Some of the most dramatic cuts by category are:

Arts and Humanities:

The budget plan proposes to eliminate entirely the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and severely cut the existing $148 million budget of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). This will mean that 40% of the NEA funds that are channeled to states and matched will no longer offer real participation to those who otherwise have no avenue to music and the arts in their communities. “The hope that comes from creativity in these low-income communities will be obliterated.” (Washington Post, 3/23/2017).

“One common comparison we’ve seen says that Melania Trump’s security detail at Trump Tower costs more than the annual budget for the National Endowment for the Arts.” (Linda Qiu on Wednesday, February 8th, 2017, PUNDITFACT).

Sciences and Higher Education:

• The Agriculture Department budget eliminates the $500 million Water and Wastewater loan and grant program.
• The Commerce Department budget eliminates the $73 million Sea Grant program, which operates in conjunction with universities in 33 states.
• The Department of Energy is to eliminate $900 million in Office of Science funding.
• The Environmental Protection Agency is to cut the Office of Research and Development funding in half.

A drastic cut of 18% or $5.8 billion is looming over the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This would severely reduce the funding NIH gives out to researchers around the globe, and reductions are slated for intramural and extramural research, and complete elimination the Fogarty International Center, which builds partnerships between the US and international institutions.

Although NASA will take a small cut of 1%, the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), which supports science and technology research and development at colleges and universities in areas such as remote sensing, nanotechnology, astrophysics and aeronautics, will be eliminated.

These cuts range from higher education, to research and innovation, to incentives for younger researchers who are beginning their careers. It is the young investigators who will be most affected. As competition increases they will be pitted against their older and more experienced colleagues. Most importantly, the research that makes the US competitive on the world stage will not take place, eventually affecting national security.

The thinking behind these cuts is that industry will pick up the slack. This will have broad implications for our colleges and universities that teach and train new generations of scientists and educators. Plainly, their potential will be impaired and creativity and exploration will be limited.

Education and Nonprofit groups:

The Education Department is targeted for a 14% reduction, which will downsize or eliminate grants for teacher training, afterschool programs, and aid to low-income and minority college students, currently amounting to $3.7 billion in funding.

Cuts to nonprofit groups and public agencies are epitomized by the 21% or 2.5 billion cut to the Department of Labor, which will eliminate grants that help nonprofit groups and public agencies that fund safety and health training.

Cultural Exchange Programs:

The Department of State is slated for $10.9 billion cut or 29% of its budget. That will reduce most cultural exchange programs. Many bilateral educational programs and agreements under the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) will either be severely cut or completely eliminated.

Hopefully these changes will not pass Congress since some agencies, such as NIH and NSF, have strong bipartisan support. However, according to Barry Toiv, a spokesman for the Association of American Universities, which represents major research institutions, “If Congress goes along with deep overall cuts in non-defense discretionary funding, significant cuts to research spending are almost inevitable.”

Solutions are difficult to anticipate. What is certain, however, is that competition will increase and those submitting proposals will have to be equipped with all the tools that will make their proposals competitive, such as training, mentors, partnerships, collaboration and interdisciplinarity.

The post What the Trump Budget Means for Grant Funding appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

Although environmental protection is a highly controversial issue among politicians, the Obama administration unveiled the “Clean Power Plan”. Under the plan, the administration will require states to meet specific carbon emission reduction standards based on their individual energy consumption. According to the administration, “The plan also includes an incentive program for states to get a head start on meeting standards on early deployment of renewable energy and low-income energy efficiency.” Even before the program was officially announced, some states unveiled plans to fight it. On another front, a multi-million dollar campaign backed by the energy industry has sought to discredit the science behind climate change.

While political debates continue to stall, scientists and researchers are making strides to implement change. Scientific research is being funded by such federal agencies as the National Science Foundation on the domestic front, and the US Agency for International Development on the international level. Key examples of public and private funding for environmental progress are listed below.

