Research and Grants Committee Minutes

Copiled by Kris Rolfhus, recording secretary (2005-06)

 

28 Sept 05

  • Convening meeting.  Convener (Rolfhus) inquired as to who was interested in Chairing the cmte—Lisa Giddings accepted, and the cmte voted unanimously to appoint her as Chair.  Rolfhus volunteered to be recording secretary.

 

  • We discussed the dates for upcoming presentation meetings, based upon the # of applicants in October.  Dates in November were planned, and a meeting room chosen (116 Cowley Hall)

 

8 Nov 05

  • Present: Burrowes, Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Rasid, Chilton, Danneker, Kuderer, Giddings, Gilmore
  • First oral presentation day by applicants, 15 minutes each (Jackson, Berlin, Buffton, Rossini)

 

9 Nov 05

  • Present: Gilmore, Giddings, Kuderer, Chilton, Rasid, Danneker, Czerwinski, Rolfhus
  • Second oral presentation day (Pierce, Chavalas, Denton, Fields)

 

14 Nov 05

  • Present: Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Rasid, Chilton, Giddings, Agarwal, Kuderer, Gilmore, Danneker
  • Third presentation day (Sloan, Wood, Battista, Kirsch, Elgin)

 

15 Nov 05

  • Present: Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Danneker, Rasid, Gilmore, Chilton, Giddings, Kuderer, Agarwal, Burrowes
  • Fourth presentation day (Stapleton, Opdahl, Ardovino, Brooks, Anderson/Vandenberg-Daves)

 

22 Nov 05

  • Present: Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Danneker, Rasid, Gilmore, Chilton, Giddings, Kuderer, Agarwal
  • Discussed framework for ranking proposals—used system that results in an average rank of 5 overall.  Ballots were handed out for submission to the Provost’s Office.
  • Proposals were discussed by the entire group, one at a time.  Comments were collected in an electronic file, and later emailed to all cmte members to aid in ranking.  Approx 5-7 minutes were allotted for discussion of each proposal.

 

30 Nov 05

  • Present: Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Danneker, Rasid, Gilmore, Chilton, Giddings, Kuderer, Agarwal, Burrowes
  • Results of ranking were presented to the cmte.
  • We discussed the allocation of funds, specifically how the full or partial funding thresholds would be determined.  A system of fully funding the highest ranked proposals, followed by fractional funding of others was agreed upon.  Proposals deemed not worthy of any funding were identified.
  • Final funding allocations were forwarded to the Provost’s Office.

 

22 Feb 06

  • Present: Czerwinski, Rolfhus, Danneker, Rasid, Gilmore, Chilton, Giddings, Kuderer, Agarwal
  • Discussed items of interest to the Faculty Senate, specifically regarding the history and future of funding levels for the Research and Grants Cmte.  Chair Giddings will send a letter to Carmen at the Faculty Senate relaying our recommendations for future funding levels.  The cmte recommended tying in the total funding amount (currently $150,000) to an index of inflation.  Such an index, applied in 2001, would put the current funding around $170,000 rather than $150,000.
  • The cmte voted 9-0 to change the bylaws such that 2 applications may be submitted within a 3 year period, instead of the current ban on 2 consecutive years.
  • Discussion of what to do with the Rossini allocation (fully funded, but now leaving university).  Vote was 9-0 in favor of spreading the money across the other funded proposals.
  • Rasid and Gilmore will create an informational survey for prior grant recipients to determine what has historically resulted from funding.  This will potentially lead to a restructuring of the grant proposal forms and questions by the Provost’s Office (Agarwal).

 

9 Mar 05

  • Rolfhus presented cmte recommendations to the Faculty Senate, regarding future funding allocations for the Research and Grants Program.  The Senate approved of increasing current funding to $170,000 and tying the annual amount to an index of inflation.