The 2011 MGHPCC Seed Fund RFP is soliciting research proposals for computer and computational science. Pre-proposals are due October 1st, 2011. A total of $500K is available with anticipated award sizes in the range of $50K - $150K. Proposals must involve investigators from two or more of Boston University, Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northeastern University and the University of Massachusetts system.
Proposal responses should be sent firstname.lastname@example.org and should follow the template outlined in the program description below.
Q - What costs should be included in my budget?
A - Budgets should only include direct charge portions of any costs.
Q - I have an administrative question who should I contact?
A - Boston University researchers please contact Azer Bestavros (email@example.com, 617-353-9726).
Harvard University researchers please contact Ken Carson (firstname.lastname@example.org, 617-495-9829).
M.I.T researchers please contact Ron Hasseltine (email@example.com, 617-253-0386).
Northeastern University researchers please contact Dave Kaeli (firstname.lastname@example.org, 617-373-5413).
UMass researchers please contact Jim Kurose (email@example.com, 413-545-1585).
Q Are there guidelines for preparing follow-up responses.
A Proposers who were encouraged to submit follow-up responses should follow the
guidelines given below.
MGHPCC 2011 research seed-fund response information =================================================== Proposers encouraged to submit a follow-up response should use the guidelines below to produce response material. Follow-up responses should contain 1) A roughly 5 page description of the project. See the Technical Content Guidelines section. 2) A brief (~1 page + short-form CVs) description of the project team makeup and its management and organization. See the Team Makeup Guidelines section. 3) A budget statement (~1 page). See the Budget Guidelines section. The response material should be submitted by November 15th, by sending a single pdf file containing the information requested below to firstname.lastname@example.org . The response material will be evaluated using criteria given in the Selection Criteria section. Awards to successful proposals will be made using the process described in the Award Administration section. O Technical Content Guidelines o Scientific/intellectual merit. Proposers should address the scientific/intellectual merit of their proposed work including - how does this work relate to other activities in the proposed domain - how will results and new knowledge be shared - how the proposed activities set a technical foundation and/or open up new opportunities for collaborative future research in the area o Computational elements. A clear statement of the level of computational resources required for the proposal The MGHPCC building will not be complete until late 2012. As such, proposers with substantial high-performance computing (HPC) needs should include a brief explanation of plans for meeting their resource needs. Note - we do not envision paying for the acquisition of mainstream computing equipment (for HPC or desktop processing) under this seed-fund program. o Prospects for larger-scale follow-on activities. Proposers should summarize any specific activities they will engage in aimed at launching larger-scale follow-on activities. This summary should explain how the highlighted activities would be expected to improve the chances of a substantial follow-on. Plans for targeting future funding opportunities are of particular interest. o Partnerships and other contributions. Proposals that have involvement of non-MGHPCC institutions or that involve contributions (either in-kind or financial) from other organizations should give some details on the envisioned partnership. Material explaining how the partnership will further the agenda of enhancing the HPC community in the Massachusetts and New England region will be particularly welcome. O Team Makeup Guidelines o CVs for key personnel Proposers should include short CVs (~2 pages each) that, where possible, include details of the level of prior experience and activity in the area(s) of work being proposed, including highlighting relevant publications as appropriate. For example a two page CV, roughly in the format requested by NSF, but also briefly discussing PI background in the area, would be ideal. o Project Organization and Team A brief statement (~1 page) on how the project team intends to manage the proposed activities and ferment collaboration among team participants at different institutions. Any plans for student involvement in research can be addressed here. O Budget Guidelines Seed-fund projects are one-year in duration with an anticipated start date of January 1, 2012. Seed-funds are being provided by the individual MGHPCC institutions using institutional resources. Each institution has committed approximately $100K to fund activities at that institution this coming year. Proposers should formulate budget details consistently with this arrangement and in reasonable alignment with pre-proposal estimates and any pre-proposal feedback. Note: o There is no need for formal Office of Sponsored Programs/Grants Office approval of budgets, although proposers should make sure budgets are consistent with individual institutional requirements such as salary and benefit rates. o There are no sub-awards. All awards go directly to PIs, co-PIs in the proposal. There should be separate budgets or budget items for each institution involved in a proposal. o Budgets do not need to include F&A/indirect cost charges. These charges will be dealt with implicitly on a per institution basis. o Budgets should include direct costs for personnel (i.e. salaries and applicable fringe benefits plus any tuition or fee charges), any equipment, travel. Proposers are encouraged to explore individual institution programs that can defray costs around activities such as graduate student research participation. o Budgets should make clear the purpose of each budget item. O Selection Criteria Guidelines Evaluation of projects will take into account the following factors o The perceived scientific/technical merits of the proposed activity. o Potential for follow-on funding and for developing a longer-term, broad collaboration. o Participation of regional industry, business and non-MGHPCC institution partners. o Potential for follow-on impacts on the broad HPC computational science and computer science community in the Massachusetts and New England region. o The degree of student involvement. o Alignment of budget with per institution funding availability. o The degree of cross-institution collaboration. o The balance amongst projects across research disciplines and across institutions. O Award Administration o The lead PI at each institution involved in a proposal will be responsible for the portion of the proposals budget awarded at their institution. o Depending on the review committees recommendations and the availability of funds some proposals may be awarded funding at less than the requested amount, subject to discussions with PIs. o Every award will be required to provide a report at the end of the award period that will be made public. The report should summarize project activities and highlight specific actions that have led or are leading to funded follow-on projects.