Search

The return on investment of funding science has rarely been accurately measured. Previous estimates of the benefits of funding have used observational studies, including regression discontinuity designs. In 2013, the Health Research Council of New Zealand began awarding funding using a modified lottery, with an initial peer review stage followed by funding at random for short-listed applicants. This allowed us to compare research outputs between those awarded funding or not using a randomized experimental study design. The analysis included eighty-eight researchers who were followed for an average of 3.8 years of follow-up. The rate ratios (and 95 per cent credible intervals (CI)) for funding were 0.95 (95 per cent CI 0.67 to 1.39) for publications and 1.06 (95 per cent CI 0.79 to 1.43) for citations, showing no clear impact of funding on research outputs. The wider use of funding lotteries could provide robust estimates of the benefits of research funding to better inform science policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A successful multidisciplinary research center depends on the quality of the science being conducted and the quality of the center's design, culture, infrastructure, and institutional support. In this perspective, we describe our experience building and maintaining a multidisciplinary transplant research center with a large focus on transplant infectious diseases. We identify principles that we believe contributed to our success including: taking inventory, defining culture, creating a multidisciplinary shared leadership model, establishing expertise in a multiple method approach, investing in operations and management, building and sharing resources, and securing institutional support. We share our experience putting these principles into practice and highlight potential roadblocks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Íkala: Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura is the property of Universidad de Antioquia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Many African American museums face financial constraints and need resources to preserve their collections, create exhibits, and offer educational programs. Grant funding is crucial for the sustainability of these museums. Black anthropologists are essential in grant writing because they provide their extensive knowledge of African American history and culture to help museums develop compelling narratives that resonate with grant funders. Additionally, Black anthropologists are needed as reviewers of grant proposals. By leveraging their unique insights from professional training and personal experiences, Black anthropologists can champion the cause of these museums in the grant‐making process. Their expertise allows them to assess proposals from a culturally sensitive perspective, considering the unique needs, goals, and challenges African American museums face. This essay highlights the significant contributions of Black anthropologists who have advocated for and strengthened grant applications from African American museums, ensuring that they align with the mission and vision of the grant‐making institutions. By helping African American museums secure grant support, Black anthropologists also convey the significance and value of other African American museums. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Participation in youth sports provides a variety of benefits to young people and the communities that they live in. Unfortunately, these benefits are not equitably distributed, as persistent issues exist with regard to access and participation. In this manuscript, we describe and evaluate a grant program intended to increase equitable access to youth sports in communities across the United States. We conclude by providing a series of "lessons learned" that may transfer to other park and recreation professionals who wish to address issues of equity in the context of youth sports. The Youth Sports and Play Grant (YSP) is a collaborative effort of the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) and the Walt Disney Company. The YSP funds park improvement projects with the potential to increase equitable access to youth sports in the context of local public park and recreation agencies. During the 2021 grant cycle, NRPA selected 12 park improvement projects. Our evaluation utilizes data from a series of pre- and post-project focus groups conducted with representatives from grantee communities. Our results focus on the impacts of the grant process on (a) the professionals that participated in the grant process, and (b) the grantee communities. Professionals indicated an increased understanding of equity, awareness of constraints, and perceived agency to make positive change. At the community level, the YSP allowed for increased programming, more partnerships to facilitate youth sports participation, and greater facility capacity. A greater understanding of the value of authentic youth voice was recognized by professionals, and as an outcome at the community level. Based on these results, we provide a series of recommendations, including the need to emphasize community and peer-learning among professionals, to provide additional education for professionals on systemic issues related to equity, and to develop a robust process for soliciting and incorporating authentic youth voice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known whether peer reviewers use the same evaluation criteria and how they integrate the criteria into their overall judgment. This study therefore proposed two assessment styles based on theoretical perspectives and normative positions. According to the case-by-case style, referees use many and different criteria, weight criteria on a case-by-case basis, and integrate criteria in a complex, non-mechanical way into their overall judgment. According to the uniform style, referees use a small fraction of the available criteria, apply the same criteria, weight the criteria in the same way, and integrate the criteria based on simple rules (i.e., fast-and-frugal heuristics). These two styles were examined using a unique dataset from a career funding scheme that contained a comparatively large number of evaluation criteria. A heuristic (fast-and-frugal trees) and a complex procedure (logistic regression) were employed to describe how referees integrate the criteria into their overall