Guidelines for the Young Investigator Awards

Guidelines for the Young Investigator Awards

Grants and fellowships awarded in this program (FAPESP Virtual Library)

The Young Investigator Award enables the creation of job opportunities for highly qualified young researchers (or group of highly qualified young researchers), especially in emerging research institutions in the State of São Paulo, Brazil.

Proposals of new research areas in traditional institutions are also eligible. This Program is part of FAPESP's strategy to strength the research institutions within the state, favoring the creation of new research groups that will work on state-of-the-art areas that are internationally relevant and new to the state of São Paulo.

The awarded grants, headed by early-career investigators, must be scientifically sound in order to create new research groups in institutions without research tradition or new research areas in traditional institutions.

Terms in effect since November 28th, 2008.


1) Purpose (Back)

The purpose of the Young Investigator Award is to enable the creation of job opportunities for highly qualified young researchers or group of highly qualified young researchers, especially in emerging research institutions. Proposals of new research areas in traditional Institutions are also eligible.

This Program is part of FAPESP´s strategy to strengthen the research institutions within the state, favoring the creation of research groups that will work on state-of-the-art areas that are internationally relevant and new to the state of São Paulo.

The awarded grants, headed by early-career researchers, must be scientifically sound in order to create new research groups in Institutions without research tradition or new research areas in traditional Institutions.

The support for the awarded proposals will be available in order to promptly guarantee the minimal conditions to the full and autonomous development of the project. Facilities in additional solicitations will be asserted to the research group, through the agility on the analysis of these additional solicitations, such as resources for visiting researchers or equipment repair and, in case of parity in merit analysis, priority to fellowship granting. The program also allows investment in research infrastructure of these emerging centers, aiming to facilitate the development of the approved projects.

The Program supports research projects selected on a competitive basis. The applications shall be sent through a comparative analysis taking into account previous accomplishes of the Young Investigator, mainly concerning publications and other parameters that suggest his involvement in world-class researches and in relevant topics for his research field. The awarded grants must necessarily present a solid project, and grounded to demonstrate its viability in the conditions it will be conducted.

FAPESP demands in return that the Host Institution commits to the purpose of the Program by providing adequate working conditions for the awarded Young Investigator such as space, infrastructure, time dedicated to research, technical support and administrative staff and permission to recruit students to work on the project. During the review process, FAPESP will take into account both the institutional support and the human resources policies applied by the Institution and relevant for the program purposes.
 

2) Attributes of the Young Investigator Award (Back)

2.1) Award format

a) The award is given as a Research Grant.

b) Young Investigators still not employed by the Host Institution may be granted a Young Investigator Fellowship.

b.1) The researcher that is awarded with a Young Investigator Fellowship shall not be hired.

b.2) The Young Investigator Fellowship must be attached to an ongoing Young Investigator Award and requires exclusive dedication to the research, except with FAPESP authorization and under the conditions described in the Regulation CS - Nº 05/2012.

b.3) The Young Investigator may not receive, throughout the duration of the fellowship, another fellowship, salary or any kind of remuneration deriving from the exercise of activities of any nature, except under the conditions described in the Regulation CS – Nº 05/2012.

- To request authorization related to the before mentioned Regulation, it must be used the AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FORM FOR EXERCISING ACTIVITIES UNDER THE TERMS OF REGULATION PR Nº 05/2012, filled in and signed by the parties.

- Processes submitted in hard copy, must have the authorization request sent by mail, in person or through the “Converse com a FAPESP > Solicitações”.

Processes submitted through SAGe, must have the authorization request attached to a Change Request (SM – Solicitação de Mudança), type "Other” that shall be prepared and sent to FAPESP.

b.4) If a Young Investigator Fellowship holder needs to move to the city where the Host Institution is located, funds for initial expenses (Settlement Aid) might be requested. This benefit consists of:

a. One (1) additional month of living expenses, to be paid with the first monthly payment of the fellowship;

b. Travel costs, if the displacement distance is larger than 350km (three hundred and fifty kilometers).

To request the benefit of Settlement Aid, the fellowship holder must submit a Change Request (SM – Solicitação de Mudança); type “Budget Changing”, right after accepting the grant.

Further information on the eligibility criteria and instructions for application can be checked on FAPESP website, www.fapesp.br/7771

b.5) Maternity Leave

The benefit of Maternity Leave is granted to FAPESP fellowship holders with full-time fellowships. The grantees will be able to leave the institution for up to four months.

In the meanwhile, there will be no interruption of payments and four extra months will be added to the term of the fellowship.

For further information, please access: www.fapesp.br/8484.

b.6) Paternity leave

On April 2nd, 2014, FAPESP Board of Trustees approved the granting of paternity leave (PL), to its fellowships holders with full-time fellowships.

The fellowship holders will be able to leave the institution for up to five days, counted from the child's birth date.

Who can apply:

Scientific Initiation, Masters, PhD, Direct Doctorate, Post Doctorate, Young Investigator and PIPE "Small Business" Fellowships.

- Adoption cases may also make use of paternity leave.

- Required documents shall be sent to FAPESP: birth certificate or adoption registration in hard-copy, with a guiding letter at the moment of the leaving.

b.7) If an Young Investigator Fellowship is granted, it must be requested in SAGe as grants awarded as budget items.

c) It is allowed to apply for a grant without the support of a research institution. In these cases, if the reviews are positive, the Principal Investigator has 90 days to submit a letter of support from an interested Institution. Only then, FAPESP will proceed to the application final review.

d) The granted resources depend on the field of the research and the details of the approved project and the decision about the budget takes into consideration the operational conditions of the institutions. Researchers who intend to develop a project in less structured institution may request higher grants than if the research would be developed in a better equipped institution. In this way, FAPESP aims to create realistic and adequate conditions to the execution of the awarded project within the scope of the program.

2.2) Term of the Young Investigator Award and the Young Investigator Fellowship

a) The Young Investigator Award may last up to 48 months, with the possibility of a 12-month extension in exceptional conditions and justification approved by FAPESP.

b) The Young Investigator Fellowship, when awarded, may last up to 24 months, always beginning on the first day of each month with the possibility of a 24-month extension, as long as the Fellowship term does not exceed the Award term (check item 12.1). The Young Investigator Fellowship shall not exceed 48 months.

b.1) In the calculation of the maximum period for a Young Investigator Fellowship, it shall be computed the period of FAPESP fellowships previously received in equivalent modality to Post-Doctoral, considering that the total sum shall not exceed 6 (six) years. In this case, the Host Institution shall make explicit the circumstances that allow the researcher affiliation to its permanent staff.