The National Science Foundation (NSF)

The NSF has various initiatives that fund environmental research such as the Environmental Sustainability Program, intended to promote sustainable engineered systems that support human well-being. Research efforts supported by the program typically consider long term outlooks and may incorporate contributions from the social sciences and ethics. The program also focuses on balancing society’s need to provide ecological protection while maintaining stable economic conditions. The four programs funded are Industrial Ecology, Green Engineering, Ecological Engineering and Earth Systems Engineering.

http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=501027

Rockefeller Brothers Fund

Global stewardship is the emphasis of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Supported projects are ecologically based, economically sound, socially just, culturally appropriate, and consistent with intergenerational equity. The Fund encourages partnerships between the public and private sectors. Recognizing the global nature of many environmental problems, the Fund also promotes international cooperation in addressing environmental challenges.

http://www.rbf.org/program/sustainable-development

The MacArthur Foundation

Recently the MacArthur Foundation announced 15 grants totaling more than $4.2 million in support of conservation and sustainable development in the southern Tropical Andes. Often referred to as the “global epicenter of biodiversity”, this region is also the primary source of fresh water in South America, holding 90 percent of the world’s tropical glaciers. As climate change and development present a growing threat to the region’s diverse ecosystems, new grants invest in research, policies, and practices that advance sustainable development and prudent stewardship of resources.

https://www.macfound.org/info-grantseekers/grantmaking-guidelines/conservation-grant-guidelines/

Charles Steward Mott Foundation

The Charles Steward Mott Foundation supports programs that improve the social and environmental accountability of those investing in large-scale infrastructure and energy projects in developing countries. This work includes a focus on the investment patterns of emerging economies, particularly of Brazil and China, whose financial institutions are becoming major lenders for emerging economies.

http://www.mott.org/FundingInterests/Issues/Sustainable%20Development#sthash.mwbM7JmD.dpuf

Kresge Foundation

The Kresge Foundation focuses its program funding on climate change that impacts communities. They invest in three primary areas:

1. Regions that have strong potential to serve as models for climate resilience in coastal cities and low-income communities.
2. Sustainable water resources and urban energy resilience programs are also their focus of support.
3. Activities that develop and disseminate promising climate-resilience approaches.

http://kresge.org/programs/environment#sthash.mH1SvX0F.dpuf

William and Flora Hewlett Foundation

The cornerstone of Hewlett Foundation grants is to protect the environment. This commitment is achieved by efforts to engage in complex environmental problems at home and abroad, from creating new Bay Area parks to shifting to clean energy in the United States, Europe, China, and India. Through its Environment Program funding, the Foundation pursues goals that are designed to guard the environment for future generations, improve ecological integrity, understand the effects of global climate change, develop clean energy, and reduce environmental problems.

http://www.hewlett.org/programs/environment

While unveiling the Clean Power Plan, Obama said: “We’re the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it.” How we move forward and how we succeed in creating the needed paradigm shifts will depend on many complex factors. Obama has taken a bold step toward making an impact. Funding agencies, whether federal or private, are increasingly stepping up to the plate. Nevertheless, as the funding agencies listed above have acknowledged, much more still needs to be done.

The post Climate Change: Sea Levels and Funding on the Rise appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

Federal Sources

Citations from federal studies have an inherent authenticity that appeals to many donors. Regardless of discipline, most researchers and writers can make use of the following sites:

• USA.gov is the most authoritative statistical portal. You can search for and find statistics spanning all topics.
• Data.gov contains data and statistics on several topics pulled from federal agencies, state and local governments, and several major institutions of higher education.
• The Bureau of Labor and Statistics is the principal fact-finding agency for the Federal Government in the broad field of work economics and statistics.
• The National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics is the nation’s leading data source for science and engineering studies.
• The Department of Education has a large collection of statistical information pertaining to education.
• PubMed is a research warehouse for nearly all medical studies conducted within the U.S.
• All of the 26 federal funding agencies, such as the Department of Justice and the Department of Agriculture, hold a wealth of data within their individual websites.
• The National Archives and Records Administration provides access to archives and historical records. Historians and librarians will greatly benefit from this site.