judgment. The logistic regression predicted the referees' overall assessment with high accuracy and slightly more accurately than the fast-and-frugal trees. Overall, the results of this study support the uniform style but also indicate that the uniform style needs to be revised as follows: referees use many criteria and integrate the criteria using complex rules. However, and most importantly, the revised style could describe most—but not all—of the referees' judgments. Future studies should therefore examine how referees' judgments can be characterized in those cases where the uniform style failed. Moreover, the evaluation process of referees should be studied in more empirical and theoretical detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Claims of widespread sexism in academic science frequently appear both in the mainstream media and in prestigious science journals. Often these claims are based on an unsystematic sampling of evidence or on anecdotes, and in many cases these claims are not supported by comprehensive analyses. Here we illustrate the importance of considering the full corpus of scientific data by focusing on a recent set of claims by two philosophers of science who argue that researchers who fail to find evidence of sexism in some domains of academia–such as tenure-track hiring, grant funding, journal reviewing, letters of recommendation, and salary–are as epistemically and socially problematic as are those who deny claims of anthropogenic climate change. We argue that such claims are misguided, and the result of ignoring important evidence. We show here that when the totality of evidence is considered, claims of widespread sexism are inconsistent with the canons of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the article is to scientifically substantiate the role of modern EU financing instruments in stimulating ecological development. The research methodology is based on the content analysis of ecological development financing instruments in the EU, their comparison and scientific generalization to substantiate further priorities for the implementation of the EU strategy «European Green Deal». The authors have examined the models of management of financial resources in the EU – direct, joint and indirect management. It is found that the EU Member States and their competent authorities develop their own national programs, coordinate the selection of projects, as well as ensure the operational management of such programs and the implementation of payments. The article shows that the most used financial instrument used within the framework of the EU programs and funds for the provision of financial resources are grants. It is determined that recently in some areas of the EU policies (first of all, in regional, entrepreneurial, and innovation) such instruments as budget guarantees and bank financing instruments (loans, credit guarantees, equity investments) have been actively developing, aimed mainly at profitable and economically viable projects. In the current planned financial period from 2021 to 2027, most EU financial programs and funds have an ecological component. At the same time, a number of the EU programs are created specifically for the purposes of sustainable development, greening of production, prevention and adaptation to climate change, as well as environmental protection, including the LIFE program, the Innovation Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the Modernization Fund. The authors show that the instruments for financing ecological development in the EU cover a wide range of potential beneficiaries, which include not only government agencies and the business sector, but also research institutions and public organizations.

The purpose of the article is to reveal the essence and propose varieties of projects in the field of culture, as well as to identify the principal criterion for their division. The research methodology is based on the application of a systemic approach, as well as analytical, synthetic, and cultural methods, which made it possible to comprehensively consider the essence and types of projects in the field of culture and, on this basis, to formulate reasonable conclusions. The scientific novelty of the obtained results consists in clarifying the principal criterion for dividing projects in the field of culture (competition basis and grant funding by state/non-state and other institutions), defining projects in the field of culture as a set of their varieties: socio-cultural (socio-cultural), cultural, artistic projects. Conclusions. As a result of the conducted research, based on the analysis of numerous interpretations of the concept of "project" and consideration of their most representative examples in the field of culture, the difference between various types of projects in the field of culture was clarified, and the principal criterion for their division was also indicated. It is emphasised that project activity in the field of culture, as a way of organising, identifying and increasing the resource potential of the latter, a means of interaction with authorities, the public and partners, is a specific form of regulation of sociocultural processes. Project activity is increasingly becoming an auxiliary and, at the same time, innovative tool for managing cultural institutions, giving the subjects of cultural activity the opportunity to implement various creative ideas. The implementation of projects in the field of culture on a competitive basis and with the financial support of various grantmakers contributes to the creation of a civilized market of cultural goods and services for citizens of the country and foreign tourists, as well as strengthening the cultural presence of Ukraine abroad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the economic benefits of the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) grant funding, in the Eastern Cape, using cost benefit analysis (CBA) and least absolute deviation (LAD) regression analysis on a sample size of 253 respondents. The study found that public investment towards youth entrepreneurship through NYDA grant funding yields positive social returns. The study further found that the development of youth entrepreneurship should go beyond just NYDA grant funding to include favorable policies towards closing gender gaps, supportive education systems as well ensuring diverse economic sectors.

