New NSF Program Supports Exploratory Research

WASHINGTON—When forest biologist Richard Condit of Princeton University applied for a grant to study how trees in tropical forests are related, the National Science Foundation told him that he had a great idea. But they rejected his application because he couldn’t prove that his approach would work. Condit is trying again, but NSF has decided to give scientists like him a chance to prove their theories without wasting a lot of federal money on experiments that don't work. The new program is called Small Grants for Exploratory Research (SGER). It provides one-year awards of up to $50,000 through a process that bypasses traditional merit review and lets scientists venture into unexplored—and therefore often unfundable—territory. “What we really want is for people to try things that they don’t think are ready for a full grant proposal,” says James M. McCullough, director of the NSF program evaluation staff. The program, announced this fall, has already attracted many inquiries. The program is a sign that NSF is willing to take risks, say NSF officials. That’s a message that NSF Director Erich B loch and others are eager to convey in light of past criticism from scientists that the foundation is reluctant to fund innovative, high-risk ideas. If the program succeeds, the officials say, such an approach may eventually influence regular research grants as well. The effort evolved from the Expedited Awards for Novel Research Program offered for the past three years by the engineering directorate. Program directors supported about 250 grants; many yielded data that became the backbone for larger NSF proposals, and one led to a commercial product. Last March, an advisory committee reviewed the program and recommended that it be extended to all of NSF. “We took the emphasis off ‘expedited’ because we didn’t want to send the wrong signal,” says McCullough. Nevertheless, this program does speed up the process. The shorter application takes less time to fill out. Also, the six-month review period is bypassed. Instead, NSF program officers decide for themselves whom to support. “It gives program directors a way to make some decisions on their own, a way to fund research they want to take a flyer on,” says William S. Butcher, senior engineering adviser who oversaw the pilot program in engineering. That flexibility also means they must shoulder responsibility for rejecting grants. “Before, if they didn’t give the money, they could hide behind the reviewers’ comments,” he adds. “With this one, they are exposed. A lot of people are apprehensive.” Difficult Choices The new SGER grants will force program directors to changethe way they process grant proposals. They’ll probably spend more time on the phone talking to scientists about their ideas, and they are likely to produce more paperwork to document their decisions. There is no new money; instead, program directors can spend up to 5% of their research budgets on these types of grants. “What they are giving up is funding for projects that have been fully reviewed,” says McCullough. “They already have a lot of proposals to fund, so it’s pretty difficult.” For Princeton’s Condit, the program comes in the nick of time. Although he’s resubmitted his proposal to assess relatedness in tropical forests, he’ll probably turn to a SGER request if his current application is turned down again. Condit likes the fact that the SGER review will take weeks, not months. The proposal format is also appealing: one copy of a two- to five-page project description with a brief biography that lists just five significant publications or research projects. The awards are nonrenewable, although it may be possible to get support for a second year, and awards are supposed to be smaller than typical grants. That amount may not seem like much, but for a scientist with a new idea, even a little money is better than, none at all. “When grants are limited, they [NSF] are likely to fund grants with a great chance of success," says Condit. “But [at the same time] there’s a great need for exploratory research.”

New NSF Program Supports Exploratory Research

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of