|2017 Annual Meeting|
2017 Meeting information
Greetings from the National Sclerotinia Initiative! home
Notice to those seeking NSI funding: ARS has revised the instruction and application templates for FY17 based on comments by reviews, stakeholders, and ARS officials. There are separate application templates for continuing and new project proposals. A major change in the continuing template is aimed at getting the PI(s) to clearly indicate by objective(s) what they accomplished (or did not accomplish) based on FY16 funding and clearly indicating what they accomplished over the life of the particular project (usually 3-5 years). Another change on the continuing template is a check box indicating the year of the current request. Both templates now place the NACA language at the back of the application package so external reviewers and stakeholders can ignore that part.
This past year funded SYs returned about $75,000 to the U.S. Treasury because they were not closely monitoring their funds. It is imperative recipients monitor their funds because we are no longer allowed to roll over funds into a new NACA at the end of a 5-year agreement. Additionally, several recipients had large balances of funds remaining from the previous award and were asking for nearly the same amount again. SY must plan accordingly to ensure they have a realistic spend down before they request a large amount of new funds. Occasionally, there are reason for which funds are not spent down, the stakeholders and I are open to your reasons, but again you should be proactive in reducing your funding request.
Lastly, on some multi-investigator proposals external reviewers and stakeholders were unable to clearly determine what each PI was responsible for given the objectives or questions being addressed. It will be imperative to make this clear as it will be difficult to impossible to develop a coherent “Research Progress to Date” section in continuing project. Moreover, external reviewers and/or stakeholders indicated they did not want to fund some specific part of a proposal because the proposed research was being done elsewhere, had been done, was not progressive in some way or other, or did not fit with the goals and milestones. Clearly, defining objectives and responsible PI will help in providing feedback when needed.