2024 New Investigator Program Request for Proposals

UW Faculty Review

• Shows innovation and has scientific or educational merit that would predict sustainable external funding beyond the New Investigator Program award
• Appears feasible with high likelihood for acquisition or application of useful data
• Advances the Wisconsin Partnership Program’s 2024–2029 Five-Year Plan Framework
• Has the potential to advance the career development of the applicant

Community Review

• Describes how the project positively impacts health, health care and/or health equity in Wisconsin or the steps necessary to translate discovery to application in a clinical or community setting in alignment with the Wisconsin Partnership Program 2024–2029 Five-Year Plan Framework

UW Faculty Review

Project Objective and Scientific Quality

• Shows innovation and has rigor and outstanding merit that would predict sustainable external funding beyond the New Investigator Program award
• Advances the Wisconsin Partnership Program’s 2024–2029 Five-Year Plan Framework
• Appears feasible with high likelihood for acquisition or application of useful data, and includes details of data analysis that address rigor and reproducibility
• Describes specific metrics to benchmark progress toward stated goals and objectives
• Describes plans for evaluating and disseminating research outcomes or project results
• As applicable, enhances interdisciplinary research or education and fosters collaborations among basic, clinical, education, informatics/data, population, social/behavioral and/or translational scientists or community partners

Applicant Qualifications and Career Development

• Applicant is qualified to successfully execute and oversee the proposed research
• Applicant brings expertise central to the project, and if applicable, there is synergistic value added by Collaborator(s)
• Proposal has the potential to advance the career development of the applicant

Community Review

Wisconsin Health, Health Care and/or Health Equity

• Describes the process by which successful execution of this project positively impacts health care and/or health equity in Wisconsin or the steps necessary to translate discovery to application in a clinical or community setting in alignment with the Wisconsin Partnership Program 2024–2029 Five-Year Plan Framework
• Describes the scope and significance of the health issue being addressed and its relevance in Wisconsin
• As applicable, describes community engagement efforts if it is the central component of overall project goal, and full application includes letters of support from community partners

The preliminary application project abstract provides an overview of the project, including the primary goal, the broader long-term objectives, specific aims, and a description of how the project advances the goals of the New Investigator Program. The project abstract must describe how completion of this project will advance the applicant’s career development, including plans to leverage future funding from federal or other granting agencies. In addition, the project abstract must address whether the Principal Investigator and, if applicable, the Collaborators currently possess or are seeking funding from other funders for the same or a similar project.

The preliminary application project abstract must be uploaded as a PDF and cannot exceed two single-spaced pages with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font. Footnotes, references and up to three tables and/or figures are not included in the page limit and should be inserted after the project abstract.

The application resubmission statement is required if the proposal is a resubmission of a preliminary or full application from a prior funding cycle (see the Application Resubmission section for more information). Provide in the respective text field and in no more than 200 words: the year the original proposal was submitted, the highest stage of review to which the proposal advanced (either preliminary application, full application or interview), a response to the reviewer comments from the applicable funding cycle, and a description of how the current proposal differs from the original submission.

Preliminary applications must include a biographical sketch for the Principal Investigator and the Collaborators in NIH format, including a personal statement, positions, scientific appointments and honors, and contributions to science. Collaborators may submit a resume in lieu of a biographical sketch. Biographical sketches and resumes, each up to five pages in length, must be uploaded as a single PDF.

The Wisconsin Partnership Program is required to operate in accordance with Wisconsin’s public records and open meetings laws. See the Wisconsin Partnership Program terms and conditions for more information.

Indicate whether the preliminary application includes proprietary and/or confidential information, and using the form provided, identify and request confidentiality for any trade secrets or proprietary information.

The abstract is a succinct and accurate description of the proposed project. The abstract must state the application’s broad, long-term objectives and specific aims, design and methods for achieving the stated project goals, and alignment with the goals of the New Investigator Program. The abstract should be informative to other people working in the same or related fields and understandable to a scientifically or technically literate reader. Avoid describing past accomplishments and the use of the first person. The abstract must be uploaded as a PDF not exceeding one single-spaced page with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font.

Impact Statement

The impact statement describes how the outcomes of the project will lead to improvements in health, health care and/or health equity, particularly in the state of Wisconsin. This section should include details on the scope and significance of the health issue being addressed. Applicants must provide a brief synopsis of the project in succinct and plain language without scientific and medical terminology that can be understood by a general, lay audience. The impact statement must be uploaded as a PDF not exceeding one single-spaced page with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font.