Transition norm for fellowship holders who had the period of Post-Doctoral fellowships previously granted by other agencies and institutions discounted from the FAPESP Fellowship (valid from June 23rd, 2010)

1. Researchers with ongoing fellowship who still have not submitted the final Scientific Report may apply for a fellowship renovation for the discounted period, within the limit permitted by the modality, upon the presentation of a work plan for the extended period.

2. Researchers with ongoing fellowship who have already submitted the final Scientific Report may apply for a fellowship renovation, to be analyzed on an exceptional basis, within the limit permitted by the modality and upon the presentation of a work plan for the extended period.

3. In the case of concluded fellowships, which had been discounted a period of six months or more regarding previously Post-Doctoral fellowships granted by other agencies/institutions, the researcher may apply for a new project, respecting the modality norms and term.

Norms for Award and Fellowship extensions (Regulation DC019, valid from November 1st, 2009, for concessions under the maximum established).


3) Conditions for applying (Back)

3.1) Submission dates

Applications may be submitted to FAPESP at any time.

3.2) Definitions

a) The Principal Investigator (PI): the who is responsible for the preparation and submission of the grant proposal, as well as for the scientific and administrative coordination of the grant, if it is awarded by FAPESP. The Principal Investigator is always one of the Co-Principal Investigators of the project.

b) Co-Principal Investigators (Co-PI): are part of the team of researchers, indicated by the Principal Investigator, with an excellent research history and with essential and specific roles within the project The Co-PIs need to be approved as such by FAPESP, and may benefit from the additional complements of a Grant.

b.1) In the Young Investigator Awards, the Principal Investigator is the only Co-Principal Investigator of the grant.

c) Associated Researchers (AR): part of the team of researchers, being indicated by the Principal Investigator to collaborate in the project; the indication must be approved by FAPESP

d) Host Institution: institution in which the research will be led, and usually the place where the Principal Investigator is employed The PI does not need to be hired by the Host Institution, but it is necessary to establish a formal association between both parties that establishes compliance with the terms of the grant; the terms of this formal association must satisfy FAPESP. The Host Institution must formally commit to provide the necessary support infrastructure to the project, which includes ensuring the safety and access to materials and equipment infrastructure to be used by the project and the management of any intellectual property that may result from it.

3.3) Principal Investigator requirements

a) To have a PhD or equivalent title.

b) To obtain the acceptance to his association to a research institution in the State of Sao Paulo.

b.1) FAPESP allows the submission of a project without any support of a research institution. In these cases, if the initial review is positive, the Principal Investigator has 90 days to submit a letter of support from an interested Institution. Only then, FAPESP will proceed to the application final review.

c) To have an outstanding research record.
 

4) Time frame for analysis (Back)

The expected average length of the review process for this type of Award Is 75 days if there are no unusual incidents such as inquiries concerning the documentation provided, or problems with the reviewers.

a) This number represents an average. Therefore, this does not mean that applications that are submitted 75 days prior to the estimated start of the grant will be approved within this timeframe.

b) Applications for Young Investigator Award will be sent to three or more reviewers. For this reason, the review process may take longer than expected.

c) Applications submitted between October and January may suffer an extra delay due to the summer holidays in Brazil, and FAPESP partial suspension of activities.

d) For each line of funding, a timeframe is defined to complete the review of submitted applications. FAPESP takes the responsibility for making every effort to observe this time limit. The Foundation cannot, however, guarantee that this condition will be always fulfilled, since FAPESP’s top priority is to ensure the quality of the review and selection process..

e) Peer reviews are the most important part of the review process. Since all applications are sent to be peer reviewed, it is not always possible, despite FAPESP efforts, to ensure that the reviews will be submitted within the regular review deadlines.

f) Furthermore, reviewers frequently ask for clarifications before submitting a final review and sometimes FAPESP itself may decide to send the application to additional reviewers if it considers that the submitted reviews were not enough to justify a final decision.

g) Regardless, experience shows that, in most cases, the average time frame to complete the evaluation process is met, as can be checked at www.fapesp.br/estatisticas/analise

j) Considering the circumstances described above and in order to allow an appropriate planning, FAPESP strongly suggests Investigators to submit their proposals up to12 months prior to the desired starting date.


5) Obligations and responsibilities (Back)

5.1) Obligations and responsibilities of the Principal Investigator

The responsibilities and obligations of the PI will be defined in the Fellowship or Grant Contract. Among the main obligations are:

a) The Principal Investigator must, at the moment of submitting the application:

a.1) have no pending problems with FAPESP (i.e., have no pending progress or financial reports, nor pending reviews), for more than 60 days.

a.2) inform if the grant was submitted to other funding agencies and whether the applicant has other current grants.

b) After the grant’s approval, the Principal Investigator must comply, through the Grant or Fellowship Contract signature, with the following terms:

b.1) To examine the Grant or Fellowship Contract to make sure of all rights, responsibilities and obligations.

b.2) To make arrangements that will ensure the success of the proposed timetable.

b.3) To make reference to the corresponding FAPESP support in all types of divulgation (e.g., theses, dissertations, papers, books, conference abstracts, webpages and any other media and divulgation formats) that result, completely or partially, from the corresponding Grant Award. If there are fellowships associated with this Grant Contract, any divulgations resulting thereof must also reference FAPESP support.

b.3.i) The Principal Investigator must ensure that the divulgation of all contents (including webpages), that result, completely or partially, from a Grant or Fellowship Award, and which is part of this Grant Contract, must contain the following statement: "The opinions, hypothesis, conclusions or recommendations contained in this material are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect FAPESP opinion". Only peer reviewed scientific papers are not subject to this rule.

b.4) To inform FAPESP if the research project funded by the awarded grant has also been awarded funds from any other private or public funding body. In these cases, the Principal Investigator must be clear about the source of the funding in all mentioned presentations.

b.5) To consult with FAPESP before accepting any award from any funding body, whether public or private, to fund the same research project.

b.6) To consult with FAPESP before committing to activities that will require the Principal Investigator’s absence from the Host Institution for more than 90 days.

b.7) To ensure the security of Intellectual Property that results from research supported by FAPESP.

b.8) To write reviews for FAPESP in his/her field of knowledge, committing to deadlines, and without any payment.