The aim of the article is to scientifically substantiate the role of modern EU financing instruments in stimulating ecological development. The research methodology is based on the content analysis of ecological development financing instruments in the EU, their comparison and scientific generalization to substantiate further priorities for the implementation of the EU strategy «European Green Deal». The authors have examined the models of management of financial resources in the EU – direct, joint and indirect management. It is found that the EU Member States and their competent authorities develop their own national programs, coordinate the selection of projects, as well as ensure the operational management of such programs and the implementation of payments. The article shows that the most used financial instrument used within the framework of the EU programs and funds for the provision of financial resources are grants. It is determined that recently in some areas of the EU policies (first of all, in regional, entrepreneurial, and innovation) such instruments as budget guarantees and bank financing instruments (loans, credit guarantees, equity investments) have been actively developing, aimed mainly at profitable and economically viable projects. In the current planned financial period from 2021 to 2027, most EU financial programs and funds have an ecological component. At the same time, a number of the EU programs are created specifically for the purposes of sustainable development, greening of production, prevention and adaptation to climate change, as well as environmental protection, including the LIFE program, the Innovation Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the Modernization Fund. The authors show that the instruments for financing ecological development in the EU cover a wide range of potential beneficiaries, which include not only government agencies and the business sector, but also research institutions and public organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the effects of using publication-based metrics for the initial screening in the application process for a project leader. The key questions are whether formal policy affects the allocation of funds to researchers with a better publication record and how the previous academic performance of principal investigators is related to future project results.

Open Educational Resources (OER) have continued to gain traction in higher education, assisting with ever-rising costs of publisher textbooks and supporting pedagogical innovation. Starting in 2017, NY state legislature has allocated funds annually to be split between its two public university systems to support and incentivize the adoption of OER. The author's institution, an included public college, has secured portions of this funding each year. This paper will focus on the initial five years of the statefunded OER initiative at the City University of New York (CUNY) College of Staten Island, with reflections on the successes of the program, the overall process of the annual grant cycle on campus, challenges that arose in the burgeoning OER program, and suggestions for future considerations. The main aim of this paper is to highlight the impact of state funding on the establishment of a library-facilitated OER initiative, to serve as a example for other institutions who are seeking to build an OER program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amid growing consensus that violence against women is structurally produced, neoliberalism produces an individualist understanding of violence that blames women while simultaneously framing it as personal failings of men, obscuring the link between the structural and the personal. Using examples from federal grant funding opportunities in the United States, activism in Bangladesh, and data from qualitative research, I analyze how such individual readings of violence get produced–reproduced. I call for radical responsibility to produce equitable and just research that serves the communities that we study, not just the interests of grant funders and the neoliberal university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Economica is the property of University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Economics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Open Educational Resources (OER) have continued to gain traction in higher education, assisting with ever-rising costs of publisher textbooks and supporting pedagogical innovation. Starting in 2017, NY state legislature has allocated funds annually to be split between its two public university systems to support and incentivize the adoption of OER. The author’s institution, an included public college, has secured portions of this funding each year. This paper will focus on the initial five years of the state-funded OER initiative at the City University of New York (CUNY) College of Staten Island, with reflections on the successes of the program, the overall process of the annual grant cycle on campus, challenges that arose in the burgeoning OER program, and suggestions for future considerations. The main aim of this paper is to highlight the impact of state funding on the establishment of a library-facilitated OER initiative, to serve as a example for other institutions who are seeking to build an OER program.

