RESOLUTION ON PROPOSED REDUCTIONS
IN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO STUDENTS

WHEREAS, the social and economic well being of the nation is
dependent upon an educated citizenry; and

WHEREAS, the proposed reduction of federal support for education
would severely affect individual students and could well

limit or deny access to higher education even for students
who are currently supporting their education through off-

campus employment; and

WHEREAS, the proposed reductions would have a particularly adverse
impact on minority and non-traditional students; therefore

be it

RESOLVED, that the Faculty Senate on behalf of the Faculty of East
Carolina University requests that the Chancellor entreat
the North Carolina Congressional Delegation to modify the
budget proposal to maintain at least the current levels
of funding for federal student financial aid programs.

 
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH COMMITTEE'S
EVALUATION CRITERIA GUIDELINES

1, Merit criteria for the purpose of evaluating proposals for basic and
applied research and scholarly/creative activities are defined in the
following manner:

a. Research/creative activity has the probability of leading
to significant contributions in the field and/or to the individual's
enrichment and growth.

Research/creative activity is based on evidence of current
knowledge in the field and shows how the proposed research
or creative effort extends, expands, and/or explores new
directions, techniques, processes, or aesthetic concerns.

Research/ creative activity possesses evidence of scholarly
potential, that is, it consists of more than mere date col-
lection or confirmation of easily anticipated results.

d. Research/creative activity is methodologically sound and
within the competency of the principal investigator.

2. Assuming proposals are equally meritorious, the committee will use the
following criteria:

a. Seed money for creative activity/research when in the judgment
of the committee there is a potential for success,

b. Continued or expanded creative activity or research which
has been successful over a period of time,

¢. Proposals which represent reentry into creative activity/

research where in the judgment of the committee there may
not be strong potential for outside funding,

d. Initial research efforts where a faculty member has not been
previously engaged in creative activity or research.

3. Previous award to a faculty member of a grant from the committee
does not prejudice the committee in any way.

4, Contracted copying costs (typing, etc.) are a legitimate expense.

5. A grant is to the project; the individual(s) acts (act) as agent(s)
of the project.

6. Normally the committee will consider awarding money for no more than
two proposals for any one individual during any one call for proposals.

 
=

7. No proposal will be considered if a progress and/or completion report
has not been submitted for a previous committee award.

Procedures for subcommittees of the University Research Committee are
as follows:

a. Subcommittees screen all proposals...

b. In situations where the subcommittee feels a proposal is pro-
mising, but the budget: is unacceptable, the subcommittee chair has

the responsibility of asking the proposal writer to submit in
writing a revised and/or reduced budget. Although the Chair can
indicate in general terms and give general guidance as to the
budget areas with which the committee has difficulty, the actual
specific terms of the revised budget should be left to the wisdom

of the: proposal writer.

Using criteria guidelines, the subcommittee will vote on the
renegotiated budget. :

d. The subcommittees then recommend to the full committee for final

‘ action.

Failure to use the proper application form, failure to adhere to the
instructions given in or with that form, or any alteration of that
form will normally lead to rejection of a proposal.