The deadline for proposals to the FY10 Faculty Seed Grant program is Monday, November 9.

Two (identical) workshops about preparing applications for the seed grant program will be offered on Thursday, September 24, from 3:00 to 4:30, and on Friday, September 25, from 10:30 to noon. To reserve a seat at one of these sessions, contact ORDA (453-4540, orda@siu.edu).

The seed grant program is primarily for new faculty establishing their research or creative projects, for established faculty making a significant change of direction in their research, and for faculty with rejected external proposals who wish to strengthen their pilot data.

Grants are made for a period of one year, with a maximum of $25,000 for graduate assistants/student workers, travel, commodities, etc. Faculty also may request one month of summer salary (not all successful applicants receive summer salary).

The emphasis of the program is to increase external funding for research and creative activities at SIUC. It is a requirement of the program that a proposal related to the research be submitted to an external agency within 18 months of the start date of the seed grant.

—excerpted from Report on Research Compliance, July 2009

Was J. Reece Roth, a Tennessee (UT) emeritus physics professor, a researcher whose ignorance of export control laws made him a real threat to the security of the nation? And how did the university exercise its oversight of his research contract with the Air Force (USAF)?

Roth has the unpleasant distinction of being the first professor who was successfully prosecuted for criminal violations of the Arms Control Export Act (AECA). Convicted on all 17 charges, he was sentenced July 1 to four years in prison; he has filed a notice of intent to appeal his conviction.

In the wake of the sentencing, universities that conduct research that falls under the web of export control regulations are left wondering what lessons to take away from this saga and whether it signals a new crackdown by the government that could ensnare other researchers. Experts say the case sends an immediate signal to universities to beef up their export compliance efforts, but they also fret that it may have a chilling effect on research. Although the case involved DOD funding, institutions are reminded that a grant funded by any federal agency could potentially raise export control issues.

The conviction stemmed from Roth's work as a subcontractor on an USAF contract that had been awarded to Atmospheric Glow Technologies (AGT) in 2005 for the development of plasma actuators for unmanned aircraft. AGT received a contract for the second phase a year later and represented to the USAF that everyone working on the contract would be U.S. citizens. In May of that year, UT accepted a subcontract, which referenced so-called "restrictive clauses" from the USAF contract.

In May 2006, Roth asked AGT if he could add an Iranian student to the project, but the firm said no. Two days later he met with Robin Witherspoon, UT's export coordinator, and disclosed that there was already a Chinese student working on the contract. Witherspoon advised Roth to stop work with the Chinese student and required AGT to remove its export-controlled equipment from UT's plasma lab. At this point, UT self-disclosed possible AECA violations to both the FBI and the State Dept.

Initial Lack of "Safeguards"

Roth was convicted of 13 counts of exporting technical data restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR); with the majority of violations occurring in the U.S. He was also charged with two counts of teaching foreign nationals to use ITAR-restricted equipment. One charge relating to the export of technical data referred to Roth's taking data with him on a trip he made to China, with his laptop in tow.

UT was never charged in this case. Witherspoon said that actions UT took later were "key to avoiding institutional fines or sanctions." UT had an "open-door policy" regarding federal investigators, and she said that its self-report was a "mitigating factor." Witherspoon said that UT has in place an extensive export management and oversight program to ensure compliance.

Activities Were Typical of Researchers

For David Brady, director of Virginia Tech's (VT) Office of Export & Secure Research Compliance, the biggest message from the case is how Roth's activities, in the absence of AECA implications, would otherwise be considered typical faculty research activities. "Roth was convicted and sentenced for activities that are standard and routine in research," Brady told RRC. Brady noted that Roth was convicted of:

• sharing lab reports and draft publications with his graduate students;
• teaching graduate students to use a piece of test equipment;
• taking a research proposal outside of the United States; and
• having his graduate student send research materials to him while on international travel.

"During the trial, the government presented no evidence that national security was ever directly harmed or that Roth ever accessed or allowed access to ITAR-restricted technical data he took out of the U.S.," Brady said.