5.2) Responsibilities and obligations of the Host Institution

a) The Host Institution must commit to offer: adequate conditions of space, infrastructure, time of dedication to research, technical and administrative support and the allowance to recruit students to work on the research as previously informed in writing by the Principal Investigator and attached to the Grant or Fellowship Contract.

a.1) The Host Institution’s responsibilities will be formalized in the Grant or Fellowship Contract, which must be signed by one of its Directors with authority for such purpose, by the Principal Investigator and by FAPESP.

b) In particular, the Host Institution must ensure that the Principal Investigator and his/her research group will be allowed to use all the facilities (laboratories, computer network, library, databases, etc.) and to have access to all kind of services (laboratory technicians, workshop technicians, administrative support, etc.) provided by the Institution and relevant to the grant execution.

b.1) In the case of project interruption or prevention due to noncompliance of the clauses a) and b), without previous FAPESP acknowledgement, the Host Institution assumes the reimbursement of FAPESP for all investment..

c) The Host Institution must have conditions to accept the requirements of FAPESP Acceptance of Cession of Use and/or Acceptance of Donation of equipment and permanent materials acquired with grant resources.

c.1) The Host Institution must also guarantee the Principal Investigator and the project team access to the equipment base and materials, the proper maintenance and insurance for these items throughout the grant and 10 years after its conclusion, except when agreed differently and authorized by FAPESP.

c.2) In the Young Investigator Awards program, the donation process is formalized only after the conclusion of the Grant Contract, never before it, according to resolution agreed by FAPESP Board of Trustee on March, 7th, 2006.

d) The Host Institution must endeavor the highest institutional effort to ensure and facilitate the access to materials funded by FAPESP to researchers both from the State of São Paulo and outside it, in order to conduct qualified research projects.

e) Being informed that noncompliance with the terms of the Grant or Fellowship Contract might hinder the progress of future applications submitted to FAPESP by investigators from the Unit.

f) The Host Institution must immediately notify FAPESP if the Principal Investigator is absent or unable to work.


6) Restrictions (Back)

a) It is strictly forbidden to the Principal Investigator:

a.1) to be the Principal Investigator of a Young Investigator Award or of a Regular Research Project, in course or concluded.

a.2) to be or have been the Principal Investigator of a Thematic Research Project.

a.3) to incur in disbursements outside the period when the grant award is ongoing.

a.4) to change the approved grant (initial plan, timetable, etc.) or modify allocation resources without FAPESP approval, except on the cases pre-established on www.fapesp.br/8647.

a.5) to use FAPESP resources for purposes other than the approved ones.

a.6) to make financial investments with project resources.

a.7) to hire or repass grant resources to other individuals, for any given reasons:

a.7.i) To individuals who might be connected to the PI by means of matrimony, common-law marriage or kinship, in this case, ascendant, descendant or collateral up to the 4th degree.

a.7.ii) To legal entities that have as partners the grantee him/herself, his/her consort, relatives by kinship (in this case, ascendant, descendant or collateral up to the 4th degree).

Under no circumstances will it be possible to hire individuals or legal entities with whom the grantee has business, liabilities or credits, according to the text of Deliberation nº 03/2012 from FAPESP Board of Trustees of September 27th, 2012.


7) Allowable items (Back)

The research project budget submitted to FAPESP shall be detailed and each item shall be specifically justified according to the objectives of the project.

Wages of any nature, third-party services other than those of technical and occasional nature, construction works, acquisition of printed materials, travel costs (except for field research and presentations in scientific conferences), administrative materials and services are not allowed.

Applicants are advised to read the Manual for Financial Report: www.fapesp.br/1416 Applicants

Allowed items include those described below.

7.1) Research project funding

a) Equipment acquired in Brazil or abroad;

b) Consumables acquired in Brazil or abroad;

c) Third-party services hired in Brazil or abroad: only short-term and specialized ones;

“When the request includes costs for payment of corporate services in the Host Institution, the justification for this service must be detailed in the project budget request, and include the decomposition of the service cost requested, in consumables, personnel and other costs. The cost of the requested service will be analyzed considering compatibility with other providers of similar services. All staff costs must be paid by the Host Institution.”

d) Transportation and per diems for activities directly related to the development of the proposed research, including expenses for bringing visiting investigators;

e) Fellowships: Payment of Technical Training, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Direct Doctorate, Scientific Journalism and Pedagogical Skills fellowships, according to FAPESP terms for each such fellowship modality;

e.1) For each Fellowship requested, a work plan up to two pages must be submitted along with the initial proposal, This work plan must include a Title, Summary and a brief plan description (long enough to be analyzed by the reviewers). The recipient of the fellowship does not need to be specified at the time of proposal submission. However, once the grant is approved, the Principal Investigator must publicize the position and organize a selective process based on academic merits.

e.2) Technical Training Fellowships: terms for the Technical Training fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/bolsastt.

e.3) Scientific Initiation Fellowships: terms for the Scientific Initiation fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/normasic.

e.3.i) The undergraduate student shall already have completed a sufficient number of courses relevant for the development of the research project.

e.4) The Scientific Initiation Fellowships may also be requested separately, related to Thematic Projects and Young Investigator Awards in specific calls, following traditional procedures from FAPESP Fellowship Program.

e.5) Masters Fellowships: terms for the Masters fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/8685.

e.5.i) The indicated student must have been accepted on the Graduate Program of the Institution that hosts the project.

e.6) Direct Doctoral Scholarships: terms of Direct Doctoral fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/5315

e.6.1) The indicated student must have been accepted on the Graduate Program of the Institution that hosts the project.

e.7) Scientific Journalism Fellowship (SJ): terms for José dos Reis Scientific Journalism Project Fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/9826

e.8) Pedagogical Skills Fellowship (PS): terms for Pedagogical Skills Fellowship are available at www.fapesp.br/9827

7.2) Research Overhead

a) Research Overhead is composed of three types of quota:

a.1) Research Overheads granted to PI and Co-PIs

a.2) Research Overhead – Direct Research Infrastructure Costs

a.3) Institutional Infrastructure to Support Research

b) The description of the overheads, in this section, is informative but not normative. Detailed terms for using the research overhead are available in www.fapesp.br/rt

7.2.1) Research Overheads granted to PI

a) Research Overhead granted to the Principal Investigators of projects in the following granting lines: Thematic, Regular, Research on Public Policies, Research on Public Education Improvement and Young Investigator Award. Their purpose is to cover expenses of participation in scientific or technological meetings and in short-term research internships outside the State of São Paulo.

