CALL FOR RESEARCH PROPOSALS

Spring 2025 Funding from CVM ENDOWED RESEARCH FUNDS (ERF)

Application Deadline is April 21, 2025

The goal of the Endowed Research Funds is to support research that will have a significant impact on animal health and well-being. The intent is also to strengthen existing clinical and diagnostic capabilities at the CVM by helping to foster strong collaborative research and create opportunities that will contribute to the development of clinician scientists. Proposals that address interdisciplinary or translational research and animal-human-environment interface investigations are also highly encouraged. Review criteria include the potential to fill a critical gap in our knowledge base, sound experimental design, and credentials of the research team (details below). Projects will be funded on a competitive basis. 

The following research focal areas are highly encouraged: genetic research, equine research, and projects that relate to pure-bred dogs or companion animal disorders.

Applicants may contact Dr. Colleen Hegg with any questions and to discuss the suitability of potential projects.

FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Pilot projects ($50,000 maximum, 1 year duration)

The pilot or “seed” project mechanism is (1) for early-stage investigators (i.e., PIs who have not received any extramural funding) to generate preliminary data or provide proof of concept for a developing research program or grant application, or (2) for an established PI to advance a new research direction and/or generate preliminary data leading to submission of an extramural grant application. No preliminary data is required for grants under this mechanism. However, history of peer reviewed publications and a plan to apply for extramural funding are required. 

• Proposals from early investigators must include a clear statement of how the proposed funding is not an overlap with start-up funds. For example, a direction of research stemming from a new idea or data that complements the PIs program and offers new avenue for funding or establishes a new collaboration. Additionally, including a mentor or co-PI previously funded by an ERF award is preferred. 
• Established PIs previously funded through the CVM Endowed Research Program must demonstrate that this proposal represents a truly new research direction and not a continuation of a previously funded effort.

Resident projects ($25,000 maximum, 1 year duration)

This mechanism is intended to provide support to CVM residents or post-doctoral scholars in their research endeavors and to provide an opportunity to gain new knowledge and skills in research methods. No preliminary data is required for this mechanism. 

Team Science-based projects ($100,000 maximum, 2-year duration)

Please contact Colleen Hegg before you start drafting your grant proposal to confirm funding availability.

The intent of this mechanism is to bring together a cluster of CVM researchers who will collectively address grand challenges. Projects may advance new or existing research projects or programs and must be highly innovative and have a significant potential for return on investment (e.g., identification of a novel therapy or a vaccine; validation of a new diagnostic test for an important disease). The most favorably reviewed Team Science projects will likely result in key preliminary findings that will lead to future large extramural funding.

All team-science projects must include:

• An early-stage/junior investigator (e.g., Assistant Professors who have not received any extramural funding) as part of the larger team that will facilitate mentoring and the junior investigator’s ability to develop independent and extramural funding.

All team-science projects should include:

• An integrated approach with multiple investigators (minimally two CVM Co-PIs).
• Teams with investigators representing diverse clinical or basic science specialties.
• Discussion of how the project will result in application(s) that will lead to substantive advancement in animal health (or human translational studies).
• A clear description of how the project: 1) has expected outcomes that could make an immediate impact or change clinical practice/diagnostics or 2) will demonstrate a proof of concept that will lead to extramural funding. 

Eligibility

The principal investigator (PI) must be a faculty member (TS, HP) or academic staff in the College of Veterinary Medicine, or, in the case of the Resident project, have a mentor that is a faculty member.

• A resident, instructor, post-doctoral scholar, or research associate may serve as a co-Investigator on any application. A resident, instructor, post-doctoral scholar, or research associate may also serve as co-PI on an application, if approved by the mentor and department chair or designee.
• When there are multiple PIs, one PI should be designated as the contact PI, and should be the one holding the senior academic rank if the other is a resident, post-doctoral fellow, or research associate. 
• The responsibility for completion of the project and submission of a final report rests with the PI, and in cases of multiple PIs, with the contact PI. 
• Submissions by individuals with a delinquent final report from a previously funded ERF at the time of the submission deadline will not be considered.