Universities Must Be Prepared

"If you accept defense funds, you are subject to these regulations, and you may not be protected by the exclusions reserved for institutions of higher education, such as fundamental research," Brady said. "You shouldn't accept export-controlled contracts unless you understand what you are accepting. Researchers need to understand that then when they cross over the line into ITAR-controlled research, their normal activities may become illegal without an export license or other government approval."

Clif Burns, an export law attorney, said, "The fundamental take-away for universities and researchers from the Roth case is the danger of relying on the fundamental research exception in connection with any contracts with the military for research."

"The whole problem might have been avoided if the university had a robust compliance program that actively involved an 'export compliance officer' in determining how data developed as part of military contracts are handled, rather than relying on the researchers to make that decision themselves."

"Universities and research institutions involve legal counsel in a number of their decisions," said Burns. "They should do the same in the export arena, where the rules are complex, where compliance is difficult, and where the penalties for noncompliance are severe."

Burns, who also maintains the www.exportlawblog.com, added that universities can also get tripped up because of mistaken beliefs by researchers. Burns said, "Professor Roth's belief that he knew more about the export laws than he actually did is not at all uncommon among academic researchers, and it's the job of the export compliance official to disabuse all of the university's researches of that false and dangerous notion. Roth believed that some of the information shared with the graduate students was fundamental research and not subject to export restrictions."

Given that "the penalty for being wrong is jail time," Burns recommends that researchers treat all information relating to military contracts "as export-restricted technical data that cannot be shared with foreign graduate students" except when there is a state department license. In addition, researchers need to be mindful that "information also can't be exported to foreign countries, which occurred when Roth carried his laptop to China with the proposal on it," Burns said. "That was enough to break the export laws even if he never shared that data with anyone in China."

—excerpted from Science, June 12, 2009

The U.S. government has streamlined procedures for processing visa applications from foreign students and researchers trying to enter the U.S. Officials say these changes should make a lasting improvement in a process that at times has resulted in long delays, pinched the flow of scientific talent into the country, and stymied collaborations.

"We don't expect the long wait times to crop up again," said a Dept. of Homeland Security representative. Marilyn Speedie, dean of the college of pharmacy at the University of Minnesota, hopes that is right. In April, the college postponed a workshop on treatments for orphan diseases after three senior Indian researchers learned their visas would not be issued in time.

The visa process became agonizingly slow in the aftermath of 9/11, when the government clamped down on anyone wishing to enter the country who had scientific and technical expertise deemed potentially useful to terrorists. However, even government officials acknowledged that the system had begun to stifle the flow of scientific information. By 2005, additional staff and better training appeared to have resolved the problem. But by 2007, the review process began to bog down again.

David Donahue, a State Dept. official, says the recent delays were due to inadequate staffing and procedural problems. Both issues have been fixed, he says. Donahue says all agencies involved in Mantis checks have agreed to complete the process within two weeks.

Speedie plans to reschedule the workshop once the Indian participants obtain their visas, and she hopes that the latest changes clear up the problem once and for all. The recent snafu delayed potential collaborations aimed at "fighting diseases and improv[ing] global health," she says. In other words, they are precisely the sort of partnerships that could eventually ease global tensions and lower the threat of terrorism.

—excerpted from Science, July 24, 2009

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has committed $85 million next year for a new program to help 50 young scientists establish their research careers. It is the latest federal agency to try to lend a hand to this vulnerable population.

For more information about these programs, contact Joel Fritzler, ORDA Information Specialist, at 453-4530 or jcfritz@siu.edu.

This competition funds projects focused on preventing, managing, and resolving violent conflict and promoting post-conflict peace-building in settings outside the borders of the USA. The competition supports innovative peace-building projects involving research, the identification of promising models and effective practices, the development of practitioner resources and tools, the development and delivery of education, training and dialogue programs, and the production of films, radio programs, and other media. Awards support activities that apply across a broad range of relevant disciplines, skills, and approaches. Support for degree work is not eligible.

USIP welcomes proposals of an interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary nature. Topic areas of interest to USIP include, but are not limited to, conflict analysis and prevention; mediation and conflict resolution; post-conflict peace and stability operations; religion and peacemaking; women and girls in conflict and peace-building; rule of law and transitional justice; economies and conflict; social, psychological, and physical impacts of war and conflict; and media and conflict.