a.1) The Principal Investigator is the only Co-Principal Investigator in the Young Investigator Award.

a.2) FAPESP will not grant multiple Research Overheads to the same person, even if this person is a PI in more than one project.

a.3) The amount awarded for Research Overhead may vary according to the funding line and is defined in the Grant Contract.

b) The participation in scientific or technological meetings presupposes the presentation of a scientific paper related to the project.

b.1) Participation in events without presentation of papers may be sponsored only in exceptional circumstances, duly justified in the annual report and subject to merit review by FAPESP.

c) Research internships in institutions outside the State of São Paulo, shorter than 60 days may be funded if justified by project needs.

c.1) While the project is in course, the Principal Investigators cannot be absent from their Institutions for more than 90 consecutive days without previous authorization from FAPESP.

d) Research Overhead is automatically awarded. Therefore, Principal Investigators are prohibited from applying for Meeting in Brazil or Meeting Abroad Awards or, in ordinary circumstances, Research Fellowship Abroad.

d.1) In exceptional circumstances, researchers who are beneficiaries of Research Overhead may submit an application for Research Fellowship Abroad for an internship longer than one month which proves, at FAPESP discretion, to be essential for the satisfactory development of the project. In this case, the fellowship will cover living expenses during the period that exceeds one month; transportation and living expenses for one month shall be covered with Research Overhead granted to PI.

d.2) Associated Investigators, if any, may apply for Meeting in Brazil, Meeting Abroad or Research Fellowship Abroad linked to the Young Investigator Award in which they take part. Their relation to the project shall be declared in a letter from the Principal Investigator of the Young Investigator Award, indicating FAPESP’s file number and the title of the project.

e) When a project entitled to Research Overheads is extended, the corresponding Overhead will be automatically granted in an amount proportional to the number of months of the extension approved, and to the number of researchers in the project, that have been granted Research Overheads, as long as the total duration of the project, including its extension, does not exceed the maximum number of months established for each funding line ( Regular and Public Policies up to 24 months, Thematic up to 60 months and Young Investigator and Public Education up to 48 months).

e.1) If a project in a funding line entitled to Research Overhead has its duration extended beyond the maximum number of months established for this line, Research Overhead will not be granted.

f) The use of Research Overhead shall observe the limits set by FAPESP daily allowances, living expenses and health insurance. Corresponding values can be can be viewed at www.fapesp.br/1106.

g) In every Annual Scientific Progress Report and in the Final Scientific Report, the Principal Investigator shall itemize and justify, in a special section of the report, the allocation of resources from Research Overheads, which will be analyzed by reviewers as to their adequacy to the project needs.

g.1) This information is to be provided in the Scientific Progress Reports themselves, and is not to be confused with the Annual Financial Report, which shall also be submitted within the time limits established in the Grant or Fellowship Contract.

7.2.2) Research Overhead – Direct Research Infrastructure Costs

The Direct Research Infrastructure Costs equals 15% of the total initial grant in Brazilian Reais. This amount may be spent in infrastructure items associated to the Research Grant and managed by the Principal Investigator.

7.2.3) Institutional Infrastructure to Support Research

The quota for Costs of Institutional Research Infrastructure equals 10% of the total grant. It must be spent in specific items discriminated in an "Annual Plan for Institutional Research Infrastructure ", which must be approved by the highest Council in the Institution. This quota will be conceded as part of the "Overhead to Support Institutional Research Infrastructure” in which all the quotas of the Direct Research Infrastructure Costs for the projects related to the approved projects of the Institution in the previous year will be pooled. This fund will be managed by the Head of the Institution or a person officially accredited by the Institution to do so. This will require opening a special FAPESP file, in cases in which the total amount of pooled resources is higher than R$ 10.000,00.

7.2.4) Other rules applicable to Research Overhead

a) If a Young Investigator Award involves several departments, the Research Overhead will be divided in the proportion suggested by the Principal Investigator responsible for the project.

b) The value of occasional supplementary grant amounts and additional resources for special support to the infrastructure of Young Investigator Award projects will not be taken into account to calculate the Research Overhead

c) As usual, due to FAPESP statutory restrictions, it is forbidden to allocate quotas for uses that, regardless of their merits, are not strictly related to research activities. In particular, the following items are not allowable:

c.1) Allocations whose justification is solely based on teaching and extension activities;

c.2) Administrative activities of any nature, including expenses to hire personnel;

c.3) Expenses to pay personnel;

c.4) Construction works that result in expansion of the constructed area.

7.3 Overhead for research infrastructure

In the initial application or on the occasion of submitting the first Scientific Progress Report, the Principal Investigator might request resources for small building renovations, whose goal is to guarantee the necessary infrastructure to conduct the project New constructions are prohibited. This request shall be justified in detail and shall be associated relevant matching contribution provided by the Host Institution.

7.4 Complementary Proposal

Complementary Proposals are those related to the objectives of a current Young Investigator Award and whose review process is not the standard one, due to this association. Proposals that are complementary to the Young Investigator Award project are called “Linked FAPESP files”. This concept is applied to Visiting Researcher Grants, Publication Grants, Scientific/Technological Meeting Attendance Grants and to the requests of Research Fellowship Abroad, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Doctorate, Direct Doctorate and Post-Doctorate Fellowships.

IMPORTANT:

A complementary proposal linked to a Thematic Project, RIDC or Young Investigator Award can be submitted only if the main grant has been awarded by FAPESP. If the proposal is approved, the corresponding Grant or Fellowship Contract will be issued only after the signing of the Grant Contract of the main award.

a) Complementary Proposal requests can only be in effect within the award period of the Young Investigator Award to which they are related. This award period cannot be exceed by any means.

a.1) of the length of the stay in a Visiting Researcher Award must not go beyond the end of the Young Investigator Award to which it is linked.

a.2) The duration of a linked fellowship cannot go beyond the Grant to which it is linked. The adequacy of the dates will be analyzed by the Scientific Directorate considering items such as the nature of the work plan and the duration of the grant in relation to the duration of the fellowship.

a.2.i. If the overlapping is not considered appropriate, the fellowship request maybe reviewed but will not qualify as a Complementary Proposal.

b) Complementary Proposal requests shall necessarily be endorsed by the Principal Investigator of the Young Investigator Award to which they are linked.

c) Requests submitted to FAPESP as “Complementary Proposal application” but that do not fit in the definition above will be processed as independent, not linked, requests.

