CALL FOR PROPOSALS
Deadline: April 2, 2002, 5 p.m. CSTI. General
II. Instructions
III. What, Where and When to Submit
IV. Evaluation and Review
I. General
A. Introduction
The Biorenewable Resources Consortium is a partnership
dedicated to the development and utilization of agriculturally derived alternatives to
petrochemicals and other nonrenewable fossil resources. Technology transfer to the private
sector is a key component of our mission. Interdisciplinary research teams will develop
new value-added products and new routes to bioenergy.
B. Mission of
the BRC
The Biorenewable Resources Consortium is a partnership dedicated to the
development and utilization of agriculturally derived alternatives to petrochemicals and
other nonrenewable fossil resources. Technology transfer to the private sector is a key
component of our mission. Interdisciplinary research teams will develop new value-added
products and new routes to bioenergy.
C. Topics of
Research
Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation should fit within the
BRC mission. The preferred research topic areas are listed below. Successful proposals
could include analytical methodology, separations technology, production and conversion
technology and economic analysis integrated into the following areas: -
Chemicals such as biodiesels, alcohols, and organic acids
produced via biocatalytic, catalytic, and green chemistry technologies from crops, crop
residues, and lignocellulosic materials.
Biopolymers and materials from crops and crop residues.
New crops and production methods designed in concert with
biobased products development.
II. INSTRUCTIONS
FOR PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS
All proposals must contain the narrative information and
forms described below. Proposals that do not follow these guidelines will be
returned .
Proposals are to be submitted on standard 8-1/2" x
11" paper with typing on one side of the page only. Pages should have uniform
one-inch margins, text should be double-spaced, and Times New Roman font, point size 12,
should be employed. Figures and tables should be incorporated into the text. The maximum
length of the proposal (parts A-H), will be eight pages.
If you have questions about proposal preparation, contact Dr.
George Kraus (294-7794).
Required Content/Order of PROPOSAL NARRATIVE
Proposal Cover Page
The cover page must have the project title, research topic area, principal investigator
name(s) and affiliation(s), total funding request, and applicable compliance issues or
concerns.
A.
Abstract (not to exceed 100 words)
B. Objectives
Clear, concise, and complete statement(s) of the
specific aims of the research project.
C. Procedures
A detailed description of the proposed work in the sequence
in which it will be carried out. This section, written as a precise work plan or
statement of work (SOW), should include a discussion of the rationale behind the
investigation, outline hypotheses to be tested, and clearly identify major challenges and
anticipated results.
D. Justification
A description of how the proposed work is relevant to
the mission of the BRC, and more broadly, to the needs of the DOE
(http://www.oit.doe.gov/agriculture/). This section should discuss the significance of
the problem and the importance of conducting the work in the near term. What is the
relationship between this project and other projects ongoing in the PI’s laboratory?
E. Literature
Review
This section should provide a summary of relevant literature
with emphasis on its relationship to the proposed research, as well as a discussion of the
relevancy of the work to future research. References to publications should be identified
using bracketed numerals, e.g. [1]. Full citations should then be listed in sequential
order at the end of this section in acceptable journal format.
F. Facilities
and Equipment
A description of all facilities, including
laboratories, available for use during the requested period of support. This section
should include an itemization of major instrumentation and nonexpendable equipment that is
available for use.
G. Collaborative
Arrangements, Cost Sharing and Leveraging
Multi-investigator, multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional
and/or industrial collaborations should be fully explained. This section should include a
discussion of the benefits of the proposed teaming arrangement and the details of the 20%
match from non-federal funds. This could include part of PI’s salary, industrial
funds and contingent funding. What are the plans for leveraging the project beyond the
project period?
H. Economic Analysis
This section should provide a rudimentary economic analysis
of the proposed work. There should be a comparison with costs of relevant existing
products or processes. What is the market size?
Appendices
A. Vitae
Curricula vitae are to be included for all key persons expected to work on the project,
including principal investigators, senior associates, and other professional personnel,
whether or not funds are sought for their support. Each vita should be limited to
one page and should include a list of only the five most recent and relevant publications.
B. Budget
Applicants should provide a summary budget using the form at the end. In addition,
nonexpendable equipment, materials and supplies, travel, publication costs/page charges,
computer (ADPE) costs, and all other direct costs should be fully itemized for each of
these budget categories.
C. Current and
Pending Support – 1 page
PIs should provide a list of current and pending research support.
III. WHAT, WHEN AND WHERE TO SUBMIT
Six printed copies of the proposal, fully assembled and in the correct order (including
cover page, sections A through H, and appendices), are required. The address for
submission is:
BRC Competitive Grant Program
311 TASF
All proposals are due by 5 p.m. CST, April 2, 2002.
IV. EVALUATION AND REVIEW
A. Review and Scoring
With the goal of sustaining quality and relevance of the work performed by the BRC, a
uniform procedure will be adopted for evaluating and selecting projects.
The BRC Task Force will constitute the internal review
panel to evaluate proposals. This group will be aided by written reviews from an external
panel of industry experts. The task force evaluations will guide the BRC Executive
Committee in determining the final selections.
-
Relevance to mission of the BRC (20%)
Reviewers will be asked to identify the relevance of the proposed research to the
mission of the BRC. The proposals should justify the work in sufficient detail to convince
the reviewers of this relevance.
-
Technical approach and procedures (45%)
The Procedures section, presented as a work plan or statement of work, should be
written in sufficient detail to permit the reviewers to judge the feasibility of
conducting the proposed work and assess progress if continuation funds are requested.
Hypotheses to be tested should be outlined, the technical approach and research
methodology to be employed should be summarized, and major challenges and anticipated
results should be clearly identified.
-
Teaming and Cost Sharing (15%)
Multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional teaming of scientists and engineers is a way to
simultaneously promote scientific discovery and technology development. Accordingly, teams
of researchers that will accomplish such synergism are required. Inclusion of researchers
from the Midwest Consortium for Biobased Chemicals and Bioenergy (Illinois, Michigan
State, Argonne National Laboratory, Purdue and the USDA facility in Peoria) as
co-investigators will be viewed favorably. There is a requirement for 20% cost sharing.
This should be defined.
-
Economic Analysis (15%)
The economic feasibility of the proposed project is directly related to the mission of the
BRC. This must be documented in the proposal.
-
Leveraging (5%)
Plans for leveraging the project beyond the project period must be well thought out.
B. Review Schedule
The task force will be convened in April, 2002 to review proposals. After discussion
and consideration of task force evaluations, BRC administrators will notify applicants of
their status on or about April 30, 2002.
(Back to top)
Last updated: 3/28/02 mjg
|