Proposal Review Criteria Statement

Prepare a statement addressing the full application review criteria in the Review Criteria section. This statement must be uploaded as a PDF not exceeding two single-spaced pages with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font.

Application Resubmission Statement (if applicable)

A response to the reviewer comments is only required if the proposal is a resubmission of a full application from a prior funding cycle (see the Application Resubmission section for more information). Provide in the respective text field and in no more than 200 words: the year the original proposal was submitted, the highest stage of review to which the proposal advanced (either full application or interview), a response to the reviewer comments from the applicable funding cycle, and a description of how the current proposal differs from the original submission.

The narrative describes the project’s specific aims, significance, approaches, limitations, alternative strategies and expected specific measurable outcomes. This should include details of data analysis that address rigor and reproducibility and specific metrics to benchmark progress toward the stated goals and objectives. The narrative must be uploaded as a PDF not exceeding five single-spaced pages with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font. Footnotes, references and up to three tables or figures are not included in the page limit and should be inserted after the narrative.

Using the required Gantt chart template, list milestones for each project aim and related activities to benchmark progress toward stated goals and objectives.

Using the required budget template, the project budget should clearly indicate how the grant funds will be spent. Expenditures must:

• Be fully justified, reasonable and clearly related to the project’s goals
• Reflect the activities listed in the proposal
• Explain the sources and amounts of any cost shared funds
• Be allowable, reasonable and applicable in accordance with WPP Cost Principles

Requests should be made by expense type (salary and fringe benefits, travel, services, and supplies and other expenses) and should provide sufficient detail for individuals unfamiliar with the project.

Allowable and Unallowable Expenses

Applicants should review the WPP’s Allowable and Unallowable Grant Expenses Policy when creating their project budget.

The project budget must include at least five percent of the Principal Investigator’s full-time equivalent (FTE) compensation. If effort is cost shared by other funding sources, details about the funding sources and amount are required in the cost-share section of the project budget and should also be referenced within the budget justification.

Funds must be used for project-related costs:

• Direct salary support cannot exceed NIH salary limitations
• Support staff expenses, such as salaries and fringe benefits or graduate student tuition
• Personnel costs should be charged directly to the award and not billed internally through a minor auxiliary (Fund 136) project
• Services, such as consultant or contractual services
• Supplies and other expenses, such as participant support costs and equipment (Equipment is defined as items costing more than $5,000 with more than one year of useful life and the maximum amount allowed for equipment is $50,000)

Funds may not be used for:

• Pre-award costs
• Indirect overhead and administrative costs
• Infrastructure
• Lobbying
• Institutional Review Board fees (for more information, see terms and conditions)
• Supplanting (for more information, see Non-Supplanting Policy)

The budget justification describes in detail the major budget line items: salary and fringe benefits, travel, services, and supplies and other expenses. The justification provides specific information about why an expense is necessary to achieve the project goals and objectives. It must also describe the roles and responsibilities of the PI and Collaborators, even if uncompensated, and of additional support staff. The budget justification must be uploaded as a PDF with one-inch margins and a minimum 11-point font.

Full applications must include a biographical sketch for the Principal Investigator and the Collaborators in NIH format, including a personal statement, positions, scientific appointments and honors, and contributions to science. Collaborators may submit a resume in lieu of a biographical sketch. Biographical sketches and resumes, each up to five pages in length, must be uploaded as a single PDF.

UW School of Medicine and Public Health Department Chair Nomination Letter

The application must include a nomination letter from the Principal Investigator’s UW School of Medicine and Public Health department chair. This letter is a critical component of the full application content review. In addition to describing the applicant’s (PI) qualifications, the letter is required to:

• Provide evidence of compensated protected time for this project
• Address departmental support and resources, such as facilities or other appropriate resources, for the successful applicant
• Describe the impact that a New Investigator Program award would have on advancing the applicant’s career development

There is no limit on the number of nominations from each department chair. The nomination letter must be uploaded as a PDF. There is no page limit for the letter.

Letters of Commitment

Letters of commitment from the Collaborators and budgeted consultants (i.e., consultants included in the project budget) are required and must show evidence of the collaboration with specific details about how they or their organizations will contribute to the project. The letters must be uploaded as a single PDF.

Letters of Support

Applicants may include up to five letters from individuals or groups other than the Collaborators and budgeted consultants (letters of commitment are required from them), including those who informed development of the project and/or are impacted by the project, to demonstrate support for the project. The letters must be uploaded as a single PDF.