d) Requests for Complementary Proposals for Visiting Researcher Grants, Publication Grants and Scientific/Technological Meeting Attendance Grants related to a Young Investigator Award may not require external peer reviewing, being only analyzed by the Area Panels.

e) Complementary Proposals for Masters, Doctorate, Direct Doctorate and Post-Doctorate Fellowships associated to a Young Investigator Awards will be given priority in their respective comparative analysis sessions, as long as they are considered to be on equal terms with the other proposals under comparative analysis as to academic requirements.

f) Complementary Proposal requests shall be submitted individually, in appropriate forms and supported by relevant documents, as described in the respective manuals. They shall also be supported by a summary of the corresponding Young Investigator Award, an essential element for the analysis of the activity proposed, emphasizing the fact that the request is complementary to the Young Investigator Award , mentioning its FAPESP file number.

f.1) These requests will be treated as new FAPESP files, with their own Scientific and Financial Reports. The resources awarded will not be deducted from the grant amount of the Young Investigator Award.


8) Proposal submission format (Back)

Applications must be submitted exclusively through the SAGE software.

The required documents for the application are:

a) Principal Investigator’s graduate transcripts, issued by the Institution. It must contain the names of the courses in full and eventual fails or withdrawals.

a.1) FAPESP will not accept graduate transcripts merely containing the final grade of concluded courses.

b) Principal Investigator’s Doctoral Certificate.

b.1) Once the proposal is approved, this document might be presented later, up to the confirmation of interest date.

c) Declaration of the beginning of the activities, signed by the awardee, informing FAPESP the date of the effective start of the fellowship holder activities in the Host Institution.

Attention: If the applicant is a foreigner, it is his responsibility, aiming the development of the activities, to check the documentation required for his entrance in Brazil with the Brazilian Consulate nearest to his residence.

d) Description of the research team:

d.1) In addition to the Principal Investigator, the team may include:

d.1.i) Investigators associated to the project;

d.1.ii) Graduate students;

d.1.iii) Interns;

d.1.iv) Technical support staff;

d.1.v) Administrative staff.

e) Abridged CVs for the Principal Investigator and each Associated Researchers (see abridged CV format instructions at www.fapesp.br/sumula).

f) Summary of results obtained previously in the scope of FAPESP Grants or Fellowships, listing projects titles and FAPESP file numbers (two pages maximum).

g) Research project of up to 20 pages for items from 1 to 7, with line space 1,5 and font equivalent to Times New Roman 12. It is strongly suggested that the project be organized according to the guidelines to format Grants, including.

g.1) Two cover pages (one in Portuguese and another one in English) with title of the proposed research project, name of the Principal Investigator, Host Institution and a 20-line summary.

g.2) Statement of the problem

g.3) Expected Results

g.4) Scientific and technological challenges and the means and methods to meet them.

g.5) Project schedule.

g.6) Dissemination and evaluation.

g.7) Other supports (if any).

g.8) References.

g.9) Work plans for requested Fellowships (Technical Training, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Doctorate, Direct PhD, Scientific Journalism and Pedagogical Skills). (This item and the next should not be included in on the 20 page limit mentioned above).

g.10) Budget spreadsheets, physical and financial schedules, available at www.fapesp.br/formularios/planilhas

g.10.i) Consolidated Budget Spreadsheet, by category of expense and by funding source (FAPESP and other sources such as universities, institutes and other agencies).

g.10.ii) Spreadsheets for items to be funded by FAPESP, one for each category of expense.

h) Additional documents for the proposal review:

h.1) Justification of why the Host Institution is considered an Emerging Institution and how the project may effectively help on its development (up to 2 pages).

h.2) Justification for each one of the items requested in the budget.

h.3) Budget (it is not necessary to submit invoices) for each one of the Equipment to be acquired in Brazil or abroad whose value is ten times higher the minimum wage in Brazil.

Important: The budgets submitted with the application are valid for submission and analysis purposes. According to the Manual for Financial Report, it is necessary to obtain new quotes at purchasing.

h.4) Description of institutional support and available infrastructure to conduct the project, including:

h.4.i) Academic, administrative and technical support services available at the Host Institution(s), personnel hired by the Host Institution(s) to support the project.

h.4.ii) Description of the scientific equipment base available at the Host institution(s). FAPESP suggests that the Host Institutions maintain a prepared listing, updated annually, with the official institutional seal, to be provided to investigators.

h.5) Projection of the present necessity of complementary proposals.


9) Authorizations required by law before the release of the Grant Contract (Back)

The researcher and the Host Institution are responsible for requesting, obtaining, and getting all the legal authorizations required for the proper execution of the project. When so required, such authorizations must be issued by the control and auditing bodies relating to the nature of the research. The Grant Contract will have a clause stipulating that the Principal Investigator and the Host Institution must have such permits to present to FAPESP whenever requested.

9.1) Documents required to sign the Grant Contract

If the proposal is approved upon merits, the Grant Contract signature and, consequently, the access to the grant resources will only be possible after the submission, reviewing by FAPESP Scientific Board and approval of the following documents

a) Description of the institutional support and infrastructure to be made available to develop the project, including:

a.1) Academic, administrative and technical support services available at the Host Institution(s), facilities and personnel hired by the Host Institution(s) to provide support for the project.

a.2) This document, which shall follow the guidelines in Appendix II of the Grant Contract, shall be signed by the Principal Investigator and by the Host Institution representative with the authority to ensure that the terms presented in the contract will be followed. The document must then be attached to the Grant Contract,.

b) For proposals in which the Principal Investigator does not have an employment relationship with the Host Institution, a statement of non-employment relationship shall be submitted, establishing, among other items considered necessary by the Host Institution, that

b.1) Any intellectual property developed during the term of the Principal Investigator in the Host Institution will remain with the Host Institution; and

b.2) Inventors will be entitled to a quota of the benefits resulting from licensing or commercialization of intellectual property, according to Host Institution rules and Act 10.973/2004.


10) Intellectual Property issues (Back)

FAPESP rules regarding the intellectual property of results from Foundation-supported projects are described at www.fapesp.br/pi.


11) Review and selection of proposals (Back)

11.1) Review criteria

The review process has two phases: Eligibility and Merit Analysis.

11.1.1) Eligibility

In this step, the application is reviewed by the Area Panels under the point of view of adequacy of the applicant’s academic record towards the aims of the Program.

