Pre-Award (Applying for Funding)

Proposal Process

Staff members in the Office of Sponsored Projects Administration collaborate closely with Principal Investigators to navigate the complexities of securing sponsored research funding. While it is primarily the responsibility of the PI to ascertain that the proposal meets the specific requirements of a given request for proposals (RFP), OSPA staff work hard to ensure proposals meet university, sponsor, state and federal requirements and to transmit complete proposal packages via various sponsor submission portals/mechanisms.

Submitting proposal information according to the timeline described below enables OSPA staff to thoroughly vet applications, check components against solicitation/RFP requirements and confirm the upload of many required files via the appropriate sponsor-required mechanisms. In addition, adherence to the timeline allows for the proper management of any compliance concerns (human subjects research, export controls, etc.).

Note: Our office cannot guarantee submission unless all required documents are received in the office three business days prior to the submission deadline.

Proposal Submission Deadlines

What are the requirements for a pre-proposal?

A pre-proposal (commonly referred to as white paper, concept paper, letter of intent, etc.) is a condensed description of a proposed project sometimes required by a sponsor in advance of the submission of a full proposal.

A pre-proposal is required to be routed through OSPA for institutional approval prior to submission if it includes any of the following:

• Includes a line item budget
• Includes a commitment of university resources (e.g. cost-share)
• Requires the university to agree to terms and conditions

Pre-proposals that include any of the above factors are subject to the same deadlines and required approvals as noted in the proposal overview flowchart (see above). This includes, but is not limited to, a signed proposal checklist. Pre-proposals that require OSPA review must be submitted through the Proposal Notification System.

Pre-proposals that require institutional endorsement/submission but none of the above factors must be submitted to OSPA three full business days in advance of the agency deadline. 

A signed OSPA checklist is not required for pre-proposals that do not include any of the above noted factors.

OSPA requests faculty to send us copies of all concept papers, letters of intent and pre-proposals. Having the preliminary document in our files will expedite the processing of a subsequent full proposal. 

Faculty submitting pre-proposals and concept papers via an agency’s web portal should use ospa@siu.edu and the information found for the institutional contact (see below). Please check with your department and/or college for internal requirements.

Pre-Proposal Decision Tree

Limited submission opportunities are funding opportunities where the sponsor has placed a limit on the number of applications that may be submitted from one institution. To facilitate a fair decision process when the number of interested researchers exceeds sponsor limitations, any SIUC researcher who wishes to apply to a limited submission opportunity will need to follow the procedures listed below.¹

Notification of intent to apply:

Interested researchers must submit a Proposal Notification.²

Internal Review Process:

• At least 60 calendar days prior to the sponsor deadline:
  • If the number of notifications is within the program limit, OSPA will notify researchers of their eligibility to submit the opportunity and initiate standard proposal review procedures.
  • If the number of notifications received by OSPA exceeds the sponsor/program limit, an internal pre-proposal review will be required. This review process and final selection will be made by a review committee or the Vice Chancellor for Research.
  • OSPA will:
    • Notify researchers who completed both steps listed above of the necessity for internal review and selection.
    • Inform investigators of the details for completing, and deadline for submitting, the pre-proposal (see below). Provide assistance with pre-proposal submission, receive all pre-proposals and coordinate the internal review and selection process with the Limited Submission Committee and/or Vice Chancellor for Research.
    • Communicate the Limited Submission Committee/VCR decision to all interested researchers.
    • Initiate the next steps for review and submission to the sponsor with those selected to submit to the program. 
  • One or more researchers may be offered alternate status for submission by the committee/VCR. If the committee’s first selection declines or withdraws their proposal from consideration, alternates will immediately be invited by OSPA to proceed with their proposal. 
  • Pre-Proposal Requirements:
    • Two-page project description describing the scope of the project, expected/intended outcomes, the personnel involved and existing resources.
    • One-page budget.
    • Two-page curriculum vitae.
  • After the 60 calendar day deadline is reached:
    • If the number of proposal notifications received is less than the program limit, notifications will be honored until the limit is reached.

Submissions without approval:

If a PI submits a proposal without following these procedures and does not obtain approval to submit, the university reserves the right to withdraw the application.