AWARD AND ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

Funding decisions and award notifications will be shared with applicants in late June or early July, 2025.

Successful applicants will receive an account number only when all regulatory compliance documents are received by the Office of Research. Once an account number is established, funding will be disbursed.

Regulatory Compliance

For projects involving vertebrate animals, approval by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee is required before funds are released. Please note: if IACUC approval is needed at the time of submission, applicants should start the process promptly as approval can take a few months. 

For research involving VMC patients and/or budgetary items, approval by the VMC Director will be required before funds are released. Director approval is coordinated by Laurie Worgul in the VTH Business Office. A “VMC Research Checklist” must be completed & provided to Laurie for Director review & approval. Before submission of the application, the need for animal space in the VMC should be cleared with the VMC Director's Office.

For projects that involve the Veterinary Research Farm, availability of space should be ensured through the farm manager.

For projects involving human subjects, IRB approval by the Human Research Protection Program is required before funds are released. Please note: if IRB approval is needed at the time of submission, applicants should start the process promptly as approval can take a few months.

Reporting requirements

A final report on each funded proposal is due three months after the end date of the grant period. Delinquent final reports will result in ineligibility of any application for CVM Endowed Research Funds submitted by the PI and co-PI until the report has been submitted.

All funded investigators will be invited to present their final research findings and outcomes at a future CVM Research Updates Seminar series. Residents will present their findings at Phi Zeta Research Day and/or in the resident seminar series. An acknowledgment of the ERF fund that supported the research is required.

Close Outs

Expenses must be posted to the account within 3 months of the project end date. Any remaining funds will revert to the original funding award.

No Cost Extension Requests

Requests for no cost extensions of up to one additional year will be considered. Send a justification for the extension to the Office of Research Facilitation (cvm.research@cvm.msu.edu). Note that:

• Requests must be made no later than 1 month before project end date

SUBMISSION PROCESS FOR PROPOSALS 

Applications are due April 21, 2025, submitted online via the link below, by 11:59 p.m. EDT. 

Late applications will not be reviewed. 

Submit your completed proposals to: https://msucvm.smapply.io/prog/ 

New applicants will need to first register on the application portal with their MSU email address as the username and create a password before they can start an application. Passwords are case sensitive and should be at least 8 characters, to include at least one special character, one number, an uppercase and a lowercase letter. 

Note: Applicants will receive a confirmation email from noreply@mail.smapply.io after they submit their online application. If you have not received an email, your application is not submitted.

If you have difficulties with this process, do not hesitate to contact Ashley Russell or Katie VanDyk. 

APPLICATION COMPONENTS

Please complete the following sections through the application portal. Some sections are completed in the portal, some sections require a document upload.

A.        Cover Page (Complete online)

Provide the following information: 

• Title of Proposal.  The title of the proposal must be brief (100-character maximum) yet represent the major focus of the project.
• Principal Investigator(s).  List the name(s) and affiliations of the principal investigator(s) and if multiple PIs, designate the contact PI. 
• Estimated project dates.
• Total amount requested.
• Regulatory Compliance. Answer the questions about research regulations.

B.        Introduction and Problem Statement (Complete online)

Provide an overall description of the project and the hypothesis to be tested, challenge or gap in knowledge to be addressed or programmatic activity to be advanced. Describe how the proposed project will advance the goals of the CVM mission (Learn, Discover, Heal, Protect) or other aims relevant to the CVM research mission (Health and well-being of animals, humans, and the environment).

C.        Project Personnel (Complete online)

Beginning with the Principal Investigator, list all personnel (including students) that will be on the project. Include the percentage of effort that each listed person will commit. When there are multiple PIs, one PI should be designated as the “contact PI”, and should be the one holding the senior academic rank if the other is a graduate student, post-doctoral fellow, or research associate. The responsibility for completion of the project and submission of a final report rests with the PI, and in cases of multiple PIs, with the “contact PI”.

