2011 Promising Investigator Research Award

Review Process: Applications that are complete and responsive to this announcement will be evaluated for merit by the Peer Review Committee. The Committee will then provide a prioritized list of recommendations for funding to the Vice President for Research and Graduate Education based on the quality of the proposals per the review criteria (see below). The VPR will make awards based on Committee's recommendations and available funds.

Research Merit:
  • Does the proposal provide a compelling argument for the research?
  • Does the proposed project represent a significant contribution to the investigator's field of study? If so, how?
  • Is there a probability of publication or public dissemination? If so, who is the audience for the proposed work, and why will they value it?
Nature of Proposal:
  • Does the proposal provide a clear statement of overall project objectives?
  • Are the proposed methodologies appropriate and accurate?
  • Does the proposal provide a sound justification with clear and specific budget information?
  • What is the likelihood of definitive results and conclusions?
  • Is the text of the proposal well-written?
  • Is the timeline and budget proposed feasible?
Leverage:
  • Will the project lead to further scholarly activity?
  • Does it improve chances for funding from existing sources?
  • Does the project offer opportunities for funding from new sources?
  • Does the project help build research networks?
Reporting:
  • If the investigator(s) has received previous funding from the Research Office, have all required reports been appropriately completed?
   
Copyright © USC Office of Research & Graduate Education. Web Design by Tim Rodono.