The continuation of financial assistance for Romanian farmers and entrepreneurs from rural areas during the years 2021-2022, which will serve as the CAP's transitional years, has been regulated at the EU level. From the standpoint of financing the rural area in Romania, the current article intends to highlight the contribution of the National Rural Development Program's initiatives throughout this period. The measures that could be accessed during the transition period are synthetically presented. The support granted to the Romanian agricultural and non-agricultural sector will increase the degree of modernization of farms, their expansion and development, will support the installation of young farmers who start an agricultural activity for the first time as holding managers and the development of farms led by young people who were installed during previously, diversifying the valorization of agricultural production as well as supporting the implementation of actions within local development strategies. The National Programme of Rural Development (NRDP) budget for the transition period 2021-2022 was approximately 3.26 billion euro, and the funds must be spent by December 31, 2025 at the latest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving access to grant funding is a critical aspect of strengthening research capacity outside of higher income settings, particularly in HIV/AIDS where randomized control trials (RCTs) that require substantial resources are common. In this article, we assessed recent RCTs to examine variation in how studies were funded, depending on study location and the countries where publication authors were based. We conducted a PubMed literature review to identify RCTs with HIV status or viral load endpoints published in 2019 and 2020, then analyzed cross-tabulations of funding sources by study characteristics. One hundred sixteen publications met the inclusion criteria. Research in higher income countries was most likely to be funded by biotech/pharmaceutical companies, whereas research in lower- and middle-income countries was most likely to be funded by U.S. government sources. Overall, we found the distribution of funding sources differed significantly by study and author location (χ2 = 23, p < .001). Published RCTs with HIV status or viral load endpoints are financed differently based on where studies take place and where the authors are based. As part of future research, understanding why this variation exists is critical for assessing how funding contributes to global imbalances in scientific resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer review is widely used throughout academia, most notably in the publication of journal articles and the allocation of research grants. Yet peer review has been subject to much criticism, including being slow, unreliable, subjective and potentially prone to bias. This paper contributes to this literature by investigating the consistency of peer reviews and the impact they have upon a high-stakes outcome (whether a research grant is funded). Analysing data from 4,000 social science grant proposals and 15,000 reviews, this paper illustrates how the peer review scores assigned by different reviewers have only low levels of consistency (a correlation between reviewer scores of only 0.2). Reviews provided by "nominated reviewers" (i.e. reviewers selected by the grant applicant) appear to be overly generous and do not correlate with the evaluations provided by independent reviewers. Yet a positive review from a nominated reviewer is strongly linked to whether a grant is awarded. Finally, a single negative peer review is shown to reduce the chances of a proposal being funding from around 55% to around 25% (even when it has otherwise been rated highly). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This column gives practical advice to early-career librarians in search of an international travel grant to gain professional experience abroad. The author completed a Fulbright Specialist grant in 2019-2022 and offers information to disambiguate the process of obtaining one such grant, including information about identifying grants, applying, locating a host, and more.

The Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE) grant program coordinates research funding initiatives across the subspecialties of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. Modeled after National Institutes of Health study sections, CORE grant review processes provide comprehensive reviews of scientific proposals. The organizational structure and grant review process support grant-writing skills, attention to study design, and other components of academic maturation toward securing external grants from the National Institutes of Health or other agencies. As a learning community and a catalyst for scientific advances, CORE evaluates clinical, translational, basic science, and health services research. Amid the societal reckoning around long-standing social injustices and health inequities, an important question is to what extent CORE engenders diversity, equity, and inclusion for the otolaryngology workforce. This commentary explores CORE's track record as a stepping-stone for promoting equity and innovation in the specialty. Such insights can help maximize opportunities for cultivating diverse leaders across the career continuum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses Critical Discourse Analysis through a Critical Race Theory lens to analyze grant applications of community colleges that applied for funding to build or support programs for justice-impacted students. I analyze how colleges problem-frame the need for their program, finding that 'colleges' use of race-evasive and ahistorical discourse is potentially detrimental to the larger goals their programs seek to address.

