2. Humanities Proposal Review Process January 24, 2014 University of Southern Mississippi Sandra George Richard Wellons

3. © 2014 AASCU Know Your Funder! All federal agencies and foundations have different grants management/review processes and “cultures” Understand the Culture: A good proposal must “fit” the mission/goal of the agency or foundation. Ask For Help: Your Sponsored Programs Office and GRC can help. - Your project MUST fit the goals of the grant. - Don’t force the grant to fit the your project. 3

4. One of the best ways to learn what makes a successful proposal is to participate in the review process as a panelist. ED: Varies by office - for the Office of Post-Secondary Education visit OPE’s Program Resources Page http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/programreso urces.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/programreso urces.html NEA: Email panelistforms@arts.gov for informationpanelistforms@arts.gov NEH: Register at NEH’s Panelists and Reviewers Information System (PRISM) https://securegrants.neh.gov/prism/ IMLS: Register as a library or museum reviewer at http://www.imls.gov/reviewers/become.aspx http://www.imls.gov/reviewers/become.aspx 4 © 2014 AASCU

5. U.S. Department of Education (ED) Funds variety of organizations Colleges and Universities Local Schools State Education Departments Community-based Organizations Funding driven by agency priorities States exactly what it wants to see in a grant proposal Doesn’t look to universities for funding ideas 5

6. ED Review Process ED has many more "internal" reviews than peer reviews. Peer review panels mostly consist of former grant recipients. Unfortunately, ED publishes minimal information about their review process. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, ASK THE PROGRAM OFFICER. © 2014 AASCU 6

7. ED Sample Review Process Narrative descriptions should follow the criteria below 100 possible points for all selection criteria Don’t forget the weighted subcriteria! 1.Need for Project - 15 points 2.Significance - 20 points 3.Quality of the Project Design - 30 points 4.Quality of Project Personnel - 10 points 5.Quality of the Project Evaluation - 25 points © 2014 AASCU 7

8. 1.Reviewers read applications individually, then come together for panel review 2.Proposals are reviewed and ranked (decline applications receive explanation letter) 3.Funding is allocated “top down” until spent 4.If interested in becoming a reviewer for the Office of Postsecondary Education, apply anytime at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/programreso urces.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/programreso urces.html 5.If interested in becoming a reviewer for any other ED office, contact the appropriate program manager 8

9. Helpful ED Websites General ED grant information - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/grantmaking/ index.html http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/grantmaking/ index.html Grant Application Packages - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/in dex.html http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/in dex.html Funding forecast for each Year - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/find/edlite- forecast.html Staff Email: First name.last name@ed.gov © 2014 AASCU 9

10. Helpful ED Websites General ED grant information - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/grantmaking/ index.html http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/grantmaking/ index.html Grant Application Packages - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/in dex.html http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/in dex.html Funding forecast for each Year - http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/find/edlite- forecast.html Staff Email: First name.last name@ed.gov © 2014 AASCU 10

11. Overall Mission: Fund and promote artistic excellence, creativity, and innovation for the benefit of individuals and communities. 11 © 2014 AASCU

12. Artistic Excellence Quality of the artists, arts organizations, arts education providers, works of art, or services that the project will involve, as appropriate. Artistic significance of the project. Artistic Merit Creating art that meets the highest standards of excellence. Engaging the public with diverse and excellent art. Enabling participants to acquire knowledge or skills in the arts. Strengthening communities through the arts. Refer to individual program guidelines for further criteria and specific interpretations of the above criteria. 12 © 2014 AASCU

13. 3 Level Process: 1. Review by independent, national panels of artists and arts experts. Panel reviewers evaluate applications based on artistic excellence, merit, and program guidelines. 2. National Council on the Arts, an advisory body comprised of renowned artists, distinguished scholars, arts patrons appointed by the President, and members of Congress (who serve ex officio). The council recommends which applications to fund and which to reject. 3. NEA Chairman reviews applications recommended by the Council and makes the final decision on all grant awards. © 2014 AASCU 13

14. NEA’s Reading Room contains sample funded application narratives from all major programs and most disciplines. http://arts.gov/foia/reading-room.http://arts.gov/foia/reading-room NEA’s live and archived webinars explain application guidelines for each program. Archived webinars can be found on NEA program websites. NEA’s current Art Works series can be found here. http://arts.gov/fy-2015-art-works-guidelines- webinars http://arts.gov/fy-2015-art-works-guidelines- webinars 14 © 2014 AASCU

15. Overall Mission The National Endowment for the Humanities serves and strengthens our nation by supporting high quality projects and programs in the humanities and by making the humanities available to all Americans. 15 © 2014 AASCU

16. Humanities significance Applicant’s abilities and qualifications Proposal’s clarity of expression Project’s feasibility, design, cost, and work plan Additional review criteria may vary from program to program 16 © 2014 AASCU

17. 4 Levels of Review: 1.Panel Review by outside experts in a program’s relevant subject areas. 2.Staff Review – the staff organizes the panel results, summarizes the panelists’ reviews of the highest- rated applications, adds comments of fact, and makes recommendations for the National council. 3.National Council on the Humanities, an advisory body of twenty-six members who have distinguished themselves in the humanities, makes recommendations to the Chairman. 4.NEH Chairman reviews applications recommended by the Council and makes the final decision on all grant awards. © 2014 AASCU 17

18. Each proposal is rated individually by peer reviewers. They are not ranked against each other in the peer review stage. NEH uses the following rating scale: E for Excellent, VG for Very Good G for Good SM for Some Merit NC for Not Competitive © 2014 AASCU 18

19. Explore your NEH program’s web page. Aside from program guidelines and application forms, NEH program web pages contain links to: Funded application narratives Sample budgets Answers to frequently asked questions Funding ratios and program statistics from previous years. 19 © 2014 AASCU

20. Final Thoughts HOW is just as important as WHAT you present to the reviewer REMEMBER: “Publication is about science, and grant writing is about marketing.” If, at first, you don’t succeed, TRY, TRY AGAIN! © 2014 AASCU 20

21. 21

22. Digital Humanities Start-Up Grants: Level One Acting as peer reviewers, we will review and rate two proposals for the above program. Looking beyond the peer review stage we will imagine a situation where we must choose between the programs, which will get funded. 22 © 2014 AASCU