΢ÃÜȦ

All funders provide guidance on rules and expectations for a proposal at the agency and program level. Below is an outline of the general process for developing and submitting a proposal to an external sponsor.

Common Proposal Timelines

1. Announcement. RFPs, PAs, or foundation application guidelines are commonly announced on sponsor websites or through centralized services such as grants.gov (see Find Funding page). Each signifies that a sponsor has an identified area of interest to fund. These documents provide instructions on how to compete for available funds.
2. Key submission information. Announcements provide critical information such as submission instructions, deadlines and eligibility requirements (including collaborations and cost-share). Proposals deviating from sponsor instructions or missing deadlines are typically rejected without review.
3. Proposal development. Requires tailoring a specific project or research idea to sponsor parameters, guidance, and funding priorities. Institutional approval must be secured prior to submission. OSP should be notified of the submission deadline and level of assistance required from the office.
4. Proposal writing. PIs draft the main programmatic narrative due to their subject expertise, with support as required. Specific questions identified by the RFP as those that reviewers will ask or by which they will rate the proposal should be addressed.
5. Budget development. OSP is available to collaborate on budget development. At minimum, this process should be coordinated with OSP.
6. Compliance and other requirements. OSP can direct faculty to appropriate compliance committees such as IRB (research with human participants), IACUC (animal welfare), or IBC (recombinant DNA). OSP, on behalf of the college, will secure internal and/or external certifications and assurances, as required through the RFP.
7. Proposal submission. OSP will submit the proposal or collaborate on the submission process, as determined in advance.
8. Post-submission. The PI should send OSP a copy of the final proposal and should obtain reviewer comments if the proposal is denied. Addressing comments and resubmitting to the same or another funder greatly increases chances of being funded.

Depending on funder guidelines, some or​ all of the following may be required in a proposal:

1. Cover letter is typically required for private foundation proposals. In one-page, it should provide a clear, concise overview of the college and the amount and purpose of the request. It should also state how the proposal conforms to funder's mission, goals and funding priorities. ()
2. Executive summary or abstract states the project description clearly, usually in less than two pages. It includes the applicant, establishes credibility, need or problem addressed, objectives, methods, total project cost and amount being requested. When applicable, sustainability and collaborators or partnerships should be included.
3. Background describes the college and applicant, establishing the credibility of each. It includes college mission and history (template for ΢ÃÜȦ proposals available on our forms & templates page), relevant facilities and/or equipment, PI qualifications, evidence of relevant accomplishments, long-range goals and current similar programs and/or activities. Reasons for including collaborators and their credibility should be included.
4. Need statement states why the research or project is necessary, why now, and why the applicant and college are best suited to do the work. Supporting statistical data should be included.
5. Program goal(s) and objectives include proposed project outcome, accomplishments, or changes realized, addressing the stated needs. Include the overall goal(s) and specific objectives or ways in which the goal(s) will be met, with at least one goal stated for each problem or need.
6. Methods describe the process by which objectives will be achieved. Include a chronological description, actions to accomplish objectives, impact of proposed activities, how they will benefit the target population and/or community, who will carry them out, a timeline of activities, and long-term strategies for sustaining the project. (Items 5 and 6 may be presented in a table format for clarity and to save space, if necessary.)
7. Evaluation measures performance or results of the project. State who will be conducting the evaluation, at what point(s) in the project, and when and how results will be used. Evaluation is particularly important in pilot or demonstration projects and may require up to 50% of the project budget. If using external evaluators, they should be identified and brought into the process as early as possible.
8. Dissemination of results may include publication, program replication, and/or other means. State that the funder's support of the project will be acknowledged in conformance with their wishes.
9. Budget is described in detail in the next section.
10. Supplemental information such as letters of support and letters of commitment (from key personnel indicating willingness to participate in the project) show broad support for, and participation in, the program. Assurances, certifications, college financials and other information may be required and is typically obtained by OSP at PI request.​​

Many sponsors request college identifying codes or common data that apply to all applications. Please contact OSP if the correct code cannot be found.

