RESEARCH COORDINATING COUNCIL
November 17, 2005
Brian Attebery Phil Blick Steve Byers
Chris Daniels Deb Easterly Larry Ford
Dianne Horrocks Mike McCurry Fred Risinger
Christina Rosen Galvin
Alternates: Cyndy Kelchner for Beth Hudnall Stamm, Karen Kearns for Kay Flowers, Greg Green for Susan Swetnam
Absent: John Bennion, Jim Bigelow, Trent Clegg, Linda Deck, Frank Harmon, Richard Inouye, Lori Johnson, Catherine Kriloff, Skip Lohse, Subbaram Naidu, Al Strickland, Keith Weber, Paul Zelus
Visitors: Janet Moravek and Randy Gaines
Dr. Ford declared that we have a quorum present with Chris Daniels sitting in for Jim Bigelow. Dr. Ford called the meeting to order.
I. Approval of Minutes
Dr. Ford asked for any changes or corrections to the minutes. Dr. Ford requested a motion to approve the minutes. Dianne Horrocks moved to accept the minutes, Chris Daniels seconded the motion. Motion passed (Memorandum #165).
II. Introduction of all members
Dianne Horrocks introduced Janet Moravek as the new Grant/Sponsored Programs Specialist in the Office of Sponsored Programs.
A. Faculty Research Committee (FRC) – Greg Green reported that 14 proposals were received totaling $63,177. This is fewer proposals than usual. The committee will meet on December 2nd to discuss the proposals and December 9th to award the proposals. The committee met on November 4th to discuss the current method used to calculate the proposal score. With the extra two points it can create a situation in which faculty who have received FRC awards in the past are at a disadvantage, making it difficult for them to receive another award. The committee agreed to not agree at this time and see if it continues to be a problem. The old formula will be used for the proposals for this semester and the committee will try to have a new formula in place for the spring semester.
B. Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee (GSRSC) – Deb Easterly
reported that the committee will meet on November 18th to review proposals. The committee received 34 proposals this semester. This is up substantially from previous fall semesters. The committee will not be able to fund all the proposals received. If a proposal was not funded, a graduate student can resubmit the same proposal the next semester.
C. Undergraduate Student Research Committee (UgRC) – Fred Risinger reported that the committee received 18 proposals – 6 travel and 12 research totaling over $22,000. They have a budget of $10,000. This represents twice as many proposals as last fall. The committee partially funded 3 travel proposals, fully funded 4 research proposals and partially funded 3 research proposals.
D. Federal Initiatives – Dr. Ford reported that Foreign Operations – soft earmarks that includes IRH-training for stress relieving issues for relief workers with disasters, has an excellent shot of getting money. The Energy and Water Bill passed - $2M IAC advanced fuel cycle, $1M IAC laser upgrade and $3M joint for INSE work with all 3 universities and the lab. Commerce State Justice - $500,000 for GIS Center, and $500,000 for Nancy Glenn’s BCAL Program. Labor and Human Services passed with no earmarks (included in those earmarks was $2M for TeleHealth/Institute of Rural Health and $500,000 the Dental Hygiene Masters Program and $500,000 for the Museum of Natural History). The Defense bill is not likely to be passed by tomorrow, November 18th, the end date for the continuing resolution. There will need to be a continuing resolution for another month. In the Defense Bill there is $1M for the Distance Learning upgrade. We will be lucky if ISU receives half of the $12M we were hoping for in this funding cycle.
IV. Council Business
A. Description of Nine Core Instructional Areas of Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)
Discussion on policies for data management and authorship – Deb Easterly
The committee discussed the following points concerning RCR:
· Improve policies and institute policies that everyone can understand (written policies, not assumed policies)
· Ensure that all issues are covered
· Look for best practices and implement at ISU
· Mentoring is crucial starting at the undergraduate level
· Maintain as much flexibility as possible
Please discuss this matter with your colleagues and we will further address these matters in the next meeting. Deb Easterly will get the information that Fred Risinger has. Deb will then put together a survey to send faculty to see where the university and individuals departments stand on these issues and what we need to address.
B. Follow-up report on the ORI Conference – Deb Easterly reported that 105 people attended the Research Integrity Conference held October 20-21. Attendance on the second day was as good as the first day. Good comments were received from conference participants.
C. Report on the number of Distinguished Researcher nominations received -- extend the deadline? – Deb Easterly reported that we received 11 nominations which is a good turn out. In the past, we have had to solicit nominations. There is no need to extend the deadline.
D. Discussion on indirect (F&A) costs distribution – Dr. Ford
The indirect costs distribution is currently broken down as follows:
45% central administration
53% back to the generating unit
Currently, the Office of Research does not get a cut of the indirects.
Dr. Ford made the following recommendation at President’s Staff meeting:
30% central administration
30% Office of Research
35% back to the generating unit
The departments said that they would not be able to get by if this were to happen.
At Deans’ Council it was suggested that Dr. Ford bring this matter to the RCC for discussion.
Dr. Ford then suggested the following:
30% central administration
15% Office of Research
50% back to the generating unit
The council would like to know what the central administration portion is actually used for. Dr. Ford also suggested that we wait until we switch over to a modified total direct cost method of calculating indirect costs before any changes are made in IDC distribution.
Cyndy Kelchner brought up the Research Computing Subcommittee. Should this committee fall under the new IT governing structure or under RCC? The committee feels it should fall under the IT governing structure.
The meeting scheduled for December 15th has been canceled. The committee will meet again in January 2006
Meeting adjourned ~4: 10 p.m.