Project Development Grant (PDG)

• Eligibility: RCHSS full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty
• Funding: Up to $5,000
• Focus: Funding for research and creative activities not generally supported by extramural sources.
• Application: Proposals accepted from September 1, 2024 – February 1, 2025 (subject to available funding)

The RCHSS Project Development Grant (PDG) program provides financial assistance to faculty with promising research agenda who might have difficulty accessing funds from other sources.  This includes projects common among humanities disciplines, but are not limited thereto.  Preference will be given to proposals from faculty who have limited alternative sources of funding and to proposals that have co-funding support from their department or school.

• Applicants must be tenured or tenure-track faculty member in RCHSS, with preference given to assistant and associate professors.
• Preference will be given to faculty who have not recently received an RCHSS Research Development award (aka Small Grant).  
• Applications may be individual or collaborative projects.  Applicants are encouraged to collaborate with faculty from outside RCHSS, but only RCHSS faculty can receive funding.
• There is a limit of one (1) award per faculty member per fiscal year.

• Allowable expenses include inter alia travel to undertake research (e.g., libraries, archives, archeological sites); equipment and supplies that are necessary to carry out the proposed research or creative project including software, texts, digital records and data, lab materials, cameras and recording devices.  See end of document for more details.
• Funds may be used to hire a GRA to support research efforts.
• Funds cannot be used for salary support, to offload teaching, or to fund conference travel.

NOTE: Funds must be expensed during the fiscal year and must observe RCHSS year-end purchasing deadlines.  RCHSS plans its annual budget sweep for March 31, 2025.  All award funds not encumbered by that date will revert to the college.

The application should be composed in an MS-Word compatible format using 12-point fonts and 1” margins.  Text shall be double-spaced.  Each Roman-numerated section should begin on a new page. Proposals that do not meet the formatting expectations will be returned unreviewed.

1. Title & Abstract Page: Project title, faculty name, department/school, and contact information. 
2. Abstract Page (250 words max): Describe the primary objectives of the research project or creative activity, the significance of the project/activity, and key deliverables.
3. Project Narrative Page (2 pages max): The narrative should include the following in clearly identifiable sections.
   • Research Question/Project Objective:  Highlight the significance of the project both for scholars within your discipline as well as for a broad audience of social scientists and humanists.  Explain clearly why your project is important, original, or otherwise significant.
   • Methods/Approach:  Be specific in how you will carry out your project. Avoiding unnecessary jargon, describe not only the research design or conceptual framework, but also the concrete activities to be undertaken (e.g., fieldwork, archival research, data collection and analysis, etc). 
   • Expected Outcomes: Describe project deliverables.  Explain how the project contributes to a research program that can be expected to generate scholarship beyond the period of the award.
4. Budget Page with Justification (1 page max): Explain how funds will be used. Explain how travel funds are necessary to meet project objectives and will be used to conduct the project. List major equipment and materials to be purchased and describe how they are necessary to carry out the proposed project. The justification should explain project-related co-funding provided by department, school, or other resource.
5. CV or Biographical Sketch(es) (2 pages max @): Applicants are encouraged to follow NSF or NIH format. A one-page summary of other key personnel may also be included (if applicable).
6. Statement on Human Subjects: All research involving human subjects must have IRB approval. While proposal that have not yet undergone review will be considered for funding, no funds will be disbursed until the project is approved.

NOTE: Proposal will be reviewed on a rolling basis and awards offered until the available funding has been exhausted.

Of the elements addressed in the below attached rubric, particular attention will be given to the extent to which proposals explain clearly the importance and impact of the proposed project. Consideration will also be given to the degree to which the project can be expected to lead directly to additional research publications or other scholarly outputs. 

• Funded investigators commit to submitting an End of Year Report (see below).
• Funded investigators agree to notify the Associate Dean of Research of articles, chapters, proposal, or other deliverables produced with the aid of college support.
• Funded investigators agree to have research summarized in an RCHSS publication, if requested.
• Funded investigators agree to participate in follow-on activities such as present their research at a seminar, workshop, or other event and/or serving as a reviewer, if requested.
• Funded investigators commit to acknowledge RCHSS support in any papers and publication ensuing from the research.
• Funded investigators commit to providing copies of articles, chapters, or other scholarly outputs supported by the award, including any publicity materials, press clippings, or reviews.

• An “End of Year” report is due by June 30, 2025.  
• The report should be completed using the provided template and follow the directions found thereupon.
• A project cannot be “closed” until the report has been received.  An investigator with an “open” project is not eligible for additional RCHSS research funding.

The RCHSS grant application scoring system uses a 5-point scale (Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor).  The entire scale should be considered for each criterion.  The Summary Assessment should reflect the reviewer’s overall evaluation of the proposal (i.e., not a numerical average of individual criterion scores).  A score of “3” represents a “good” application. 

• Criteria
  Description
• Aims & Objectives
  Aims and objectives are clearly presented and can be met.
• Background
  Demonstrated knowledge of existing research/approaches.
• Significance
  Potential for project to make a significant impact.
• Approach
  Methods/procedures/process are clearly explained & appropriate.
• Timeline
  Research plan is clearly stated and achievable.
• Budget
  Budget is complete, well justified, & appropriate.
• Summary Assessment
  Overall (holistic) assessment of proposal quality.

Comments: Identify key strengths and highlight areas that needed strengthening.  Offer recommendations for how to address shortcomings.