The National Science Foundation's Innovation and Organizational Sciences (IOS) program supports scientific research directed at advancing understanding of innovation and organizational phenomena. Levels of analysis may include (but are not limited to) individuals, groups, and/or institutional arrangements. Disciplinary perspectives may include (but are not limited to) organization theory, organizational behavior, organizational sociology, social and industrial psychology, public administration, computer and information sciences, complexity sciences, and decision and management sciences. Research methods may span a broad variety of qualitative and quantitative methods, including (but not limited to) archival analyses, surveys, simulation studies, experiments, comparative case studies, and network analyses. Research may involve industrial, educational, service, government, not-for-profits, voluntary organizations, or interorganizational arrangements.

IOS-funded research must be grounded in theory and generalizable. It must advance our scientific understanding of innovation and organizations. Scientific inquiries that are relevant to real problems and organizations in generalizable ways are encouraged. Proposals that aim to implement or evaluate innovations or particular organizational changes rather than to advance fundamental, generalizable knowledge about innovation and organizations are not appropriate for IOS.

The Division of Mathematical Sciences in the National Science Foundatio's Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at the National Institutes of Health plan to support research in mathematics and statistics related to mathematical biology research. Both agencies recognize the need and urgency for additional research at the boundary between the mathematical sciences and the life sciences. This competition is designed to encourage new collaborations at this interface, as well as to support existing ones.

The NSF Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE) offers Minority Postdoctoral Research Fellowships and Research Starter Grants in an effort to increase the diversity of researchers who participate in NSF programs in the social, behavioral and economic sciences and thereby increase the participation of scientists from underrepresented groups in selected areas of science in the U.S. These activities (postdoctoral fellowships and follow-up research starter grants) support training and research in the areas of social, behavioral, and economic sciences within the purview of NSF.

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

• For Postdoctoral Research Fellowships: only individuals who are U.S. citizens, nationals, or permanent residents. The proposals must be submitted by the individual directly to the NSF.
• For Follow-up Research Starter Grants: U.S. academic institutions may apply with the former fellow as principal investigator.

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) represents the continuation of a National Cancer Institute program to facilitate the transition of investigators, primarily those with clinical doctoral degrees as well as those with doctoral degrees working in the areas of cancer prevention, control, behavioral, or population science research, from the mentored stage of career development in academic cancer research to the independent stage. This goal is achieved by providing protected time through salary and research support for 3 years to postdoctoral individuals or junior faculty in mentored positions transitioning into their first independent position, and investigators within the first 2 years of their first independent cancer research position, to initiate and develop their independently-supported cancer research programs.

This American Council of Learned Societies program is open to scholars in the humanities and humanities-related social sciences who have received a Ph.D. or its equivalent by the time of application.

Applicants must submit a carefully formulated research proposal that reflects an understanding of the present Chinese academic and research environment. The proposal should include a persuasive statement of the need to conduct the research in China. Those submitting a joint proposal must apply individually. Support is offered to specialists in all fields of the humanities and humanities-related social sciences, and is not limited to China scholars.

Fellowship tenure is from four months to one year of continuous research in China. The fellowship period must fall between July 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011. However, awardees planning to begin using fellowships as early as July 2010 must be prepared to delay entry into China if it is not possible to secure placement before September.

The India Network Foundation is pleased to offer small research grants that would lead to larger project funding from national and international agencies. The foundation is interested primarily in proposals that target the Asian Indian community in North America.

These fellowships are intended to encourage the scholarly use of The Filson's nationally significant collections by providing support for travel and lodging. Fellows are expected to be in continuous residence at The Filson. The society's collections are especially strong for the frontier, antebellum, and Civil War eras of Kentucky history. The fellowships are designed to encourage research in all aspects of the history of Kentucky and the regions of the Ohio Valley and the Upper South. Applicants should indicate how the society's collections are relevant to their research topics and will have the opportunity to present the results of their research to scholars and the general public as appropriate. The Filson anticipates that fellows will publicize the results of their research in Ohio Valley History, a peer-reviewed journal published jointly by The Filson, the Cincinnati Museum Center, and the University of Cincinnati.