

  • What is the overall impact of the project? 
  • Is the project the outcome of a new idea or is it incremental in nature?  
  • What is produced at the end of the project?
  • Who derives direct or indirect benefit from the project?
  • What outreach and engagement to broader communities and disciplines is provided?    
  • What are the next steps for the project once internal funding has been completed? 
  • What is the likelihood that the project will attract external funding?

Response to Reviewers (one page limit -- resubmissions only)

  • How has the revised proposal been significantly improved and how has the proposal addressed comments from the initial review?

AHI Major Conference/Ideation Meeting Review Criteria:  AHI Major Conference and Ideation Meeting applications should be responsive to the specific review criteria below.  OVPRED seeks to identify applications that are highly innovative and will create new opportunities for scholarship, creative work, and research.  Applications that focus on existing conferences or have limited participation are not responsive to this solicitation.

Project Description

  • Why is the proposed new conference needed? 
  • Is the proposed conference clearly described?
  • What is the importance and significance of the conference from the perspective of the discipline or area of focus?   
  • Who is the target audience? 
  • How will the impact of the conference be evaluated and assessed?

Innovation

  • What is new and novel about the proposed conference or meeting?

Collaboration

  • How does the conference bring together individuals from cross- or multiple disciplines? 
  • Who benefits from the proposed conference?

Feasibility and Timeline

  • Specifically comment on a) the likelihood that the conference will be completed in the proposed timeline, b) the qualifications of the conference PI (and collaborators), and c) the essential resources and budget to support the desired outcomes from the conference. 
  • What specific milestones are provided to assure progress along the timeline?

Outcomes and Impact

  • What is the overall impact of the conference? 
  • What is the benefit to the target audience? 
  • What outreach and engagement to broader communities and disciplines is envisioned as a result of the conference or meeting?  
  • If the conference will continue in future years, what mechanisms are developed to sustain funding for the conference?

Response to Reviewers (resubmissions only)

  • How has the revised proposal been significantly improved and how has the proposal addressed comments from the initial review?

Notification and Project Period of Award

Reviews for the March 2017 application cycle will be held in early May. We anticipate award notifications to be sent in mid-to-late May.

The project period is 12 months from the date of the award letter. If your project is constrained by outside factors dictating a different funding period, you should apply during the funding cycle that more closely matches the project's required timeframe.

Other Funding Programs

University of Iowa GAP Funding:  Contact Paul Dymerski (paul-dymerski@uiowa.edu)

Digital Scholarship & Publishing Studio: Contact Leah Gehlsen Morlan (leah-morlan@uiowa.edu)  

ICRU Research Fellows Program Email icru@uiowa.edu or call 319-335-8336 for more information