Application Information

Applicant Name or ​Organization

΢ÃÜȦ

Applicant Address and Telephone

Office of Sponsored Programs
204 Forman Center
600 Mount Pleasant Avenue
Providence, RI 02908
Phone: 401-456-8228

Official Authorized to Sign for ΢ÃÜȦ

Nadia Petrovic, Interim Director​
Office of Sponsored Programs
Phone: 401-456-8778
E-mail: npetrovic@ric.edu

Business Official or Financial Officer for ΢ÃÜȦ

Mary West, Director
Grant Accounting
Phone: 401-456-8197
Email: mwest@ric.edu

Legislative Districts for ΢ÃÜȦ

Congressional: Second district, Rhode Island (RI-002 for grants.gov)
RI Representative District 06
Visit  and type in ΢ÃÜȦ's street address and zip code to confirm current government officials (600 Mt. Pleasant Avenue, 02908).
RI Senate District 07

Public Reporting

΢ÃÜȦ does not publish an annual report. ΢ÃÜȦ is not required to file a Form 990.

Common Rates/Documents

Indirect Cost/F&A Rates

Effective July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2028
On-Campus all programs: 44.6% of Salaries and Wages
Off-Campus all programs: 26% of Salaries and Wages
Determining the appropriate F&A rate depends on where the majority of work will take place. If more than 50% of a project is performed off-campus, the off-campus rate will apply to the entire project.
Fringe benefits are not included in the calculation base.
View the official F&A rate agreement.

Fringe Benefit Rates

Standard fringe benefit costs for full-time ΢ÃÜȦ employees may be estimated at 42% of salary level.

Tuition and Fees information

This information is available via the Bursar's Office website.

Salary and Fringe Information

Salary and fringe rates for a proposal budget should be secured through the OSP office.

Template Documents for Proposals

For templates, please visit our Forms & Templates page.

Human Participants in Research

For more information, please visit the Institutional Review Board (IRB) website.​

Specific questions on college policy and procedures relating to the use of recombinant DNA and/or biohazardous materials should be directed to:
Dr. Emily Cook, Chair
irb@ric.edu
΢ÃÜȦ

Animal Care and Use

For more information, please visit the Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee (IACUC) website.

Specific questions on College policy and procedures relating to the use and care of animals in research should be directed to:
Dr. Eric Hall, Chair, IACUC
chairIACUC@ric.edu
΢ÃÜȦ

Recombinant DNA and/or Biohazardous Material

For more information, please visit the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) ·É±ð²ú²õ¾±³Ù±ð.​

Specific questions on College policy and procedures relating to the participation of human beings in research should be directed to:
Dr. Rebeka Merson, Chair
IBCchair@ric.edu
΢ÃÜȦ

Information on Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

Rhode Island has chosen not to participate in the intergovernmental review process, and therefore do not have a Single Point Of Contact (SPOC). If you are located within a State that does not have a SPOC, you may send application materials directly to a Federal awarding agency.

Translation Chart Showing Credit-Hour Offload Versus Percent Effort Versus Person-Months

Part of the process of writing and submitting proposals is being declined by a sponsor. In fact, proposals are turned down more often than they're approved.

A negative response should not discourage you from continuing with your project idea. A faltering economy and increased competition have combined to drive down already low proposal approval rates. Some federal agencies award fewer than 10% of submitted proposals, particularly on first-time submissions.

When a proposal is declined, OSP wants to work with the PI to resubmit to the same sponsor, if possible, and/or to identify and submit to new ones. Resubmissions that incorporate reviewer's comments have increased chances of being funded, particularly with federal agencies.

If a proposal is not funded and the PI wishes to continue seeking funding, OSP recommends that:

• The PI request a copy of reviewer comments. This is a common and usually standardized, published practice with federal sponsors. Private foundations typically provide verbal feedback through a staff person. Discussing the proposal with a foundation staff person also increases sponsor knowledge of the project.
• The PI share these comments with OSP. OSP is always seeking information on ways proposal submissions can be improved. The office also looks to identify similar comments across proposals. This information can be very useful in all future submissions.
• The PI meet with OSP to discuss comments and identify a plan, timeline and potential sponsors for resubmission.
• The PI revises the proposal to address reviewer comments. These are an excellent source of feedback that give insight into the sponsor's funding priorities. Resubmissions that incorporate reviewer comments have a significantly higher chance of being funded.

Recognizing that proposals are often declined and accepting this as part of the process of getting funded is vital. With much of the work already done to develop and submit a proposal, subsequent resubmissions require much less effort and may offer great reward.

OSP will be happy to assist you in re-focusing the proposal, re-building it, re-branding it or simply re-directing the request to a more appropriate funding source. ​​