¹. The Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research reserves the right to initiate a different review and/or selection process if the parameters of the opportunity warrant such a change, e.g. institutional commitments, nominations, etc.

². The proposal notification is required for all submission types, e.g. letter of intent, pre-proposal, full proposal, etc.

Research project specialists (RPS) must review a draft budget prepared on the OSPA budget spreadsheet; see the link below. This can help you ensure that the budget will conform to university fiscal policies, reducing or eliminating the need for last-minute revisions. Draft budgets should be sent (preferably via email) to your RPS at least 10 full business days before the proposal deadline. All final proposal budgets must be reviewed at OSPA before the institutional signature can be obtained and the proposal submitted to the agency.

The budget should reflect the principle of "best-effort" work within the specified time frame. Once the budget becomes part of an award agreement, it represents a legal commitment. Every budget expense must be supported by the proposal narrative. When you write your budget justification, you will need to refer back to the proposal to justify how you arrived at your budget figures: why given personnel are needed at the percentages indicated, how new equipment will be used, why you are requesting travel amounts, supplies, etc.

View/download the Budget Spreadsheet.

• Categories
• Rates
• Cost Share
• Indirect Costs

Whether the grant application will be submitted electronically or not, you will circulate a complete copy of the proposal (agency forms and OSPA budget) with a Proposal Checklist to your chair and dean for review and signatures and then to OSPA for review.

The Proposal Checklist must be signed by the PI, by any co-principal investigators named on the project, and by the school directors (or equivalent) and deans (or equivalent) of these individuals before it is submitted to OSPA.

In addition, the proposal checklist must also be signed by faculty and staff contributing time (non-PI/PD personnel) to the project and by the appropriate chairs of these individuals. OSPA may make exceptions on a case by case basis (e.g. positions located in 100% grant funded centers).

If the proposal involves SIU contributions outside the department and college, the person with fiscal authority for the contribution also must sign the checklist. Exception: If the Vice Chancellor for Research makes a commitment of matching funds, he will sign the matching funds request form; he does not sign the checklist.

OSPA provides the final review and the official institutional signature on the application itself for all grant/contract proposals. Contact your OSPA research project specialist if you have any questions about the form.

Subawards are issued by the university for collaborative grant activities involving personnel at other institutions. The subrecipient will be responsible for managing the technical and administrative aspects of its part of the project being performed for the university under the prime award. Subawards are not issued for the procurement of normal, routine services or goods, these are handled through Procurement Services. See the table below for assistance in determining whether the situation requires a subaward or is a vendor relationship.

If SIU is included as a subrecipient in another institution’s proposal, the following must be provided and approved by OSPA prior to submission to the lead institution:

• Completed and signed proposal/award checklist
• Approved OSPA budget and justification
• Clear scope of work (for SIU portion only)
• Any other documents required by the lead institution and/or funding agency

Upon receipt of these documents, OSPA will provide a signed letter of intent to participate in the project (if funded) to the lead institution. OSPA must receive these documents one business day before the date required by the lead institution.

If you are including a subaward in your proposal, the following must be included in the proposal package:

• Justification for subawardee selection (clearly identified in the proposal text).
• Subaward total costs as a line item in the OSPA and agency budget. When preparing the overall project budget, include the total costs of each subaward, including the appropriate subcontractor’s indirect costs, as one line item in the OSPA budget.   
• An approved formal proposal from the subrecipient, which must include:
  • A letter of intent signed by the authorized official of the subrecipient’s institution.
  • A clear scope of work to be performed by the subrecipient.
  • A corresponding budget and budget justification on the same forms as required by the prime agency.

When required, subrecipients may need to provide additional information, such as:

• Biographical sketches of key personnel
• Current and pending support of key personnel
• Representations and certifications
• Detailed budget information
• Negotiated facilities and administrative cost agreement

The review/approval process applies to all grant/contract proposals. It also applies to preproposals or other preliminary grant applications, such as concept papers, if they involve budget figures or a commitment of university resources. Some noncompeting renewal grant applications also require institutional approval, depending on agency requirements; check the program guidelines.

