1. IT-Catalyst pre-proposal webinar June 23, 2015 Jessie DeAro, Program Officer ADVANCE

2.  Departure from prior programs with goals related to increasing numbers of women in academics (1980 to 2000) ◦ Starting with passage of Science & Technology Equal Opportunities Act of 1980 ◦ Visiting Professorships for Women in Science and Engineering (1982-1997) ◦ Research Planning Grants and Career Advancement Grants for Women Scientists and Engineers (1986-1998) ◦ Faculty Grants for Women Scientists and Engineers (1990-1991) ◦ Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education (1997-2000) ◦ ADVANCE Fellowships (2001-2003)  The ADVANCE Institutional Transformation track represents a switch to a focus on the organizations within which academic careers are experienced – fix institutions of higher education rather than fix women or help them “survive”  ADVANCE Institutional Transformation (2001-present)

3.  To develop systemic approaches to increase the representation and advancement of women in academic STEM careers  To contribute to and inform the knowledge base on gender equity in academic environments  To create positive and sustainable change in academic climates

4.  The current solicitation (14-573) has three tracks: 1. IT-Catalyst 2. Institutional Transformation (IT) 3. Partnerships for Learning and Adaptation Networks (PLAN)  PLAN-D  PLAN-IHE

5.  IT-Catalyst projects can be designed to: ◦ Conduct self-assessment work in preparation for an Institutional Transformation proposal or other transformation activities; and/or ◦ Implement strategies adapted from those found effective by other ADVANCE grantees or new strategies designed to be responsive to the unique environment of the institution.  IT-Catalyst projects must include an evaluation of the project effectiveness.  Up to 3 years and up to $250,000 total  Institutions that have had an IT or IT-Catalyst award are not eligible for an additional project.

6.  Innovative systemic organizational approaches that include all STEM disciplines and are institution-wide designed to increase the participation and advancement of women in STEM academic careers. ◦ All faculty, tenure and non-tenure can be included ◦ Projects targeting the intersectionality of gender and race, ethnicity, disability, and LGBTQ are encouraged ◦ All faculty and administrators – men and women should be involved in the project activities  Proposed activities must be based on and justified by: ◦ The institution’s data and identified issues in academic career outcomes at your institution; and ◦ The relevant research on organizational change and barriers to participation and advancement in STEM academics.  All projects must include an original research component related to the project design and goals.  Up to 5 year projects with appropriate budgets for the proposed scope

7.  Partnerships for Learning and Adaptation Networks: ◦ Adapt strategies that have evidence of effectiveness from the literature or from previous ADVANCE to enhance gender equity in STEM academics. ◦ Learn from the implementation in new contexts to determine what works, why, in what context(s), and for what populations. ◦ Networks are the proposed community of adaptors of the activity.  PLAN D proposals focus on one STEM discipline  Professional societies are eligible to participate as partners  PLAN IHE proposals focus on IHEs ◦ Can focus on one discipline, subset of STEM, or all STEM disciplines  Up to five years up to $750,000 total  Another PLAN competition is anticipated for 2016 – always review the new solicitation for changes 7

8.  New limited eligibility in this solicitation ◦ Department of Education Title III and V status - check with your institution to determine your eligibility.  http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.html ◦ Dept. of Ed determines eligibility by the following factors:  Needy student enrollment (Title IV and Pell grant students)  Low core expenses per FTE student (compared to averages) ◦ By submitting to NSF your institution is attesting that they have been determined to be eligible by the Dept. of Ed or that they reasonably believe that they would have been determined eligible had they applied in the current year.  Your letter of intent must include statement certifying that the submitting institution is in compliance with organizational limits.  Do not submit eligibility data to the NSF with proposal.

9.  These types of non-profit institutions will likely be eligible.  Hispanic-Serving Institutions  Historically Black Colleges and Universities  Tribal Colleges and Universities  Minority-Serving Institutions  Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI)  Predominantly Black Institutions  Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions  Alaska Native Serving Institutions  Non-Tribal, Native American-Serving Institutions  Community colleges  Some predominantly undergraduate institutions

10.  IT-Catalyst Due Date: October 5, 2015 1. Project Title 2. Synopsis - Description of proposed project (2,500 characters max) 3. Other Comments (2,500 characters max) ◦ List of senior project personnel and proposed roles for each ◦ List of partner institutions and organizations and description of involvement (not generally applicable for IT-Catalyst) ◦ Other information such as known conflicts and areas of specialized expertise pertinent for the review process can also be included. ◦ IT Catalyst Letters of Intent: must include a statement certifying that the submitting institution is in compliance with organizational limits 4. Contact Information for: ◦ Point of Contact (and an alternate) for NSF inquiries ◦ PI for the project

11. ◦ Collection and analysis of data, development of strategies for reporting and using data ◦ Climate surveys or other climate assessment ◦ Planning and implementation meetings with stakeholders ◦ Training and development of team, institutional leadership, and STEM faculty ◦ Reviewing social science literature and current IT site strategies ◦ Site visits to exemplar institutions ◦ Consulting experts on gender equity and organizational change ◦ Contextualized adaptation and implementation of effective activities