This qualitative research study explored librarian experiences at libraries that received funding for Affordable Care Act outreach through the "Connecting You to Coverage" funding opportunity offered by the Public Library Association. The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 public library funding recipients to uncover more details about providing Affordable Care Act assistance, the specific services offered at participating libraries, approaches to connecting patrons with Navigators, and undertaking social media outreach efforts. The participants in this study shared creative approaches to using funding, outlined the benefits of partnering with local organizations, described the ways in which patrons engaged with librarians for assistance, and identified their strategies for evaluating these efforts. By identifying successful outreach strategies, the ideas presented in this study provide a springboard for other librarians hoping to undertake Affordable Care Act and health insurance information outreach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The beauty of science lies within its core assumption that it seeks to identify the truth, and as such, the truth stands alone and does not depend on the person who proclaims it. However, people's proclivity to succumb to various stereotypes is well known, and the scientific world may not be exceptionally immune to the tendency to judge a book by its cover. An interesting example is geographical bias, which includes distorted judgments based on the geographical origin of, inter alia, the given work and not its actual quality or value. Here, we tested whether both laypersons (N = 1532) and scientists (N = 480) are prone to geographical bias when rating scientific projects in one of three scientific fields (i.e., biology, philosophy, or psychology). We found that all participants favored more biological projects from the USA than China; in particular, expert biologists were more willing to grant further funding to Americans. In philosophy, however, laypersons rated Chinese projects as better than projects from the USA. Our findings indicate that geographical biases affect public perception of research and influence the results of grant competitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The financial well-being of the charity sector has important social implications. Numerous studies have analysed whether the concentration of income in a few sources increases financial vulnerability. However, few studies have systematically considered whether the type of income (grants, donation, fund-raising activities) affects the survival prospects of the charity. We extend the literature by (a) explicitly modelling the composition of sources of income, (b) allowing for short-term volatility as well as long-term survival and (c) testing alternative specifications in a nested form. We show that the usual association between income concentration per se and financial vulnerability is a specification error. Greater vulnerability is associated with dependence on grant funding, not overall concentration. Previous studies showing that concentration of income per se is problematic are picking up a proxy effect. We also show that the volatility of income streams may be an important factor in the survival of charities, but that this also varies between income sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From 1982 to 2017, 539 unique awards studying extreme events and natural disasters have been funded by the Infrastructure Management and Extreme Events (IMEE), Decision, Risk and Management Science (DRMS), Humans, Disasters, and the Built Environment (HDBE), and Hazard Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (Hazard SEES) programs under the National Science Foundation, totaling approximately $450 million. The relationships between discipline, topic, and funding are explored through review of the data on each award's active dates, amount of funding received, specific hazards and disasters studied, and principal investigator (PI) and co‐PI affiliations. A positive correlation between award funding and increasingly larger multidisciplinary teams of PIs on projects is observed. However, these teams of four or more PIs only account for about 18% of the total number of awards. In terms of topic, projects applicable to general hazard/disaster research encompass the largest portion of awards, but not the greatest funding per award on average. Additionally, both the number of awards per year and the total funds allotted per year show an increasing trend. Finally, some of the trends in project team discipline with relation to hazards show a shift to equal numbers of engineers and social scientists on multidisciplinary teams while others remain fairly homogeneous in their team dynamics. This article provides unique perspectives on how to better allocate funds through extensive topic and funding analysis. This work is a brief analysis of trends in the hazard and disaster research community, focusing on multidisciplinary project teams and their correlation to funding amounts and research areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple studies have shown that women's likelihood of receiving research funding is lower than that of their male colleagues. Thus far, all research on this gender gap in academia has focused on post-PhD academics, making it difficult to discern whether the female disadvantages in number of publications, previous grants, maternity leave, and h-indexes are at the root of the gender gap in received funding, or whether it is due to a more fundamental gender bias in academia. Therefore, we investigated whether female university students are already disadvantaged in receiving their first grant in their