OSPA Signature Authority

Grant proposals and awards are processed through the Office of Sponsored Projects Administration. (See the policy on Institutional Submission of Grant/Contract Application and Acceptance of Awards.) All grant proposals, whether electronic or hard-copy, must be reviewed and approved by OSPA before going (in draft or final form) to the funding agency. Only the OSPA director or an approved designee has institutional signature authority for the grant application.

Even when a funding agency's electronic system gives principal investigators (PIs) the authority to submit their own proposals, OSPA approval is required first. Likewise, proposals that do not require an institutional signature still must be approved by OSPA before the PI submits the proposal to the agency. This is also the case when SIU is a subcontractor with another institution.

Proposal submission responsibilities:

It is always the responsibility of the principal investigator to assure that all requirements for submission of the proposal (and any pre-proposal or letter of intent), both internally and to the funding agency, are met. 

• Roles and Responsibilities
• Deadlines
• Levels of Review
• Methods of Submission

Proposal Updates

Agencies may request proposal updates for a number of reasons:

• Missing information or errors
• Budget revisions
• Scope of work revision
• Change in personnel

If you are contacted by a potential funding agency to update your proposal, please contact the OSPA Research Project Specialist assigned to your area to assist you with this process. 

Proposal Resubmissions

If your proposal is turned down by a funding agency, request the reviewers' comments and seek feedback from the program officer. If the agency discourages resubmission, consider finding an alternative funding source or modifying your project idea or approach. The program officer and your colleagues may be able to give you suggestions in this regard.

If the agency is encouraging resubmission, please check agency guidelines for resubmission procedures. Be sure to respond specifically to reviewers' comments in the revised proposal. Point out changes made to strengthen the proposal in the areas judged to be weak, and clarify information that may have been misinterpreted in the initial review. You can further help your cause by working closely with the program officer, being willing to rethink aspects of the project based on the agency's feedback and being as objective as possible in revising the proposal.

See Resources for additional information.

When the university submits proposals to external sponsors and accepts awards for sponsored projects, legal responsibility and accountability for the conduct of the sponsored project and for compliance with all relevant policies reside with OSPA as the university’s agent in these matters.

The principal investigator (PI) of a sponsored project is the primary individual responsible for technical compliance, completion of programmatic work, fiscal stewardship of sponsor funds and compliance with administrative requirements of the project. Thus, the university must ensure that individuals serving as PI have the technical competence and administrative capability to carry out a sponsored project.

Who Can Serve as a Principal Investigator?

Category 1

Any individual who holds one of the following positions with a 50% or greater appointment, may be identified as a principal investigator for sponsored activities: 

• Tenure Track Faculty: Assistant professor, associate professor and professor
• Research Faculty: Assistant research professor, associate research professor and research professor
• Project/Program directors
• Directors/Associate directors
• Senior scientist

Category 2

The following positions require prior approval (see below) to serve as a principal investigator. These individuals may be identified as a co-principal investigator for sponsored projects if one of the individuals listed in Category 1 is named as the lead principal investigator on the project:  

• Assistant/Associate professor of practice, instructor and lecturer (also known as non-tenure track)
• Non-Research professional staff
• Emeritus faculty

Prior Approval
Individuals listed in Category 2 may make a request for prior approval using the PI Prior Approval Request Form. Approval must be obtained prior to routing a proposal for internal approvals and a copy of the approval document must be included with the proposal routing package.

Category 3

Any individual who holds one of the following positions may not be identified as a principal investigator but may be identified as a co-principal investigator for sponsored projects if one of the individuals listed in Category 1 is named as the lead Principal Investigator on the project:

• Adjunct faculty
• Researcher (I, II, III)
• Assistant scientist/Associate scientist
• Postdoctoral fellow
• Graduate student
• Undergraduate student

Note: In some cases a sponsor’s guidelines may require these positions to be listed as the PI. In this case, the application will list this position as PI but the Proposal Checklist must have a Category 1 individual listed as the PI. This person will be responsible for supervising all project activities.

Category 4

An individual who holds one of the following positions may not be identified as a principal investigator or co-principal investigator for sponsored projects under any circumstances:

• Visiting professors
• Faculty affiliates (e.g. those with zero-percent appointments)