Multilateral Organizations

Multilateral organizations are a great source of information on national and international areas such as in health, economics, geosciences and education. The following sites are just a few of the major resources:

• The International Monetary Fund (IMF) houses a comprehensive collection of research and statistics with publications in multiple digital formats. The IMF eLibrary is an excellent resource for global statistics and information.
• The World Bank provides data on multiple global-scale topics, such as poverty, education, and technology.
• The World Health Organization is an excellent resource on world health data and statistics.
• The Asian Development Bank and African Development Bank have country-specific economic and business performance measurements, data, and statistics.
• The United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has an array of data on culture and education gathered from global studies.
• The Organization for Economic Co-Operation Development (OECD) iLibrary, although not a multi-lateral organization, can be a great resource for international data for many disciplines.

Medical and Scientific Research

The most authoritative place to begin looking for data and resources for medical research is the National Institute of Health (NIH) site. For scientific research, it is the National Science Foundation (NSF). In addition, the following resources provide further statistics for some disciplines:

• Nature.com’s Statistics for Biologists focuses on data and resources in biology.
• The American Physical Society houses resources and guides for physics research.
• The American Cancer Society focuses on data for cancer research.

Social Sciences Research

Social scientists should make use of mixed method research. Both qualitative and quantitative data can be found at the following sites:

• The American Fact Finder pulls statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau data.
• The American Psychological Association provides resources and data for psychological research.
• The American Sociological Association supplies information and links for sociological research.

To have any chance of being funded you must always start with an important idea. Once you have that, citing authoritative previous research and data to demonstrate the completeness, legitimacy, and accuracy of your idea will greatly increase that chance. The resources listed above are only the some of the countless available, but they should provide an excellent start while writing your proposal.

The post Sources of Data to Build Your Argument appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.

The Winners

The two agencies that appear to be favored are NASA and the NSF, both of which received modest funding increases. NASA will get approximately $18 billion, an increase of $364 million. The big winner is the agency’s science mission, which will be $94 million dollars more than the 2014 level of $5.151 billion. The NSF, which had a rocky 2014, did receive an increase to $7.344 billion. In 2014, the Republican Representative Lamar Smith (R–TX), and chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, campaigned to demonstrate how the NSF’s $7 billion research agency is “wasting” taxpayer dollars on frivolous or low-priority projects, particularly in the social sciences. Nevertheless, the six NSF directorates will increase by $125 million to $5.93 billion and the education directorates will grow by $20 million to $866 million.

The Stagnant

The NIH will receive $30 billion, which is $150 million above the 2014 budget. Disappointed in the appropriation results, Carrie Wolinetz, president of United for Medical Research stated: “Sustained increases to the NIH budget are necessary to close our nation’s innovation deficit – the widening gap between the current medical research funding levels and the investment required to ensure the U.S. remains the world’s innovation leader.”

The Losers

On the other hand, the areas that seem to be in continued peril are the social sciences and humanities. The social sciences have increasingly been questioned by congress, and support for their research is waning across all agencies. Funding for the arts and humanities remains flat, often reflecting the sentiments of colleges and universities.

The Department of Energy’s Office of Science did not do well, since the budget remained flat. Further, the bill’s language makes the funding contingent upon management reforms.

The EPA fared the worst. The agency’s budget has been slashed by $2.2 billion – or 21 percent – since 2010, and is $60 million less than the $8.1 billion budget in 2014. The cuts mean that the EPA will need to reduce its staffing to the lowest levels since 1989.

To Be Determined

The 2015 Budget for the Department of Education focuses on six priorities: (1)increasing equity and opportunity for all students; (2) strengthening support for teachers and school leaders; (3)expanding high-quality preschool programs; (4) affordability and quality in post secondary education; (5) promoting educational innovation and improvement; and (6) improving school safety and climate. The Obama Administration is requesting $68.6 billion in discretionary appropriations for the Department of Education in 2015, an increase of $1.3 billion – or 1.9 percent – more than the 2014 budget.

Community colleges will do well in adult education, workforce development, and affordability of education, because these are the priorities of the President. Very recently, President Obama announced a plan for free community college education.

Moving Forward

Institutions and organizations seeking funding in 2015 will have to diversify their requests. The Federal Government will continue to be a major source for research, but foundation and corporate giving will increase their weight in the formula. Equally, partnerships between government and the private sector will be favored, due to cost-sharing for major research. In all cases, accountability and performance measurements will continue to increase in significance in the decision-making process.

The post 2015 Federal Budget: What it Means to You appeared first on Grant Training Center Blog.