11.1.2) Merit Analysis

The eligible applications are submitted to merit analysis using external aid of experienced researchers in the field of the project. The items that guide these reviews are:

a) Regarding the Principal Investigator:

a.1) Quality and regularity of scientific and/or technological results. Important elements for this review include, among others: publications in periodicals with selective editorial policy; books or book chapters; patents in which the applicant appears as the inventor; other instruments of intellectual property; research results effectively transferred and adopted by companies or by the government; and any additional information relevant for the assessment of this item.

a.2) Experience as head of research projects related to the theme of the proposal under review.

a.3) When applicable, the results obtained in previous FAPESP-funded projects or projects funded by other agencies, including fellowships.

a.4) According to the program regulation, the applicant must be an early-career researcher, with a remarkable technical or scientific production for his career level. Particularly, the applicant must be fully able to independently coordinate research projects and implement new lines of research.

b) About the Host Institution:

b.1) The institution research tradition.

b.2 If the project aims to establish a new line of research inside the institution (unit, department) with an established tradition in research.

b.3) Appropriate institutional and building infrastructure offered by the institution where the project will be developed.

b.4) The effects that the grant might bring to the institution. Notice that: 1) The purpose of the Young Investigator Award Program is to enable the proper creation of job opportunities for highly qualified young researcher or group of highly qualified young researches, preferably in emerging research centers, favoring the creation of new groups and decentralization of the state research system. Candidates whose proposal is to create a new line of research, in institutions with established tradition in research, may also apply; 2) In this case, the proposal will only be approved if: a) The applicant has an outstanding productivity for his career level; b) Identification of special circumstances (for instance, an application which aims to create a new research group in an Unit or in a department) that would justify the support.

b.5) Institutional compliance with the proposal, according to the regulation of the program.

c) About the research project:

c.1) Definition and relevance of the objectives.

c.2) Originality and importance of the intended contribution for the corresponding field(s) of knowledge.

c.3) Scientific foundations and methods employed.

c.4) Adequacy of the requested resources considering the relevance of the intended scientific or technologic contribution.

c.5) If the project involves Scientific Initiation or Graduate students.

d) Concerning the Proposed Budget

d.1) Budget adequacy in relation to:

d.1.i. The project needs;

d.1.ii. The applicant experience in managing resources; and

d.1.iii. The Principal Investigator’s ability to take full advantage of the requested resources.

d.2) The justification for each of the requested items.

11.2) Procedures

a) FAPESP practices the peer-review system adopted in the most important research funding agencies worldwide.

b) Each application is reviewed by one or more researchers, without any formal ties with FAPESP, with expertise in the knowledge area under consideration. These reviews ground the decisions issued by FAPESP.

c) If the reviewers recommend that the application should not be accepted, the applicant has the full right to appeal against this negative decision. Appeals are reconsideration requests based on the discussion of the objections raised by the ad hoc reviewers.

c.1) The unlimited practicing of this right of appealing – which may lead to the plea of another ad hoc review – is the necessary counterpart of the importance that the external reviews have on the decisions of the Scientific Directorate.

d) International experience and experience accumulated by teach that the good performance of this review system depends essentially on the preservation of the anonymity of the ad hoc reviewers. The degree of independence and objectivity of peer-reviews is certainly proportional to the degree of the reliability of the secrecy offered by the Foundation regarding the identity of these reviewers.

d.1) Thus, by decision of FAPESP’s Board of Trustees, its higher decision body, every request for an opinion to an ad hoc reviewer is accompanied by an explicit commitment to preserve his/her anonymity.

e) On the other hand, ad hoc reviewers oblige themselves to maintain confidentiality regarding the content of their own reviews, of which only FAPESP area panels review process will be aware. This trust relationship between FAPESP and its reviewers cannot be broken under any pretext whatsoever.

f) When sending an application to FAPESP, the applicant shall declare that:

f.1) (S)He is familiar with the FAPESP review system;

f.2) (S)He authorizes his/her application be reviewed according to this system and, in particular, be submitted to review by researchers chosen by FAPESP, whose identities will be kept confidential.

g) FAPESP’s review system is described at www.fapesp.br/1478

11.3) FAPESP Conflict of Interest Policy

a) In order to preserve the high degree of credibility of its analysis procedures and avoiding potential embarrassment to its peer reviewers, FAPESP requests that, before starting to review a project, the reviewer considers the possibility of a potential conflict of interest. According to FAPESP, the following situations configure a potential conflict of interest:

a.1) Current or previous participation in the project;

a.2) Regular collaboration in research activities or publications with any of the applicants in recent years;

a.3) Relationship supervisor/student with any of the applicants;

a.4) Financial interests in the proposed research;

a.5) Family relationship with one of the applicants;

a.6) Any previous relationship with any of the applicants that can be seen as a hindrance for an unbiased opinion.

b) If one or more of the mentioned circumstances occur, or that might characterize potential conflicts of interest, the reviewer shall return the application immediately. If the reviewer feels unsure about the existence of a potential conflict of interest or not, (s)he can consult with FAPESP’s Scientific Directorate.

11.3.1) Reviewer Declaration

On signing the advisory report, the ad hoc reviewer formally declares : "There is no circumstance that typifies a situation of potential conflict of interest or that may be seen as a hindrance for an unbiased opinion. I hereby agree to keep completely confidential and not disclose, publish or use for any purpose, except as expressly authorized by the Principal Investigator responsible for the current proposal, any information obtained by reading the Proposal.”

11.4) Reconsideration request

FAPESP guarantees to the applicant, the right to a new review of the application, upon justified request submission for reconsideration of the initial decision Further information at www.fapesp.br/reconsideracao.


12) Scientific Progress Reports (Back)

a) Deadlines for submitting Scientific Reports are defined in the Grant or Fellowship Contract. Their submission within stipulated time limits is essential for the release of the remaining balances of the awarded grant.

b) Usually (the Principal Investigator must always verify the Grant or Fellowship Contract, since the valid dates are there specified), the deadlines to submit the Scientific Progress Report and the Final Scientific Report are:

b.1) 1st Scientific Progress Report until the 20th day of the 18th month of the grant.

b.2) 2nd Scientific Progress Report until the 20th day of the 34th month of the grant.

b.3) Final Scientific Report until the 20th day after the 48th month of the grant.

c) Eventual balances will be automatically cancelled on the very date stipulated in the Grant Contract to be the end of the project.

d) It is suggested that the Final Scientific Report and every (annual) Scientific Progress Reports be written according to the model in the Formatting Manual for Scientific Reports (annual).

