Skip to main content

Secondary navigation:

Research Incentive Grants

for chairs and deans

Information for Chairs and Deans

The person named on the Evaluation form has applied to the University for a Research Incentive Grant (RIG), to carry out the study described on the application. We would appreciate receiving from you an evaluation of this application according to the criteria below. Any other comments that you think might be helpful are welcomed.

RIGs are designed to support the conduct of research over the summer recess. The criteria used in the review of the application are those generally used in the review of sponsored research proposals, with the merit of the proposal the primary criterion. In addition, priority should be given to proposals that will:

  • Assist younger faculty members to launch their research careers;
  • Assist more senior faculty members to reactivate their research careers or make significant progress on an important project;
  • Likely to produce significant results;
  • Likely to result in publication;
  • Assist in bringing an existing project of importance to a successful conclusion;
  • Relate to preliminary investigations that have potential for later obtaining outside support.

 

It would be most helpful if the chairperson, and where appropriate the dean, would draw upon an evaluation by a truly peer expert to support the recommendation called for here.

 

Rating System

In ranking the application you are asked to rank order based on the number of applications. For example, if you receive a total of five applications, the strongest would be ranked #1 out of 5, with #5 out of 5 being the weakest application.

Note: Every application should be ranked in whole numbers. No two applications can receive the same number. This method of evaluation is intended to lead the reviewer to consider applications not only on the basis of the individual merit of each, but also in relation to the merit of others under review. Also please indicate for each proposal the best and the weakest substantive features. Each chairperson and dean should rank the order of proposals which he/she may be evaluating.

Note: The relevant chairperson and dean must complete this form for a faculty member's proposal to be considered by the Committee. Absent this form the proposal will be returned.

 

Deadlines

  • November 22, 2013 — deadline for department chairpersons in A&S, CSOM, LSOE, and CSON to submit their evaluations to their respective dean
  • November 29, 2013 — deadline for deans to submit their evaluations to:  

    Office of the Provost
    Waul House

The Chairperson/Dean form can be found here.

Updated July 2013