D.        Research Plan (Upload a document)

Page limits and formatting

The Research Plan may not exceed four pages, single-spaced for pilot/seed projects and eight pages for Team Science projects. Page limitation includes figures and tables and excludes references. Provide at least one-half inch margins (top, bottom, left, and right) for all pages. 

References: Use additional pages for references/bibliography as needed. There is no page limit for references/bibliography. 

Font and size: Must be Arial or Helvetica typeface 11 points or larger. Smaller text in figures, graphs, diagrams and charts are acceptable, as long as legible when the page is viewed at 100%. 

Research Plan components

1. For all three types of proposals, include the following sections: 

• Specific Aims 
• Significance and Impact
• Methods/Approach (pay attention to study design, sample sizes, statistical methods to be used etc.)
• Expected Outcomes 
  • Include significance statements on how the proposed research will address a gap in knowledge and how this will be used to either change clinical practice, diagnostic test, establish proof of concept for extramural grants, production of a manuscript with high impact to the field, etc. 
• Timeline

2. Additionally, please address the following in the Research Plan:

For the Pilot or Seed projects describe how the submitted proposal represents a new line of research not previously supported by Endowed Research Funding by the Research Office or does not overlap with start-up funds.

For Resident projects, please have the PI’s mentor(s) include a paragraph describing the mentoring plan.

For Team Science based projects:

• Describe the unique skills of the team and how you will work together to achieve the proposal’s goals. Delineate specific roles and activities of all key personnel.
• Provide a description of the role of the multiple co-PIs on the project and the potential for synergy in the collaboration. If the two co-PIs have a history of collaboration (e.g., as evidenced by co-authored papers and/or jointly held grants), please explain if the current application is an extension of prior work or a new direction.
• Clearly articulate justification for the request, particularly for applications from PIs with substantial funding (endowments or extramural).

E.        Funding Plan (Complete online)

Describe existing leveraged funds (e.g., industry or commodity groups) and the plan for securing future large-scale funding by this team. This is required for Team Science grants and optional for pilot and resident grants.

F.         Budget and Justification (Complete online or upload a document)

Upload a budget/justification document or complete it online. Please include effort levels for all years for all personnel. 

Total budget for Team Science grants should not exceed $100,000 per proposal; $50,000 for Pilot projects; and $25,000 for Resident projects.

Not allowed: 

• Faculty salary 
• Tuition
• Computer purchases
• Subcontracts
• Conference travel NOT associated with presenting the outcome of the funded research project

Note: Travel related to sampling or related to conducting research activities is allowed. 

Equipment is allowable only on certain endowment funding sources. If equipment is included in the budget, it will be considered for funding but may also be unfunded based on funding availability. 

G.        Biographical Sketches (upload a single document)

Upload an NIH or USDA style biosketch for all key personnel. Project PI’s/Co-PIs must provide outcomes of any previous ERF Program funding received from the CVM Research Office (i.e., peer reviewed publications, federal grant support, and invention disclosures etc.). 

APPLICATION REVIEW

Review Process

The CVM Research Committee will identify the reviewers. The review panel can include faculty members from the CVM, other colleges or schools, or external stakeholders. Recommendations of the review panel will be submitted to the CVM’s Dean and Associate Dean for Research for final approval. Reviewer critiques will be sent to applicants to assist with project implementation or future submissions. 

Review Criteria

All grants will be evaluated for:

• Clarity of the importance of the problem
• Gap in knowledge that is being addressed
• Robustness and quality of the research approach
• Clinical or translational impacts (Case reports or presentations are considered impacts for resident proposals)

Team science grants will also be evaluated for innovation and synergy of the research team

Reviewer’s Evaluation form

Score Rating 

Applications will be scored on a 9-point rating scale (1 = exceptional; 9 = poor)

1-3: Applications are addressing a problem of high importance/interest in the field. May have some or no weaknesses.

4-6: Applications may be addressing a problem of high importance in field but weaknesses in the criteria bring down the overall impact to medium or applications may be addressing a problem of moderate importance in the field with some or no weaknesses.

