Research Seed Grant

Overview

OVPRI Research Seed Grants (RSG) are designed to support faculty in establishing new research projects. Funds support acquiring preliminary data, conducting feasibility studies, initiating new community or industry projects, or other critical activities to launch new projects that currently do not have funding support. To be considered a new project, the work should be clearly distinct from current or recently funded work and more than an incremental advancement. The RSG requires the eventual development and submission of an external funding proposal based on the activities funded by this mechanism. Early-career faculty with start-up funding or investigators with significant other support (e.g., gifts, endowed chairs, etc.) are discouraged from using this mechanism. 

Faculty are expected to submit at least one external proposal related to the seed grant within six months of project completion. Additional outcomes, such as publications, conference presentations, and student mentorship are expected as appropriate for the discipline.

Track 1

Track 1 awards provide up to 18 months of funding (up to $25,000) for a single PI (or, in some instances, research teams) seeking to submit an application for external funding at the level of a typical single-investigator award or standard research grant (e.g., NIH R01, NSF single-investigator research grants, NEH collaborative research grant, Large Research Grants from Spencer Foundation). The award requires six-month progress check-in meetings with RDS.

Track 2

Track 2 awards provide up to 2 years of funding with the aim of developing and submitting a single large-scale and/or institutional proposal to an external funder (up to $50,000 total award, with $25K distributed in year one, and the second-year tranche issued based on meeting project milestones). A Track 2 proposal should pursue a funding opportunity that is significantly larger and more complex than a traditional single investigator-initiated research grant for their discipline. Examples would include a multi-project grant, a center grant, or a major collaborative research project (e.g., NIH P50, national coordination hub). Appropriate external funding targets must reflect a strong return on investment of seed funds. The award requires six-month progress check-in meetings with RDS.

Important Dates

  • November 17, 2026 - January 27, 2027: Research Development Staff are available to review drafts before submission
  • February 5, 2027 by 11:59 p.m.: Application Deadline
  • Late April 2027: Faculty applicants notified of the funding decision
  • July 1, 2027 - December 31, 2028 (Track 1): Project Period
  • July 1, 2027 - June 30, 2029 (Track 2): Project Period

Guidelines and Forms

Reach out to Research Development Services if you have questions about this program.

Eligibility

Eligible PIs are tenure-track faculty and career research faculty with the classification of research associate, research professor, research scientist, research engineer, principal research scientist, professor of practice (with primary duties in research), or librarian, and with a 0.50+ FTE appointment during the academic year of the research award.  

Concurrent applications as PI not allowed: Faculty are only permitted to serve as the PI or Co-PI on one RSG application per cycle—applicants may serve as collaborators or team members on additional proposals. 

Ineligible PIs: Faculty who received an OVPRI Research Seed Grant within the past 3 award cycles; Emeritus, retired, courtesy, visiting, instructor, and pro-tem faculty, as well as postdoctoral scholars; Recipients of any competitive award from the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation who have not submitted a final report for their prior award(s). Note: Faculty who are ineligible to serve as PI/Co-PI may serve as key personnel on a project team.

Multiple OVPRI Awards: PIs may not apply to both the Faculty Research Award and the Research Seed Grant programs for the same project. Further, we do not anticipate that PIs will have more than one active OVPRI award at a time except in unusual circumstances (e.g., recipients of Strategic Investment Fund awards).

Budget & Use of Funds

Note: Please contact your Departmental Grant Administrator early to assist you with the budget.

Track 1 Awards: 18-month project, up to $25,000

Track 2 Awards: 24-month project, up to $50,000

Allowable Costs

Funds may be used for costs necessary to plan and execute the proposed research project including:

  • Salary for career research faculty, graduate students, undergraduates, and/or technical personnel under the supervision of the principal investigator
    • For graduate employees, the GE tuition, insurance, and fees will be contributed by the OVPRI, at the College of Arts and Sciences Masters/Doctoral rates, to maximize funds available for your work. 
    • The R&R Budget template used for your submission automatically calculates and auto-populates cells for GE tuition, fees, and insurance. Please work with your budget/grant administrator to ensure your budget only includes Other Payroll Expenses for GEs on row 76
    • If your unit has higher tuition/fee rates, please include the supplemental amount under “OTHER” on the budget template.
  • Core Facilities: for project budgets that include the use of Core Facilities, OVPRI funds will be transferred directly to the Core (funds for all other costs will be transferred to a faculty-managed departmental index for the award). Please clearly show Core Facilities costs on a line of its own under Other Costs
  • Equipment
  • Materials and supplies
  • Contractual services
  • Other Direct Costs: (e.g., external speaker honoraria, additional GE tuition beyond CAS rates
  • Travel: may include funds to support a planning workshop or faculty retreat, to host a distinguished speaker who will help you initiate your project, to visit key resources and/or archives, or to visit a program officer to discuss your project.
  • Faculty summer salary and/or course release (as per departmental policies and guidelines)