scientific career. We analysed data on applications (N = 2651) from 1995 to 2018 to the Leiden University International Study Fund (LISF), a fund dedicated to support students to study or conduct research abroad. We found that men and women applied equally often to the LISF. However, women had a lower success rate, which seemed to only get worse over recent years. Furthermore, male and female applications were assessed to be equal in quality when gender-related information was removed from them. The current study demonstrates that the factors that were assumed to contribute the most to the gender gap in more senior academics (e.g. previous grants, h-index) do not explain it fully: even when those factors do not yet play a role, such as in our student sample, women were found to have lower success rates than men. This underscores the importance of attacking gender biases at its roots. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The primary goal of the peer review of research grant proposals is to evaluate their quality for the funding agency. An important secondary goal is to provide constructive feedback to applicants for their resubmissions. However, little is known about whether review feedback achieves this goal. In this paper, we present a multi-methods analysis of responses from grant applicants regarding their perceptions of the effectiveness and appropriateness of peer review feedback they received from grant submissions. Overall, 56–60% of applicants determined the feedback to be appropriate (fair, well-written, and well-informed), although their judgments were more favorable if their recent application was funded. Importantly, independent of funding success, women found the feedback better written than men, and more white applicants found the feedback to be fair than non-white applicants. Also, perceptions of a variety of biases were specifically reported in respondents’ feedback. Less than 40% of applicants found the feedback to be very useful in informing their research and improving grantsmanship and future submissions. Further, negative perceptions of the appropriateness of review feedback were positively correlated with more negative perceptions of feedback usefulness. Importantly, respondents suggested that highly competitive funding pay-lines and poor inter-panel reliability limited the usefulness of review feedback. Overall, these results suggest that more effort is needed to ensure that appropriate and useful feedback is provided to all applicants, bolstering the equity of the review process and likely improving the quality of resubmitted proposals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grant funding sought by academics for research or service activities can facilitate societal transformation and the development of community resilience. Grant funding, for the purpose of this paper, will refer to funding from govern- mental sources. Funding can be an agent for transformation and resilience for individuals and communities but has both positive and negative consequences. Previous work has failed to address why, even when a grant provides funding for the development of measures with seemingly positive impact, those measures may not be accepted or sustained, or may be perceived in a negative way by the community they are meant to benefit. We have found that the key to maintaining the positive effects (and potential resilience) of any community-focused grant-funded activity is to engage the community during proposal development in goal setting and activity planning, and in the dissemination of the research or programme findings. These measures aid in community acceptance of the grant objective and enhance the sustainability of the outcome, thus having a positive impact on resilience. Involving the community in early planning and throughout the process enhances capacity and facilitates stronger relationships between the academic grantee and the community that can potentially allow for further transformative activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We undertook this study to measure the reach of Oregon’s legislated farm-to-school grant program among school districts and children, particularly low income, and examine changes in local purchasing, particularly fruit and vegetables, and the use of produce from school gardens in school meals. We conducted descriptive analyses to examine the reach and paired two-sample t-tests to examine average purchases of local products between school year 2014–2015 (baseline) and 2015–2016 (intervention). The study results indicate that the number of nonwhite students attending a district participating in farm-to-school nearly doubled in the intervention, and 89% of children eligible for free and reduced-price meals attended schools in participating districts compared with 39% of eligible children at baseline. Eighty-one percent of participating districts were low income, which is much higher than the percentage of districts characterized as low income statewide (65%). The policy also increased the average total local food purchases for low-income districts, particularly fruits and vegetables. The results suggest that the opt-in approach to the grant program facilitated greater participation from low-income districts that may otherwise have not accessed the grant program. Oregon’s policy approach of designating funds for procurement and/or education grants (versus generic farm-to-school grants to be used at the discretion of the district) enabled the prioritization of these activities in grantee districts. Future research can help develop a more thorough understanding of the long-term impacts of Oregon’s farm-to-school policy on children’s health outcomes and on other intended outcomes on farmers and the local economy.

