This is an old revision of the document!
Back to AAAC Demographics Start page
What is the effect of reduced funding for individual research grants (relative to the overall funding profile)?
What do we expect to happen if the current trend continues unchecked?
Does it represent healthy competition and improve proposal quality?
Does it unfairly target younger researchers?
Does it reduce the number of scientists in the field?
Does it favor large projects over small projects? Is that good or bad?
[aaac:questions:NoChange|Specific Data]]
Solution 1: one proposal per year per PI
-
Would it improve success rates?
funding requested per proposal, $$ requested for successful vs unsuccessful
number of times proposed before success. (and no success attempts)
demographics on success vs unsuccessful
Would it reduce reviewer load?
Would it create more PIs (proposals) from otherwise collaborating senior researchers?
Does it make it even more difficult to decide between a few very excellent must-fund proposals?
Solution 2: RFPs every other year
Is it good for the science?
Does it create funding gaps for tenure-seeking researchers and thus unfairly target a demographic we want to encourage?
Does it create uneven funding levels, loss of resources, lack of continuity in the off years?
Would it improve success rates?
Would the funding requested per proposal go up?
Would it reduce reviewer load?
Data we need
Who is writing the proposals?
PI position: e.g. postdoc, assist. Prof, assoc. Prof, tenured faculty, research faculty, Gender, race/ethnicity, geographical location, size of institution
How many proposals submitted by same PI (broken down by PI category)
Number of senior researchers on proposal
Compare success rates of different sorts of proposals
per PI category, per number of senior researchers, per number of proposals submitted in the last 5 years, per funding requested
Years between proposals
Do younger researchers rise through the ranks (are researcher on proposal and then become PI later)?