WARNING: FAPESP files submitted through SAGe should have their Scientific Progress Reports submitted electronically as described in the Scientific Report Submission Manual that can be consulted at SAGe, on the link Manuais.

12.1) Guidelines for a Young Investigator Fellowship complementary to a Young Investigator Award Grant.

a) If the Grant includes a Young Investigator Fellowship, the Scientific Progress Report of the Grant will also be considered as the Scientific Progress Report of the Fellowship. An identical copy of the Scientific Progress Report must be attached to the corresponding Fellowship Grant process at SAGe.

a.1) If the fellowship holder has benefitted from the Resolution CS n.º 09/2008, the Scientific Progress Report must also describe the extra-fellowship activities developed in the period, including the working hours.

a.1.i. In case of remunerated activities, a financial statement from the paying source must be attached, specifying the nature of the services provided, the number of working hours per week, the duration of the service and the amount received, for tracking purposes.

b) The 1st Scientific Progress Report, to be presented on the 18th month of the grant, will serve as a base for the analysis for the first Fellowship extension for a 12-months period.

c) The 2nd Scientific Progress Report, to be presented on the 34th month of the grant, will serve as a base for the analysis for a second Fellowship extension for a 12-months period.

d) If the extension is not approved, the fellowship holder must submit a Complementary Scientific Progress Report related to the remaining period (6 months in the case of the first extension request and 2 months in the case of the second request).
 

13) Financial Report (Back)

a) Deadlines for submitting Financial Reports are defined in the Grant or Fellowship Contract.

b) The Financial Report must be written according to the model available at: www.fapesp.br/1416.

c) FAPESP allows the Principal Investigator appoint SAGe account users to support entering the data on the Financial Report. Information about the registration of users and their official appointment are available in www.fapesp.br/materia/1416.
 

14) Amending the Grant Contract (Back)

a) By signing the Grant Contract, the Principal Investigator officially recognizes that resources provided by FAPESP are sufficient to enable the execution of the approved project, barring unpredictable circumstances. b) For this reason, Investigators are advised to sign the Grant or Fellowship Contract only after having assured themselves that the items and amounts in the budget FAPESP approved are, under predictable circumstances, enough to fully guarantee the successful execution of that project. c) In the lack of this certainty, it is recommended that the investigator does not sign the Grant or Fellowship Contract and immediately submit a well-founded request for reconsideration of the approved budget, which will be analyzed by FAPESP Area Panels. d) Recognizing that, in certain cases, circumstances unpredictable at the moment of the initial award may occur, requiring changes in the agreed conditions, FAPESP accepts that requests for changes in the Grant or Fellowship contract may be made by means of an Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Contract, under the following conditions.

14.1) Requests for Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Contract justified by unpredictable circumstances, and without the granting of additional resources

a) Requests for amendments for extending the duration of the grant due to unpredictable circumstances without granting additional resources may be analyzed by FAPESP when they are submitted at least 30 days before the closure date initially approved. b) Requests for amendments for other changes justified by unpredictable circumstances, without granting additional resources may be analyzed by FAPESP when submitted at least 30 days before the date on which the change will be effective. c) Requests shall be submitted, together with their proper justification, via the service available for this purpose at “Converse com a FAPESP” or via SAGe.

14.2) Requests for Amendment to the Grant or Fellowship Contract for supplementary resources, justified by unpredictable circumstances

a) Requests for amendments to supplement resources, justified by unpredictable circumstances, may be analyzed by FAPESP when they are submitted at the moment of submitting a Scientific Progress Report

a.1) Requests for amendments to supplement resources not submitted on these occasions will be analyzed exceptionally only if the grantee demonstrates that the budget items and amounts in question could not have been predicted at the moment of signing the Grant or Fellowship Contract or of submitting previous Scientific Progress Reports presentation

b) Requests shall be submitted together with their proper justification via the service available for this purpose at “Converse com a FAPESP” or via SAGe.

 

DOCUMENTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (Back)

1) Guidelines for formatting a research project and requested forms (Back)

A research project shall demonstrate clearly the technical and scientific challenges to be overcome by the proposed research, the means and methods to achieve this purpose and the relevance of the expected results for advancing knowledge in the field.

Formatting

The text shall be printed with a line space of 1.5, font equivalent to Times New Roman size 12, with margins set at 3.5 cm on the left and 1.5 cm on the right. Figures and tables, if any, shall have caption and numbers to be referred to in the text.

Research project Organization

a) This is only a recommendation – following it does not imply the approval for the project.

b) It is strongly suggested to the applicant to read the form used by scientific reviewers to report their opinions (www.fapesp.br/assessoria), This form makes clear what are the points to be analyzed by the reviewers consulted by FAPESP.

c) It is recommended that the project be structured according to the table bellow. It is suggested to use the titles listed from (1) to (7) bellow, as section titles.

d) Items (1) to (7) below shall be written in up to 20 pages, with font equivalent to Times New Roman 12 and a line space of 1,5.

Guidelines for formatting a Young Investigator Awards Research Project

0) Title pages (two, one in Portuguese and the other in English) with the title of the proposed research project, the Principal Investigator’s name, the Host Institution and a 20-line summary.

1) Statement of problem: What will be the problem addressed by the project and what is its importance? What will be the contribution to the field, if successful? Mention relevant research in the field.

2) Expected Results: What will be created or produced as a result from the proposed project? How the results will be disseminated?

3) Scientific and Technological Challenges and the means and methods to meet them: Explain the scientific and technological challenges that the project intends to meet to achieve its objectives. Describe the means and methods to meet these challenges. Mention references that help the reviewers who will analyze the proposal to understand that the mentioned challenges have not been met yet (or have not yet been met appropriately) and that they may be met by the means and methods of the proposal under analysis.

4) Schedule: when will the project be completed? What are the significant events that will be used to measure the progress of the project? If the proposed project is a part of another larger project already under way, estimate deadlines only for the proposed project.

5) Dissemination and evaluation: How will project results be evaluated and how will they be disseminated?

6) Other supports: Enumerate other supports for the project, if any, in the form of funds, goods or services, but not including items such as use of facilities already available at the institution. Observe that the authors of selected proposals shall submit an official letter signed by the Institution director, involving the additional resources and goods described in the proposal.

7) References: list the bibliographical references cited in previous sections.