Optional materials are limited to essential study materials, such as consent forms, which may be submitted for use by the reviewers at their discretion. Such materials are limited to no more than 10 pages and are not to be used to circumvent the narrative page limits. These materials must be uploaded as a single PDF.

Indicate whether the project requires approval by the Animal Care and Use Committee, the Madison Campus Biological Safety Committee, UW–Madison Institutional Review Board, and/or the University Radiation Safety Committee. See the Wisconsin Partnership Program terms and conditions for more information.

Complete the required non-supplanting questionnaire by responding to the questions and providing explanations as necessary. The non-supplanting questionnaire must be signed by the PI. See the supplanting review section for more information on supplanting.

The Wisconsin Partnership Program operates in accordance with Wisconsin’s public records and open meetings laws. See the Wisconsin Partnership Program terms and conditions for more information.

Indicate whether the full application includes proprietary and/or confidential information, and using the form provided, identify and request confidentiality for any trade secrets or proprietary information.

Technical Review: Partnership Program staff will review each preliminary application to confirm applicant eligibility and to ensure that all requirements are met. Preliminary applications that do not comply with the eligibility or submission requirements will not be reviewed, and the applicant will be notified.

Content Review: The Preliminary Application Review Panel, which is advisory to the PERC and includes UW faculty and community representatives, will review the preliminary applications. Each preliminary application will be reviewed by at least two University of Wisconsin faculty reviewers and at least one community reviewer. Faculty reviewers typically are from SMPH basic and clinical science departments and other UW–Madison schools and colleges with expertise in biomedical research, health services research, health policy, community-based population health research and/or education. Community reviewers typically are from Wisconsin-based non-profit community organizations, 4K-12 schools or districts, health systems, or tribal, state or local government entities with expertise in community health, health policy and/or health care. The reviewers will independently review assigned applications based on the preliminary application review criteria. The ranking and written critiques of the preliminary applications by the Review Panel will be provided to PERC to inform its selection of the applications that warrant further development as full applications.

Applicants will be notified by September 10, 2024 whether they are being invited to submit a full application. The notification will include the de-identified reviewer comments.

Technical Review: Partnership Program staff will review each full application to ensure that all requirements are met. Full applications that do not comply with the submission requirements will not move to the content review, and the applicant will be notified.

Content Review: The Full Application Review Panel, which is advisory to the PERC and includes UW faculty and community representatives, will review the full applications. Each full application will be reviewed by two University of Wisconsin faculty reviewers and one community reviewer assigned based on the content and objectives of the proposal. Faculty reviewers typically are from SMPH basic and clinical science departments and other UW–Madison schools and colleges with expertise in biomedical research, health services research, health policy, community-based population health research and/or education. Community reviewers typically are from Wisconsin-based non-profit community organizations, 4K-12 schools or districts, health systems, or tribal, state or local government entities with expertise in community health, health policy and/or health care. The reviewers will independently review assigned applications based on the full application review criteria. The ranking and written critiques of the full applications by the Review Panel will be provided to PERC. The PERC will select the finalists to present their proposals to the committee.

Applicants will be informed by December 10, 2024 of whether they are being invited to present their proposal to the PERC. The de-identified reviewers’ comments will be provided to each applicant.

PERC Review: Finalist presentations will take place at the TBD (January 13, 2025) PERC meeting. The presentations by the Principal Investigator typically take place between 4 and 7 p.m. CDT and are fully virtual over Zoom. Collaborators may join to respond to questions. No exceptions to this date will be made.

The PERC will make a final decision to select the grant award recipients based on rank, presentation by the PI, discussion of the application and review materials, additional information from the project team (if requested by PERC or WPP’s Administrative Leadership Team) and the project’s alignment with the goals of the New Investigator Program. Applicants will be notified of whether they are selected for a grant award no later than January 31, 2025.

Supplanting Review: Supplanting means to replace, to take the place of, or to supersede. The Wisconsin Partnership Program prohibits any funds from being awarded that will supplant funds or resources otherwise available to applicants from other sources for the proposed project.

PERC’s award decisions are conditional on a review of non-supplanting by the WPP Administrative Leadership Team.

Applicants selected for awards by PERC are required to provide information for review by the Wisconsin Partnership Program:

• An up-to-date non-supplanting questionnaire
• Principal Investigator’s Other Support information in NIH format with three sections: Project/Proposals by status (Active and Pending); In-Kind Contributions; Overlap
  • Principal Investigators must sign their Other Support page

The committee’s decisions at each stage of the review are final and cannot be appealed.