The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) offers competitive grants to institutions to provide training to prepare education personnel to work with children with disabilities. These grants have been found to improve the recruitment, training, and retention of special education personnel. This study explored the use of OSEP–personnel preparation (OSEP–PP) grants in school psychology programs from the perspective of school psychology university trainers with current active OSEP grant funding. Findings suggest that OSEP–PP grants enhance school psychology program recruitment efforts and improve the training of school psychologists. Study participants highlighted the importance of diversity within both training and recruitment. On the basis of these findings, authors discuss ways in which OSEP–PP funding can improve field shortages and school psychology training, and subsequently enhance school psychology practices towards more comprehensive service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To describe the characteristics of obstetrical and gynecological randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that were registered at a national database, and to identify factors associated with the publication among the completed trials. This was a cross-sectional study using data from ClinicalTrials.gov which was queried for all obstetrical and gynecological RCTs that were registered between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2013. Poisson regression models were used to examine the factors associated with publication among the completed trials (using relative risk [RR] and 95 % confidence interval [CI]). During the 5-year study period, 1389 obstetrical and gynecological RCTs were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: 31 % (n = 538) in obstetrics and 69 % (n = 851) in gynecology. Among all registered RCTs in obstetrics-gynecology, 59 % (n = 816) were completed and 29 % (n = 406) were published. Compared to registered trials that were unpublished, those that were published were more likely to be funded by NIH/US Federal Government (RR = 3.36, 95 % CI = 1.46−7.74) or other non-industry organizations (RR = 2.41, 95 % CI = 1.07−5.38), have a procedural intervention (RR = 1.52, 95 % CI = 1.12−2.06), or an enrollment of >150 (RR = 2.73, 95 % CI = 1.57−4.75). Among the obstetrical and gynecological randomized controlled trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, less than two-third were completed, and only one-third were published. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When considering how to obtain funding for outreach services, GIS can be used to translate information about current outreach services and areas of need where services can have the most impact. Using ArcGIS Pro, census data, and data gathered by the Adult Literacy division of the Nashville Public Library, areas of impact for those at high poverty levels and without high school diplomas were compared to current library locations and locations currently served by the division. The maps show areas that present opportunities for more equity in services and can be presented to funders to garner interest in outreach services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe differences in funded grants between male and female faculty in two academic emergency departments.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of grant funding at two academic emergency departments from January 2012-September 2018. We queried the grants department databases at each institution and obtained records of all funded grants for emergency medicine (EM) faculty. We extracted the following information for each award: gender of the principal investigator (PI), PI academic rank, grant mechanism (government, institutional, industry, organizational), and percent effort. Differences by gender were compared using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon-rank sum.Results: One-hundred and thirty grants were awarded to EM faculty at the two institutions during the study period. Of the funded grants, 35 (27%) of recipients were female. Among grant recipients, females held lower academic ranking than males (p-value < 0.001): Instructor (49% vs 51%), Assistant Professor (36% vs 64%), Associate Professor (9% vs 91%), and Professor (0% vs 100%), respectively. Organizational grants were dispersed equally between funded faculty, but females received a fewer government, industry, and institutional grants (p-value = 0.007). Female grant recipients were awarded a higher median percent of effort compared to males (14% [IQR: 3-51] vs 8% [IQR: 1-15], respectively, p-value = 0.023).Conclusion: In this multicenter analysis, gender discrepancies exist among funded grants of EM faculty. Male recipients had higher academic ranking than their female counterparts. Female recipients were less likely to have government, institutional, and industry grants but received a greater percent effort on funding that was awarded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We undertook this study to measure the reach of Oregon's legislated farm-to-school grant program among school districts and children, particularly low income, and examine changes in local purchasing, particularly fruit and vegetables, and the use of produce from school gardens in school meals. We conducted descriptive analyses to examine the reach and paired two-sample t-tests to examine average purchases of local products between school year 2014-2015 (baseline) and 2015-2016 (intervention). The study results indicate that the number of