An Endowed Summer Science Research Community

Last updated : Saturday, October 02, 2004 at 15:50:11  EST

The current draft of the internal summary document (aka Charlie's version) is here. This version is designed for internal audiences.

The current draft of the external summary document (aka Paul's version) is here. This version is designed for external audiences, e.g. prospective donors.

The current draft of the full proposal is here. It needs a significant amount of work.

If you have any comments, ideas, prose, etc. get in touch with the Science Friday group (currently PaulO, MattP, LoriW, MarkS, and CharlieP). The email address for the group is sci-fri at cs.earlham.edu

The basic question is what information do we need to add/modify/delete to make this a reasonable part of a proposal to Keck, Merck, Research Corp, and Earlham's Capital Campaign. Are there other places to consider?

Notes, questions, etc. for the full proposal text and the summary

• The Research Community Program section is weak at best.
• Develop an executive summary of the full proposal for external audiences.
• Develop a section that highlights 3 or 4 current research projects of the sort that this fund would support. Focus on ? Include a list of gear, stipends, etc. that each project is shopping for?
• Add majors and minors in each department and year to the list of people doing research in each department.
• Add academic year research projects to the list of people doing research in each department.
• Check the budget numbers, they were generated about 3 years ago.
• We discussed including money for release time during the academic year. This would augment Ford-Knight so that if a faculty had an active research project with students they could be released for one course/year. Is 50% participation reasonable for the purposes of budget calculations?
• Major items to add
  • Descriptions of 3 or 4 current research projects, focus on interdisciplinary work.
  • Student, faculty, and student/faculty awards as an appendix
    • SIAM
      • All those student awards from math
      • B+T GROMACS poster, best in show at PPC04 in SFO
    • Others?
  • Student, faculty, and student/faculty meetings, presentation titles as an appendix.
  • Student, faculty, and student/faculty publications as an appendix.
  • Recent grant awards
    • Lilly
    • AVD
    • Mark's PRF
    • NSF (Chemistry)
• Should we mention that we are going to start looking for money to build a new science complex?
• Potential sources of ideas, prose, statistics, etc.
  • Second HHMI grant
  • Letter's we have sent to Keck over the past 4 years or so
  • The science "brag sheet", what's the state of it now?

Notes, questions, etc. for the process

• Is it time to re-visit Keck?
• Is it possible to give Alums the ability to direct their contributions to this new fund as part of the upcoming solicitation related to the Lilly match? No.
• It's important that this new effort not be interpreted as to raise the expectations for publication by faculty nor should participation in this program be required in any way.
• What relationship does this have to the scientific equipment fund that Doug, Len, and Dick have spoken to us about? New purchases, maintenance, upgrades?
• Can this fund be a high priority item for the next capital campaign? Yes, although much work remains in terms of a full description, etc.
• Mattews' Gift
  • Is the Matthews money actually in the endowment now? Who should we ask?
  • We need to speak with the Matthews about the coverage of their gift. Done, it's ok to use their funds across all natural science departments.
  • When is the last time we sent them an update? Who does this?

What happens when we get it

• How to administer the application and follow-up processes and how to manage the day-to-day aspects of it? Amy can probably help us out quite a bit here with her Hughes experience.