8) Work plan for the requested Fellowships (Technical Training, Scientific Initiation, Masters, Direct Doctorate, Scientific Journalism and Pedagogical Skills).(This item and the following shall not be included in the limit of 20 pages mentioned above): For each fellowship requested, a work plan of up to two pages, for TT, SJ, SP and SI and up to 4 pages for DPhD, must be submitted, together with the initial proposal, including Fellowship Project Title, Summary and the description of plan. It is not necessary to mention the fellowship holder’s name in the proposal. If the project is approved, the Principal Investigator shall make arrangements for a selection process publicly advertised to choose fellowship holders on their academic merit.

9) Budget Spreadsheet: spreadsheets are available at www.fapesp.br/formularios/planilhas. Once filled in, they will become item 8) of the research project. In any case spreadsheets shall form a single document together with the “Research Project”.

9.a) Consolidated Budget Spreadsheet, by item and by source (FAPESP and other sources ,such as universities, institutes and other agencies).

9.b) Spreadsheets for items to be funded by FAPESP:

i) Spreadsheet for items of Acquired Equipment in Brazil

ii) Spreadsheet for items of Acquired Equipment Abroad

iii) Spreadsheet for items of Acquired Consumables in Brazil

iv) Spreadsheet for items of Acquired Consumables Abroad

v) Spreadsheet for items of Third-Party Services Hired in Brazil

vi) Spreadsheet for items of Third-Party Services Hired Abroad

vii) Spreadsheet for Transportation items

vii) Spreadsheet for Per Diem items

9.c) Annual physical and financial schedule of resources requested from FAPESP

i) Schedule for project execution.

10) Additional documents necessary for reviewing the proposal:

10.a) Justification for the emergent nature of the Institution and how the project may effectively help in its development (up to 2 pages).

10.b) Justification for each one of the items requested at the budget.

10.c) Three different budgets (it is not necessary to submit invoices) for each one of the items in the category Acquired Equipment in Brazil or Acquired Equipment Abroad which value exceeds ten times the Brazilian minimum wage.

10.d) Description of institutional support infrastructure available (Appendix II of the Grant Contract) for developing the project, including:
i) Academic, administrative and technical support services available at the Host Institution(s), personnel hired by the Host Institution(s) to support the project.

10.e) Description of the scientific equipment infrastructure available at the Host institution(s). FAPESP suggests that the Host Institution(s) has (have) a prepared list, updated annually, with the institutional seal, to be provided to investigators..

10.f) Projection of the present necessity of Complementary Proposals
 

2) Scientific Progress Reports (annual) and Final Scientific Report (Back)

The Final Scientific Report and each of the Annual Scientific Progress Reports shall contain the following items, preferably in the suggested particular order ensuring that items 1 to 7 do not occupy more than 30 pages.

1. Formulary for Submitting Scientific Progress Report of Grants, properly filled in and signed. Required for Annual Scientific Reports, Final Reports and Reformulated Reports.

a) Only the Principal Investigator shall sign the form and the Scientific Progress Report

2. Cover Page (1 page) with:

a. Project title;

b. Principal Investigator’s name;

c. Host Institution(s) of the project;

d. The research team, including names, qualification and institutions, if different from Host Institution.

e. FAPESP file number;

f. Period for which project was approved;

g. Period covered by the Scientific Report in question.

3. Summary of the objectives of the proposed project (up to 2 pages).

4. Evidences of creation or strengthening of the emerging center and its impact upon the Host Institution or evidences of the creation of a new research line in the Institution, as applicable (up to 2 pages).

5. Accomplishment in the period, with reference to the list of publications in item (g) (20 pages).

6. Description and evaluation of institutional support received in the period (1 page).

7. Plan of activities for the following period (not applicable to the Final Scientific Report) (up to 2 pages).

8. Specific section with brief and justified description for allocation of resources from Research Overhead in the period covered by the Report (2 pages).

a. When resources have been used for participation in scientific events, a copy of each of the papers presented must be included, with a note by the Principal Investigator, stating that “This paper was presented by [investigator’s name][orally/in panels] in scientific event [name of the event] that took place from [starting date] to [closing date] in [location]” ------ The Report should not exceed 30 pages up to item 8 – the following items do not count for the 30-page limit -------------------------

9. List of publications (including material accepted for publication, informing this situation in each case) in the period, containing:

a. Papers in indexed scientific periodicals;

b. Papers in non-indexed scientific periodicals;

c. Papers presented in international conferences;

d. Papers presented in Brazilian conferences;

e. Patents requested or obtained;

f. Chapters in published books;

g. Books published together with team members as author, organizer or editor;

h. Dissertations defended;

i. Theses defended;

10. For the publications listed in item (9), include copies of the first page.

a. For Theses and Dissertations, include copies of the title page containing the title, summary and signatures of banking.

11. List of papers prepared or submitted (and not yet accepted) for publication, with copies of these papers attached.

12. If the holder of the Young Investigator Fellowship has been authorized by FAPESP to carry out the activities described at the Resolution CS nº 17/2005, the Scientific Progress Report must include a section detailing the extra-activities carried out in the period, reporting the working hours.

a. In the case of paid activities, a declaration from the paying source must be attached, with specification of the nature of the rendered work, the weekly hours, the period of the service rendering e the received remuneration for tracking purposes.

13. In there were grants for Technical Training, Scientific Journalism, Pedagogical Skills or Scientific Initiation Fellowships granted as budget item, an appendix containing the spreadsheet and the Synthetic Reports of the fellowship holders, according to instructions available respectively in www.fapes.br/bolsasttwww.fapesp.br/9826, www.fapesp.br/9827 and www.fapesp.br/materia/4729

14. An appendix for each of the Annual Scientific Reports by Honor PhD fellowship holders whose fellowship have been awarded as budget items in the project.

15. Theses or Dissertations will not be accepted as Scientific Progress Reports.
 

3) Description of the institutional support and available infrastructure (Appendix II of the Grant Contract) (Back)

4) Description of the scientific equipment of the institution(s) (Back)

A list of the equipment available at the host Institution(s) must be submitted, including equipment whose acquisition values have been equal to or higher than 20 thousand dollars, informing for each one of the items:

a) Type, manufacturer and model (e.g.: Oscilloscope Tektronix mod.7904);

b) Relevant features (ex.: 500MHz; 1mV; single beam);

c) Nature: domestic or imported material

d) Acquisition year;

e) Acquisition price;

f) Person in charge of allowing access to the equipment at the institution.