nonwhite students attending a district participating in farm-to-school nearly doubled in the intervention, and 89% of children eligible for free and reduced-price meals attended schools in participating districts compared with 39% of eligible children at baseline. Eighty-one percent of participating districts were low income, which is much higher than the percentage of districts characterized as low income statewide (65%). The policy also increased the average total local food purchases for low-income districts, particularly fruits and vegetables. The results suggest that the opt-in approach to the grant program facilitated greater participation from low-income districts that may otherwise have not accessed the grant program. Oregon's policy approach of designating funds for procurement and/or education grants (versus generic farm-to-school grants to be used at the discretion of the district) enabled the prioritization of these activities in grantee districts. Future research can help develop a more thorough understanding of the long-term impacts of Oregon's farm-toschool policy on children's health outcomes and on other intended outcomes on farmers and the local economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Grant funding allocation is a complex process that in most cases relies on peer review. A recent study identified a number of challenges associated with the use of peer review in the evaluation of grant proposals. Three important issues identified were bias, burden, and conservatism, and the work concluded that further experimentation and measurement is needed to assess the performance of funding processes. Methods: We have conducted a review of international practice in the evaluation and improvement of grant funding processes in relation to bias, burden and conservatism, based on a rapid evidence assessment and interviews with research funding agencies. Results: The evidence gathered suggests that efforts so far to measure these characteristics systematically by funders have been limited. However, there are some examples of measures and approaches which could be developed and more widely applied. Conclusions: The majority of the literature focuses primarily on the application and assessment process, whereas burden, bias and conservatism can emerge as challenges at many wider stages in the development and implementation of a grant funding scheme. In response to this we set out a wider conceptualisation of the ways in which this could emerge across the funding process.

Introduction: Early funding can have significant impact on a researcher's career. However, funding is not equal for men and women. Not only do female researchers apply for fewer grants than men, but they also experience a lower success rate when they do. The Zucker Grant Program (ZGP) was established in 2000 to promote the early success of women researchers. The purpose of this evaluation is to support other institutions hoping to grow the research careers of women scientists. Methods: This program evaluation reviewed the first 16 years of the program's history. Our mixed-methods, outcomes-based evaluation had four phases: (I) interviews with key stakeholders, (II) development and distribution of a survey to ZGP recipients, (III) focus groups and interviews with ZGP recipients, (IV) document analysis from the ZGP Center and the Tufts University School of Medicine (TUSM) Development Office. This article reports on the qualitative data collection and analysis. Results: Between 2000 and 2016, US$377,050 was awarded for 142 recipients. Qualitative data revealed how grant funding was critical to support pilot data in awardees' research to inform extramural grant applications. However, the program evaluation also identified effects on awardees' confidence as researchers and connection to a community. Conclusion: Outcomes are interpreted through the framework of Bourdieu's three forms of capital, including economic, social, and cultural capital. Viewed through this framework, they provide a critical infrastructure to the development and success of early career female investigators. This work offers other institutions a framework to consider when establishing intramural funding and support programs for their early career investigators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This explanatory case study investigated the phenomenon of one institution's public research university STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) faculty members' perspectives on indirect cost recovery from research grant funding. The explanatory scheme incorporated organizational culture, faculty socialization, and political bargaining models in the conceptual framework. The analysis indicated that faculty socialization and organizational culture were the most dominant themes; political bargaining emerged as significantly less prominent. Public research university STEM faculty are most concerned about the survival of their research programs and the discovery facilitated by their research programs; they resort to conjecture regarding the utility of indirect cost recovery. The findings direct institutional administrators to consider less emphasis on compliance and hierarchical authority and focus on greater communication and clarity in budget processes and organizational decision-making when working with expert professionals such as science faculty; for higher education researchers, the findings indicate a need for more sophisticated models to understand organizational dependency on expert professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]