12. 12  Baseline data that might include: ◦ Numbers of faculty at various ranks in each department. ◦ Search and hiring data. ◦ Start up packages and salaries. ◦ Promotion and tenure data. ◦ National pool data or peer institution comparison data.  The data to be included in the proposal will depend on the types of activities that are proposed.  The IT data toolkit: ◦ http://teaching.nmsu.edu/advance/advance-data-reports/ http://teaching.nmsu.edu/advance/advance-data-reports/ ◦ Can help identify important baseline data to include in an proposal. ◦ Developed for reporting purposes by NMSU and other IT grantees. ◦ Note that the toolkit may not include all the data that should be included in your proposal.

13. Understanding of the Problem Leadership Commitment Familiarity w/Prior ADVANCE awards Leadership Expertise Description of the institutional context Basic faculty data Issues for faculty to be addressed Activities consistent with Institutional context Project goals Conceptual framework Leadership team capabilities Demonstrated commitment from leadership (president, provost) to the ADVANCE project and to the personnel to be involved in implementation. Familiarity with strategies of earlier ADVANCE awardees and relevant literature Team with appropriate mix of expertise Junior and senior faculty involvement Involvement of key administrative decision makers Social science expertise involved in design and implementation

14. Realistic Plans Evaluation Plan Data Realistic timeline and management plan The budget reflects scope of the project Complete description of proposed activities to be implemented Plan for formative and summative evaluations (at minimum) focused on the catalytic activities The collection and reporting of project-related data and participants’ evaluations of activities alone are not sufficient for project evaluation See Online Evaluation Resource Library Relevant data included to provide an understanding of the potential impact of the project Understanding of types of data to be collected during the project Relevant data on targeted populations in the proposal (women of color, faculty with disabilities, associate level faculty, adjunct, part-time, etc.) See ADVANCE Indicators Toolkit

15. Reinventing the wheel – project will develop materials, tools, resources, or activities without building on relevant existing resources. Leadership team that is not sufficiently broad for the kinds of activities and goals proposed. Underestimation of the time and human resources to set up and maintain an ADVANCE project. No, or inappropriate, data provided in the proposal. Not using all fifteen pages or exceeding fifteen page limit for the project description.

16.  How strong are the indicators of institutional commitment to the project activities and goals?  If women from special populations are included, how likely are the proposed activities to target their unique circumstances?  How likely is this project to catalyze sustained institutional transformation at the institution?  Are mechanisms and strategies included that ensure long-term sustainability beyond the duration of the funded project?

17.  Letters of Commitment from key administrators ◦ Include description of what the commitment is… ◦ Do not include letters of support  Postdoctoral mentoring plan ◦ NSF required if a postdoc is supported by project funds  Data management plan (NSF required)  External evaluator CV(s)

18.  Projects involving research with human subjects must ensure that subjects are protected from research risks in conformance with the relevant federal policy known as the Common Rule (Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 45 CFR 690)  All projects involving human subjects must either ◦ (1) have approval from the organization's Institutional Review Board (IRB) before issuance of an NSF award or, ◦ (2) must affirm that the IRB has declared the research exempt from IRB review, in accordance with the applicable subsection, as established in section 101(b) of the Common Rule.

19.  Does the PI of this proposal have to be a senior level administrator? ◦ No, but it is suggested as a way to demonstrate institutional commitment to the project. It will depend on your institution’s organization and culture.  Do we need to include all STEM disciplines? ◦ For IT and IT-Catalyst, all non-clinical sciences including the social, behavioral and economic sciences should be included.  Can I support undergraduate or graduate student activities such as mentoring and tutoring? ◦ No this program focuses on the academic workforce and is not a “pipeline” program.  Do you have to have an IT-Catalyst before getting an IT? ◦ No – if you are ready and able to apply for an IT award you can.  Can I make changes to the project after submitting the LOI? ◦ Yes, as long as your proposal is responsive to the solicitation.  Who will be reviewing the IT-Catalyst proposals? ◦ Peer reviewers include STEM faculty and administrators as well as social science experts on gender and the academy and organizational change.

20.  NSF ADVANCE Program web page ◦ http://www.nsf.gov/ADVANCE http://www.nsf.gov/ADVANCE  ADVANCE Web Portal for access to materials ◦ http://www.portal.advance.vt.edu/ http://www.portal.advance.vt.edu/  Program Office – ADVANCE@nsf.govADVANCE@nsf.gov ◦ Jessie DeAro, Program Officer – jdearo@nsf.govjdearo@nsf.gov ◦ Cynthia Douglas, Program Specialist – cdouglas@nsf.govcdouglas@nsf.gov ◦ Maurice Dues, Program Specialist – mdues@nsf.govmdues@nsf.gov