Postdoctoral Mentoring - NSF Applications to the National Science Foundation (NSF) that include funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a postdoctoral mentoring plan. Plans must be provided as a one-page supplementary document. (See NSF PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.j. for full details) Mentoring and Being Mentored "Making the Right Moves – A Practical Guide to Scientific Management for Postdocs and New Faculty" Data Management Plans In 2013, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued a directive for "each Federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures to develop a plan to support increased public access to the results of research funded by the Federal Government." Therefore, federal agencies require data management plans as part of a funded proposal's project efforts. "Where Should You Keep Your Data?" – The Chronicle of Higher Education Data Management Planning Tool – University of California Curation Center Budgets The Office of Sponsored Programs, which is responsible for the administrative activities of all sponsored research projects, has provided resources for proposal budget development which are consistent with all current university policies and procedures. UAH Budget Development UAH Financial Data Sheet Understanding Review Criteria NSF NSF evaluates proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria: 1) Intellectual Merit, which encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and 2) Broader Impacts, which encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes. The broader impacts of a proposed project must be highlighted both in the Summary of a proposal's narrative, as well in a separate section in the Project Description. Broader Impacts Review Criterion: NSF Dear Colleague Letter National Science Board, NSF's Merit Review Criteria: Review & Revision (2011) Broader Impacts 2.0 – FAQ's about Revisions to NSF's Broader Impacts Criterion NIH For NIH research grants and cooperative agreements, the five review criteria include: Significance, Investigator(s), Innovation, Approach, and Environment. The NIH Peer Review Process provides an overview of the multi-level approach for evaluating and scoring NIH proposals. The "NIH Peer Review: Grants and Cooperative Agreements" document describes in fuller detail the NIH peer review process which is based upon seven core values. Letters of Commitment A letter of commitment specifies the activities, role, and resources that a collaborating organization will contribute to a proposed project. Below are links with tips for obtaining effective letters of commitment from collaborators. "Grant Writing Tips: Writing Effective Letters of Commitment" – Rochester Institute of Technology "How to Get Great Letters of Commitment" – The Non Profit Times Biographical Sketches The NIH requires biographical sketches for both competing applications and progress reports. Templates, instructions, and samples are located on the "NIH Biosketch Format Pages, Instructions and Samples" webpage. NSF requires a biographical sketch for each individual listed as senior personnel on an application. Chapter II.C.2.f. of the NSF PAPPG lists all information that must be included in a specific order and format. Institutional Review Board (IRB) All research involving human subjects must be approved by an Institutional Review Board. UAH researchers can find detailed information about the university's IRB, it's policies, and application procedures at the UAH Institutional Review Board website.