7-9: Applications may be addressing a problem of moderate/high importance in the field, but weaknesses in the criteria bring down the overall impact to low or applications may be addressing a problem of low or no importance in the field, with some or no weakness.

Overall Impact      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.  

The Overall Impact score is a synthesis that takes into consideration all the review criteria. An application does not need to be strong in all review criteria to be judged likely to have a major impact. It is possible for one or more review criteria to overshadow the other review criteria, thus driving the Overall Impact score up or down.

Summary critique of the proposal (briefly summarize the pros and cons of the proposed project):

Clarity of the importance of the problem      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Does the project address an important problem in the field?

Yes ☐             No ☐

Does the proposed research have potential to have a sustained positive influence on animal / human health (either immediate or long-term)?         

Yes ☐             No ☐

Please provide comments relating to the importance of the problem:

Gap in knowledge that is being addressed      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Does the proposal explain why this research is needed?

Yes ☐             No ☐                 

Does the project address a critical barrier to progress in the field?     

Yes ☐             No ☐

Please provide comments relating to the gap in knowledge:

Robustness and quality of the research approach      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Is the guiding hypothesis testable?                   

Yes ☐             No ☐                      

Does the project have appropriate sample size and adequate statistical methods?     

Yes ☐             No ☐                

If the project involves patients, are factors such as age, sex, breed, etc. adequately controlled?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is the general approach and methodology to be employed in the project suitable?     

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Note: Preliminary data is not required for Pilot nor Resident Projects

If applicable, preliminary data supports the hypothesis to be tested and the feasibility of the project.

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐

If applicable, preliminary data included experimental controls, was collected and analyzed without bias (blinding, randomization, inclusion/exclusion criteria, etc.) and used appropriate statistical methods.

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐        

If applicable, preliminary data presented supports the research team's ability to conduct the research proposed (familiar with technology and methodology).

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐        

Please provide comments relating to the research approach:

Clinical or translational impacts      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Does the project have the potential to drive a change in clinical practice?        

Yes ☐             No ☐                                            

Does the proposed research open a path to create a new understanding of a disease process?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Does the project create a new diagnostic modality?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is the project a valuable training experience for a student/resident with potential for publication(s)?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Does the Resident Project have the potential to result in a case report or presentation (considered an impact for resident proposals)? 

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Please provide comments relating to the impact:

Additional Team Science Considerations

Innovation      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Are the concepts, approaches, or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions, novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Does the project provide refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches, or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions to one field of research?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Does the application clearly describe (1) expected outcomes that could make an immediate impact or change clinical practice/diagnostics or (2) will demonstrate a proof of concept that will lead to extramural funding.

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Please provide comments relating to the innovation:

Synergy of research team      Score (1-9) Click or tap here to enter text.

Are the investigators qualified to carry out the project, given the scope of the project and their experience?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is a detailed and satisfactory description of how each member of the team will contribute to the project included?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is the leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Please provide comments relating to the team’s synergy:

Other Considerations

Personnel, Budget, and Future Plans

Are the personnel well defined and qualified?

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is the budget realistic for the work proposed?  

Yes ☐             No ☐                

Is the budget free of inessentials?

Yes ☐             No ☐                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Pilot Project

Does the PI/Co-PI have a plan to apply for extramural funding?

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐        

Did the application include a clear statement of how the proposed funding is not an overlap with start-up funds and/or offers a new avenue for funding or establishes a new collaboration?

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐        

Resident Project

A strong mentoring plan appropriate to the needs and goals of the candidate was presented.

Yes ☐             No ☐             N/A ☐        

Team Science

Was an early-stage /junior investigator included?

Yes ☐             No ☐      

Were at least two CVM Co-PIs included?

Yes ☐             No ☐      

Did the proposal describe a feasible plan for securing future large-scale funding?

Yes ☐             No ☐      

Assessment of performance on completed CVM Endowed Research Fund Grants 

In general, does the PI/Co-PI have a history of peer reviewed publications?       

Yes ☐             No ☐      

DEADLINE: April 21, 2025