Unallowable Costs

  • Replacing current funding from another internal or external source
  • Renovation, remodeling, or alteration of research laboratories or core/shared facilities

Application Instructions & Materials

Application: The Research Seed Grant applications must be submitted using the online submission form with the documents described below.

  1. Application Form (online):
    1. Provide basic information in the form’s text boxes. (Note that the form cannot be saved part way through.)
  2. Proposal Documents: (single-spaced text, Times New Roman, Arial, or other easily readable font, in 11-point or larger, and 1” margins).
    1. Abstract (250 words or less): A summary of the project goals and activities. Please write on a separate page from the Narrative.
    2. Proposal Narrative (3-page limit): Use the Project Narrative template at the end of the guidelines document at the top of this page to complete this component of the application.
    3. Timeline with Milestones (1-page limit): Provide a clear timeline for project activities. Include key milestones that will be used to assess the project’s progress. Use the template at the end of the guidelines document to complete this component of the application.
    4. References Cited (no page limit).
    5. Biographical Sketch or CV (5-page limit per person): All PIs should submit a Biographical Sketch or CV. While there is no specific format, you are encouraged to use the format associated with the funding agency to which you would typically apply (e.g., NSF, NIH, NEH, etc.).
    6. Current and Pending Support (no page limit): For each PI, use the Current and Pending template at the end of the guidelines document to list any current and/or pending funding for any research project at UO, whether or not related to the proposed project. Include any institutional start-up, licensing revenue, and other funds available to the PI for research.
    7. Budget: – Use the SPS R&R 1 to 5 Year Detailed Budget template found on the Forms webpage. Contact your Departmental Grant Administrator early to assist with the SPS Excel budget template as it is very complex.
      1. Note 1: internal awards do not require indirect (F&A) costs. Please set that cell in the template to 0.
      2. Note 2: If you are including graduate employees, see the Budget & Use of Funds section above for details on how to budget for these personnel.
    8. Budget Justification: Use the Budget Justification template at the end of the guidelines document to complete this component of the application.
    9. Unit Head Approval Form: Linked above. Include a signed scanned copy or e-signature confirming your unit head approves of the proposed application, including the budget.
    10. Reviewer Comments on Resubmissions: If you are proposing a project in preparation for a resubmission to a specific funder, please include the reviewer comments on the first submission as an appendix.

Submission Instructions

Complete all components of the application and combine them into a single PDF in the order listed above, with each component on its own page. Save with the naming convention [Contact PI Last Name] _FY 27 Research Seed Grant.

  1. Fill out the basic information in the online application form.
  2. Upload the complete PDF. 
  3. Submit the form.
  4. Each PI may complete the demographic survey (see guidelines for more information).

Review Process and Criteria

RDS will conduct an initial review of applications to ensure that proposals comply with all guidelines. A review panel of faculty will conduct a peer review to evaluate the grant proposals and make recommendations to the Vice President for Research and Innovation. The VPRI makes the final funding decisions and will inform applicants of their funding status.

Below are the criteria used by the review committee when scoring proposals. The committee scores each element on the following scale: 1 – Excellent; 2 - Very Good; 3 – Good; 4 – Fair; 5 - Poor

