Top of page

Center Proposal Process and Review Criteria

1. Review Criteria

General

A critical facet of every application is to define clearly what the Center will do together and to demonstrate why the faculty or leaders identified are uniquely qualified to do it. Each proposal should make a compelling argument that, if funded, the University will gain more than the sum of the individual parts.

Every proposal must address the following question: what will you do together, and what will you achieve if the Center is funded, that will not and cannot be achieved without this funding?

The Center director must work with the Vice Provost for Research, Scholarly Inquiry and Creative Activity (VPRSICA) prior to proposal preparation to determine whether the Center concept is viable, and during preparation to ensure the proposal is competitive for review by the Research Advisory Council (RAC). Reviewers on RAC rate each proposal on how well it addresses the questions below, applying the set of criteria that corresponds to the proposal’s class of center.

Interdisciplinary Research & Scholarship Centers

  1. Intellectual merit. How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding across different fields? How well qualified are the applicants to conduct the work, individually and collectively? To what extent does the activity explore creative and original concepts? Reviewers should provide a peer assessment describing how the Center will either catch the University up to its peers or distinguish it from them.
  2. Broader impacts. How well does the activity promote teaching, training, and learning while advancing discovery and understanding? To what extent will it enhance research or creative activity and education through facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will results be disseminated broadly, and what may be the benefits to society? 
  3. Planning and conceptualization. Are the topics or questions clearly stated, with a timeline for addressing them and a description of who will do the work? How well conceived and organized are the activities? Is the budget well justified — including a plan for an administrative core — and are the resources needed for success clearly identified?

Engagement & Impact Centers

Engagement & Impact Centers are not evaluated on intellectual merit or on the production of new knowledge. Reviewers assess them on the following.

  1. Mission alignment and impact potential. How important is the proposed activity to advancing the University’s mission and to generating meaningful community, economic, or cultural benefit? How well qualified are the applicants and their partners to deliver it? To what extent does the activity reach individuals, groups, or communities that do not typically have access to such programs?
  2. Reach and engagement. How well does the activity broaden participation and access, and how many people or ventures will it serve? How will it strengthen the relevant culture on campus — for example, an entrepreneurial culture among students, faculty, and staff? What partnerships extend its reach beyond the University?
  3. Planning and conceptualization. Are the programs, activities, and intended outcomes clearly stated, with a timeline and identified personnel and partners? Is the delivery model sound? Is the budget well justified — including a plan for an administrative core — and is there a credible path to sustainability beyond Provost’s Office funding?

2. Review Process

The following process applies to proposals in both classes.

  1. The VPRSICA will schedule a meeting of the RAC to review the proposal. The final application must be submitted to the RAC at least two weeks prior to that meeting.
  2. The Center director will be invited to the RAC review meeting for a 45-minute presentation, followed by closed-door discussion.
  3. The RAC chair will provide a report addressing the review criteria, along with an overall recommendation, to the VPRSICA within two weeks.
  4. The VPRSICA will present the application and the RAC review to the Provost for consideration.
  5. The Provost may consult with the relevant deans prior to making the final funding decision.

Note on reviewing Engagement & Impact Centers

Proposals for Engagement & Impact Centers are evaluated against the Section 1.B criteria. Where the VPRSICA seeks external input on such a proposal, that input may include community, practitioner, or partner perspectives in addition to, or in place of, academic peer reviewers, as appropriate to the Center’s mission.