Friday, January 19, 2024 by 5 p.m. National Institute of Food and Agriculture Introduction
National Institute of Food and Agriculture: NIFA works with university scientists across the U.S. to find innovative solutions to issues related to agriculture, food, the environment and communities across five priority science areas:
Food Security and Hunger. NIFA supports science to boost domestic agricultural production, improve capacity to meet the growing global food demand, and foster innovation in fighting hunger and food insecurity in vulnerable populations.
Climate change. NIFA funded projects help producers adapt to changing weather patterns and sustain economic vitality while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing carbon sequestration in agricultural and forest production systems.
Sustainable Energy. NIFA contributes to the President’s goal of energy independence with a portfolio of grant programs to develop optimum biomass, forests, and crops for bioenergy production; and produce value-added bio-based industrial products.
Childhood Obesity/Nutrition. NIFA-supported programs ensure that nutritious foods are affordable and available and that individuals and families are able to make informed science- based decisions about their health and well-being. This area also focuses more broadly on improving all citizens’ health through nutrition and improved food quality.
Food Safety. NIFA food safety programs work to provide a safer food supply and reduce the incidence of foodborne illness by addressing the causes of microbial contamination and anti- microbial resistance, educating consumer and food safety professionals, and developing food processing technologies.
Colorado Agricultural Experimental Station
The Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station distributes funds annually to facilitate achieving the above goals in Colorado and elsewhere. Colleges at CSU receive an annual budget from CAES and the college distributes those funds in a manner that supports the broad national goals and is responsive to State needs in its areas of expertise. Funding is contingent upon receiving approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to expend CAES funds to support that work. Further, wherever possible, projects should attempt to link with Cooperative Extension personnel who can facilitate dissemination and application of the research results. CAES is committed to finding practical solutions to food and natural resources challenges facing the people of Colorado. CAES’s mission is to conduct research that addresses the evolving business, climate, and policy conditions that affect farmers, ranchers, and rural communities. More information about CAES can be found on their website.
College Philosophy About the College of Health and Human Sciences
The College is guided by the philosophy that Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station funds should be used flexibly and their assignment should be responsive to the changing needs in our society and in the State and region.
Department/School: Each academic unit in the College of Health and Human Sciences is eligible for CAES funding. Only proposals that further the goals of the department or school, and are aligned with NIFA, CAES and CHHS priorities can receive Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station funds.
General Guidelines: Funds are viewed as project-centered (as opposed to investigator-centered). It is expected that by the time most funded projects are completed, the principal investigator will have developed sufficient expertise and satisfactorily demonstrated the viability of the research to obtain continuing funding from other sources. Nevertheless, renewed funding is not precluded and highly productive projects in targeted areas of excellence may be considered for competitive renewal. Projects that are approached from an interdisciplinary perspective are highly desired.
Friday, January 19, 2024 by 5 p.m. Details for Applying
Applications for New Awards
It is expected that 3 projects will be funded in this next cycle for new projects, to start on July 1, 2024. Proposal budgets are for up to two years; should not exceed $30,000 of direct costs per year and should align with the scope and demands of the proposed research project.
A single/combined PDF version of the AES application is due to Stephanie Ouren at firstname.lastname@example.org, Research Support Services Coordinator, by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, January 19, 2024. Please also address any application questions to her. Committee review and decisions are expected by March 2024. Funding begins July 1, 2024, or as soon thereafter as federal approval of the project is received.
Proposal Guidelines and Format
The College of Health and Human Sciences has established the following guidelines for allocating the funds it receives from the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station.
- Projects must represent high-quality, state-of-the-art research in a field of study that shows potential to further national, state, college, and departmental goals. Evidence of a project’s fit with goals at all of these levels should be clearly described in the application. If the proposed research is part of a multi-state project (approved or pending approval), that research and the contribution of this research to the whole project should be described. As assurance that the proposed research has the endorsement of the PI’s academic unit, the Proposal Cover Page must include the signature of the unit head.
- As part of a research and teaching university, it is expected that funded projects will involve graduate students in a manner that will further their own knowledge and skills in conducting research. Therefore, proposals should include funding for graduate research assistants when appropriate. Also, up to one month of the Investigator’s nine-month salary (taken either during the academic year or as a summer appointment) is allowed.
- A projected two-year budget and budget justification must be provided, along with a brief year-by-year work plan. Include details on how all resources (e.g., graduate research assistants, operating expenses, travel, summer salary) will be used.
- Proposals must include a plan for dissemination of results. This plan should include expected scholarly publications in journals, AES bulletins/reports, and/or Extension fact sheets/bulletins; planned Extension outreach efforts; and how the funding will be leveraged to attain future external funding and/or improve teaching, outreach, and scholarship efforts.
- Proposal narrative must be limited to 8 pages, following the proposal outline below, and single-spaced. Typeface must be in 12-point font and all pages must have 1-inch margins. Proposal narrative must have page numbers in the upper right-hand corner of each page. Please include a header at the top of each page that identifies your project in a unique manner. This 8-page narrative must include all tables, figures, budget, and budget justification.
- The only information that may be appended to the Cover Page and 8-page narrative is the reference list, a two-page biographical sketch or brief CV for each key person in the project, the Current and Pending Support form for each key person, and the required Stakeholder Input form.