  1. Research Project:  Weighted 30%
    • How clearly does the applicant describe the research problems or questions?  Does the applicant specify a critical gap in the research to be addressed?
    • Evaluate the novelty of the project. Is the project clearly distinct from current or priorly funded work? Does it represent more than an incremental advancement of existing research programs?
    • Please evaluate the project's significance. What is the strength of the project's intellectual merit?
  2. Research Approach: Weighted 30%
    • Aims/Goals: Assess the project’s aims/goals for clarity and feasibility. How well do the aims address the stated project goals?
    • Methodology: Are the methods appropriate, feasible, and well-justified?
    • Team Roles and Responsibilities: If the project has a team, are the roles and responsibilities of the team members well explained and justified for the proposed research?
  3. Researcher or Research Team: Weighted 7.5%
    • Rate the PI's/ Team's qualifications and experience as they relate to proposed research objectives/goals. Do they have the needed experience to complete the project aims? If they are pivoting to new research directions given the current federal climate, do they have the right partners/advisors/mentors to position them for success?
    • How well does the proposed research align with the PI's/ team members' long-term research agendas and/or future directions fueled by changes in the federal landscape?
    • Assess the past success of PI's/ team members' obtaining external research funding.  If they are pivoting to a new funder given the current federal climate, does their past record of success indicate productivity and ability to submit compelling, competitive proposals?
  4. External Funding Strategy: Weighted 25%
    • Assess the plan for external funding. Does the proposal clearly identify an external funding mechanism or program that aligns with the chosen Track (e.g. a Center-type grant for Track 2, individual research award for Track 1)? How well does the project align with the named funding mechanism(s)?
    • How well does the proposal describe a feasible and appropriate strategy for preparing and submitting the project for external funding?
  5. Timeline and Budget: Weighted 7.5%
    • Assess the proposal timeline. Is it realistic given the research goals and proposal development activities?
    • Evaluate the project budget. Is it well-justified? Is it sufficient to support the development and implementation of the project?
  6. Comment boxes: Please comment on the project’s level of risk in relation to the potential reward of a successful outcome. Consider planned mitigation of risk and the potential transformative nature of the research. Please summarize your review of the proposal’s strengths and weaknesses in 3-4 sentences to be shared with the applicant.

Reporting

A final report is required and due to Research Development Services no later than one month (30 days) after the conclusion of funding. RDS will supply awardees with a link to the final report form in the last quarter of their project.

Past Awards

2026

  • Aaron Galloway, Associate Professor, Department of Biology, Oregon Institute of Marine Biology: Quantifying the ‘landscape of fear’ created by waterborne chemical cues of the predator Pycnopodia helianthoides: implications for kelp forest recovery
  • Nicole Giuliani, Associate Professor, Department of Special Education and Clinical Sciences, Prevention Science Institute: Development of non-restrictive health messages to improve parent feeding and child eating practices
  • Gabriella Lindberg, Assistant Professor, Department of Bioengineering: Redirecting Tumor Invasion: Engineering Neural Guidance Conduits for Glioblastoma Treatment
  • Katelyn McDonough, Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology: Climate, Culture, and Human Resilience at the End of the Ice Age
  • Kyle Reardon, Assistant Research Professor, Department of Special Education and Clinical Sciences, Secondary Special Education and Transition: Refinement and Validation of the Social Emotional Inventory (SEI) for Transition-Age Students with Disabilities

2025

  • Marian Hettiaratchi and Felix Deku, Assistant Professors of Bioengineering, Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact: Design of a Hyaluronic Acid-Based Neural Probe Coating to Mitigate Neuroinflammation and Improve Neural Probe Integration
  • Matthew Polizzotto, Professor of Earth Science, and Lucas Silva, Philip H. Knight Chair of Natural Sciences Environmental Studies and Biology Institute of Ecology and Evolution: Towards Predictive Models for Soil- and Water-Quality Risks in Fire-Prone Landscapes
  • Josh Snodgrass, Professor of Anthropology and Global Health, Zachary DuBois, Associate Professor of Anthropology, and Birdie Shirtcliff, Research Professor of Psychology and Center for Translational Neuroscience: Under the Skin and Into the Bone: Novel bone turnover markers as indices of biological embedding of stress across the lifespan

2024

  • Bill Cresko, Lorry Lokey Chair and Professor of Bioengineering and Insitute of Ecology and Evolution: Generating RNA-seq data of induced Daphnia phenotypes as preliminary data for a full NSF proposal
  • Jennifer Doty, Associate Professor in Counseling Psychology and Human Services and Ariel Williamson, Assistant Professor in the Ballmer Institute and Department of Psychology, Prevention Science Institute: Development of the TECH Check-up Intervention for Adolescents
  • Lauren Hallett, Associate Professor of Biology & Environmental Studies, Jeff Diez, Associate Professor of Biology & Institute of Ecology and Evolution, and Lauren Ponisio, Assistant Professor of Biology, Environmental Science and Institute of Ecology and Evolution: Integrating network theory and coexistence theory to restore diverse plant-pollinator communities
  • Gyoung-Ah Lee, Professor of Anthropology: Investigation of the Incipient Neolithic Culture on Jeju Island, Korea
  • Shawn Lockery, Professor of Biology and Institute of Neuroscience: Unraveling Genetic Pathways of Psychoplasticity and Hallucinogenic Behaviors: A Comparative Approach Using Drosophila and C. elegans