Land Use Planning Tools to Improve Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Quality
This funding opportunity has two goals: to enhance the effectiveness of land use planning through the novel application of technologies at the community level; and to promote the broad dissemination of project outcomes to other communities.
Examples of appropriate technologies include geospatial tools, internet-based applications, predictive models, visualization technology, and decision support systems. For this RFP, CICEET defines land use planning as an activity beyond the scale of the individual Best Management Practice (BMP). Examples of land use planning activities that could be influenced by this funding opportunity include the creation or refinement of the following: master plans, conservation guidelines, water resource protection policies, regulatory controls on land use (e.g., ordinances), and site plan review procedures that account for cumulative impacts.
Federal agency personnel—including those from NOAA—are eligible if they can document statutory authority to supplement their appropriations with funds from other federal programs and entities. In some cases, obtaining this documentation can take time, so CICEET encourages such applicants to plan ahead. Federal applicants may not request salary compensation.
In the "Project Elements" section of this funding opportunity, CICEET refers to the requirement that applicants plan to partner with an agency that has an established track record of working with local officials. This does not preclude representatives from such agencies—e.g. NERRS, NEMO, or Sea Grant from applying to this funding opportunity.
Private-sector applicants may not include fee or profit in their budget requests.
Please note: CICEET will not accept proposals from CICEET investigators who have failed to submit final reports for completed projects, or progress reports for ongoing work.
Often, when a CICEET project’s funding is complete, work remains to facilitate the technology's or method’s application. In cases where researchers have shown a commitment to collaborate with adopters and producers, CICEET may consider investing additional resources to support further development and/or application.
Since the dissemination pathway is often not clear at the outset of a project, CICEET strongly suggests that you take the following steps to protect your technology’s intellectual property at the proposal stage. By doing this, you will be able to talk freely about your invention and avoid the inadvertent loss of intellectual property rights.
Step 1: Take steps to protect your intellectual property as soon as possible so that you can discuss your research with colleagues in a manner that does not restrict your ability to choose the most appropriate dissemination path. If you receive funding, CICEET will ask you to discuss your research at a meeting with colleagues, coastal managers and industry representatives.
Step 2: Do not make assumptions about the commercialization value of your work. In our experience, researchers often make assumptions about the intellectual property process that are inaccurate.
Step 3: Talk to your institution’s Office of Technology Transfer, or its Office of Intellectual Property. Determine the proper approach to intellectual property protection for your technology. This could include any of the following: prior-art research and determination of patentability; pursuit of “confidential and proprietary information”; pursuit of copyright; or no intellectual property protection steps whatsoever. (Note: The title page you download from this site comes with a confidentiality statement. Please review it and contact us with any questions.)
Step 4: Until talking with one of the specialists recommended in Step 3, do not disclose your idea in a public setting. “Disclosure” entails giving enough information—verbally or in written/graphic form—for a person “skilled in the art” to reproduce your invention.
1) Introduction: Briefly describe the land use planning problem your project seeks to address. Explain how your approach would address one or more of the technical or non-technical impediments to land use planning in support of environmental health. Justify the assertion that your approach represents an innovative application of technology. (You will be asked to expand this discussion in the "Methods" section.)
2) Objectives: State your project's objectives and how they relate to the goals of this funding opportunity.
3) Methods: Describe in detail the methods you will use to meet project objectives. Demonstrate how they address each of the “project elements” required by this funding opportunity. Include a timeline for accomplishing your objectives. Expand on the technical aspect of your project and discuss alternatives. Please provide a review of relevant literature and alternative strategies to substantiate how this approach is innovative.
4) Community context: Demonstrate that the community in question has the requisite commitment and resources (data, personnel, legal authority, etc.) to accomplish the objectives of the project. Demonstrate the involvement of local officials at all stages of the project. If it is likely that CICEET funds will leverage support from other sources, please include that information here.
5) Projected outcome: Describe what you see as the projected outcome of the proposed activities. Please discuss how your proposed approach may be applied to other communities. CICEET has a national focus and thus seeks demonstration projects that can serve as templates for use around the country.
6) Roles and responsibilities: Describe the roles and responsibilities of the project participants. Describe who will address the “Project Elements” of this funding opportunity, and why their experience makes them an appropriate choice.
7) Budget justification: Please provide a detailed budget justification that explains each item in your proposed budget. Include a description of any cost-sharing opportunities if applicable.
8) Survey question: CICEET would like to make its extramural research funding competition as user friendly as possible. Your answer will not impact the assessment of your proposal and will help us improve our RFP for future applicants.
On a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being the most favorable score), please rate this RFP document in terms of the following question: Did you have sufficient information and support to prepare your proposal?
Additional comments/suggestions are very welcome!
Investigator curriculum vitae
Appendix of literature cited
Please send your proposal as a single PDF attachment to an e-mail to email@example.com
If you have questions about converting documents from common formats to PDF, please contact CICEET. Note that proposals in any other digital format will NOT be accepted.
You must also send one signed hard copy of your proposal that includes documentation of your institution’s federally negotiated indirect cost rate and contact information for the sponsored research office at your institution. The postmark must not be later than Friday, December 29, 2006. Please mail this to CICEET’s Program Coordinator:
You will receive notification of CICEET's proposal evaluations and decisions by early March 2007. Please note that the panel may elect to recommend that a proposal be awarded funds contingent on clarification or changes to the proposal. Please be prepared for this possibility and be ready to respond in early March, 2007. If you have questions regarding the format and guidelines for proposal preparation, please contact CICEET.
Please note that projects recommended for funding are subject to a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed research. Funding is contingent upon compliance with NEPA guidelines. You can learn more about NEPA at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.
Proposals will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
1) Appropriateness: To what degree are the objectives, methods, and overall approach of the proposal consistent with the goals of CICEET? Did the proposal clearly address the Project Elements stated in this funding opportunity? See "Description" and "Project Elements" sections.
2) Technical Approach: To what extent does the proposal demonstrate excellence in technical capability and familiarity with the issues relevant to land use planning? Does the proposal demonstrate a novel approach to addressing the bottlenecks that currently limit the ability of local planners to improve or protect water and habitat quality? Will the methods allow the applicants to achieve the stated land use planning objectives as well as objectives related to measuring performance and dissemination?
3) Projected Outcome: Based on the proposed activities, what are the anticipated beneficial impacts on water and habitat quality? How transferable is the approach to other coastal/estuarine communities?
4) Personnel: Are the identified personnel qualified for the proposed work, and does the team composition reflect the expertise to address the "Project Elements" described for this funding opportunity?
5) Budget: Is the budget appropriate and justified?