Members from the CHHS Research Committee who have expertise in the subject areas encompassed by the applicants will evaluate and rate the applications received each year based on the evaluation components listed at the end of this document.
If such expertise is not available from the CHHS Research Committee or conflicts of interest exist for one or more committee members, reviewers will be solicited from outside the CHHS Research Committee to ensure adequate research and content expertise is on the review committee. The Committee’s review will focus on the proposal evaluation factors listed below. When the quality of proposals is comparable, priority will be given to proposals from tenure-track assistant professors.
Proposal Evaluation Factors
- Fit of proposed project with the priorities identified in the CHHS CAES Grant Guidelines.
- Quality and appropriateness of the research design.
- Project’s scientific merit and likelihood that the completed research will make a substantial contribution to its area of inquiry and lead to further funding. This includes clear evidence of success in translating prior AES funding into continued funding from other sources in the event that a PI or team seeks additional AES support.
- Evidence of a sound management plan for conducting the research.
- Appropriateness of proposed budget and budget justification.
- Assessment of investigator(s) ability to successfully complete the project as proposed.
- Feasibility and adequacy of the dissemination plan.
- Evidence of appropriate and thoughtful stakeholder input.
Proposal Review Process
The CHHS Research Committee’s peer review of the proposals will be forwarded to the CHHS Executive Committee, who will review the evaluations and make recommendations to the Dean for final approval. The Dean will make the College recommendation for funding to the Director of the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station. At this point in the process, factors that must be considered in funding decisions are:
- The amount of funds available vs. the amount of funds needed to conduct the research
- The possibility of disseminating results through Cooperative Extension
- The opportunity to strengthen interdisciplinary approaches to research
- The use of these funds to increase the researcher(s)’ competitiveness for attaining other sources of extramural funding.
Each applicant will receive feedback on his or her proposal following review by the College. Final authority for funding rests with the CAES Director.
Annual Reviews of Existing Projects
Once a project has been approved and funded, the primary responsibility for annual reviews will be assumed by the Department Head/School Director with monitoring by the College Dean and/or Associate Dean for Research and the Director of CAES. The Department Head may choose to invite members of the Department’s faculty to participate in the review process and provide critique and advice to the department head and principal investigator.
Annually, the principal investigator will submit a progress report on the project to the NIFA reporting system (NRS) for worldwide distribution. Before being finalized, these reports must be reviewed and approved by the Department Head, Dean and/or designee, and CAES Director. The format for this annual report is determined by CAES. If concerns at any level are identified, a special review may be required with the possibility of project reorientation or early termination.
Final Reviews of Terminating Projects
In the terminal year of a project, the principal investigator(s) must prepare a Final NRS report that summarizes the project’s goals, results and outcomes. This summary report is approved by the Department Head, Dean and/or designee, and CAES Director before distribution through NRS.
Proposal Outline and Downloadable Application Materials
- Proposal Cover Page
- Proposal (eight pages)
- Reasons for undertaking work
- Importance of the problem
- Alignment with NIFA, CAES, and CHHS goals/objectives
- Expected outputs and products
- Expected outcomes and impacts
- Previous work and present outlook
- Budget and Budget Justification
- Reasons for undertaking work
- Biosketch for key personnel (two pages per person)
- Current and pending support form for each key person
- Stakeholder input form
2023-2024 Agricultural Experiment Station Grant Recipients
Rachel Lucas-Thompson – Human Development and Family Studies; Preventing Unhealthy Eating and Excess Weight Gain for High-Risk Adolescents Across the State by Incorporating Mindfulness Training into Multiple Sites of a Mentoring Program.
Charlene Van Buiten – Food Science and Human Nutrition; Advancing Targeted Fermentation Approaches for Food Production: Nutritional and Functional Characterization of Sourdough Breads.
2022-2023 Agricultural Experiment Station Grant Recipients
Sonali Diddi – Design and Merchandising; Co-PIs: Dawn Thilmany and Rebecca Hill, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, College of Agricultural Sciences. Visioning a Sustainable Colorado Fiber Systems Collaborative – Implications for Colorado fiber producers and small businesses economic vitality.
Sarah A. Johnson – Food Science and Human Nutrition; Co-PIs in FSHN: Tiffany Weir, Charlene Van Buiten, Marisa Bunning, Co-PIs: Joshua Craver, Jessica Prenni, Adam Heuberger, Mark Uchanski, and Henry Thompson, Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, College of Agricultural Sciences. Advancing Microgreens Research from Plants to Health: Optimizing Nutritional Quality and Bioavailability of Red Cabbage Microgreens.
Megan Mueller – Food Science and Human Nutrition; Co-PI: Rebecca Cleary, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, College of Agricultural Sciences. Determining differences in experiences coping with food insecurity among households above and below the federal poverty threshold.
2021-2022 Agricultural Experiment Station Grant Recipients
Co-PIs: Chris Bell, Ph.D. – Health and Exercise Science and Tiffany Weir, Ph.D. – Food Science and Human Nutrition, Co-I: Greg Dooley, Ph.D., Analytical Toxicology Laboratory. Influence of Cannabidiol on Glucose Tolerance and The Gut Microbiota.
PI: Charlene Van Buiten, Ph.D. – Food Science and Human Nutrition; Co-PI: Sarah A. Johnson, Ph.D., RDN – FSHN. Enhancing the Benefits of Blueberry Polyphenols with Novel Plant Protein Food Matrices.