If you are having trouble viewing this message, click here to view in a browser.
Newsletter Banner
Examples of UNF Faculty research conducted with ORSP

Spring 2016

Dr. Heather Truelove
ORSP Researcher of the Month: Dr. Heather Truelove

Dr. Heather Truelove joined the University of North Florida in 2012 as an assistant professor of applied psychology in the College of Arts and Sciences. Truelove, a psychologist with a specialization in social psychology and environmental psychology, earned her M.A. at UNF, her Ph.D. at Washington State University and a Post-Doctorate Fellowship at Vanderbilt University. Her research focuses heavily on environmental psychology and researches human recycling behavior and the impact environmental problems have on people. 


Truelove's research has taken her to Sri Lanka to study "farmers and how they're adapting to climate change" she stated. Paddy farmers are learning how to integrate indigenous practices with new practices in order to keep their farms alive. Truelove and her students collaborate on this project with Vanderbilt University and University of Colorado-Boulder research teams. The three schools secured a five year grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF). Two UNF students joined Truelove on the ten day trip to Sri Lanka. In addition, the schools have grown a strong partnership with the National Building Research Organization (NBRO), which has given the team access to interview and survey Sri Lankan locals. 


Truelove has also, in collaboration with University of Colorado-Boulder and Columbia University, received a three year grant from the National Science Foundation, to research environmental spillover. This research is conducted to observe if a person does one pro-environmental behavior, is it likely they will be more inclined to continue to stay within the identity of being a pro-environmentalist. The competing hypothesis is if someone does one pro-environmental behavior then they feel as though they have already contributed to a pro-environmental behavior and will not complete another pro-environmental behavior. Much of this research is conducted on UNF's campus and involves current undergraduate and graduate students. 


In understanding the importance of research, Truelove feels the biggest piece of advice she can offer to new faculty is to apply for grants early and utilize the funding mechanisms Research and Sponsored Programs can provide. She owes much of her success in receiving sponsored research and funding through hard work and luck. She stated, "within my first year as a faculty member, I had two NSF grants". Truelove also said, "if it's practically important [your research], if there's a direct application or benefit to society, I think it's important. Since I study environmental issues, anything we find is going to be useful to policymakers." 


Truelove feels there are many other benefits to receiving funding from Research and Sponsored Programs, both personal and professionally. She now has the ability to conduct research with 15-20 undergraduate students and has personally mentored four graduate students in her three short years at the University. At the end of January, Truelove and two of her students will be heading to San Diego for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology Convention. Truelove and the students will also attend the pre-conference and present at that time. 


The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs is proud to have Dr. Truelove on campus and working diligently to conduct beneficial research. We look forward to seeing her grow at the University and the impact her research will make on environmental psychology. ORSP is proud to support her work. 

Research Integrity
Update from Research Integrity Team

Happy new year everyone! 


We have a lot of research activity going on at UNF and this has been an exceptionally busy time in research integrity. Review timelines for the IRB are elongated for several reasons and we look forward to getting that timeline back to normal (i.e., 2-3 weeks for exempt and 4-6 weeks for expedited and full board review). We’re fairly certain researchers look forward to shorter review timelines as well. As always, we enjoy the working relationships we have with researchers and look forward to teaming together to help reduce processing timelines. To that end, RI staff noticed a few trends in IRB protocol submissions. 


The first trend is that many more research projects fit within the expedited review category and the review timeline is longer for those projects as noted above. This is due to additional information and supplemental documentation required for expedited projects. Second, research protocols could be much better organized and more complete. The qualities of protocol submissions affect review and approval timelines for everyone. We encourage researchers to take advantage of the document checklists and other resources available on the UNF IRB Website. Please direct student researchers to that page as well. Use of those tools will help reduce review and approval timelines for everyone.


We understand the learning curve for working in IRBNet, UNF’s IRB Protocol submission and review software, can be challenging for some folks. In order to assist researchers (faculty, staff, and students) in navigating IRBNet and in planning IRB protocol documents we scheduled additional workshops for each topic. Please see the announcement section of the UNF IRB webpage for dates. These include a few evening sessions!


In reference to IACUC protocols, researchers received meeting invitations for their Outlook calendars. These were set up such that researchers would have a 75 day and a 60 day advance notice of protocol expirations. We want to help ensure everyone has approved protocols and project documents do not expire without having the new protocol in place when the researcher would like to continue with the project. To utilize future reminders, simply accept the invitation and a pop-up reminder will appear prior to protocol expiration. With that advanced reminder you should also have plenty of time to renew permits or training required for your work.


In reference to IBC protocols, Outlook invitations were also created as expiration reminders for those projects as well. Again, simply accept the invitation and a pop-up reminder will appear. We hope you find the reminders helpful and that data collection is not disrupted due to protocol expiration.


Finally, there is always a flurry of submissions around breaks. Therefore, we suggest you keep that in mind as you plan the rest of your fall schedule. Once you submit a request (protocol review or other) and you don’t hear from us after a week or so, please feel free to send a friendly email inquiry. Please also contact our office if we can assist with your protocol submission or other research integrity activity. Thank you for working with us and we hope you enjoy the rest of the spring 2016 term.




Your Research Integrity Team

National Science Foundation
NSF Proposals Returned Without Review

The NSF has implemented new features in the FastLane system for automated compliance checking. The goals are to ensure consistency in NSF's proposal submissions and bring all NSF systems in line with long-standing proposal preparation requirements as outlined in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The agency is now actively applying the “letter of the law” in many divisions and turning proposals away without review if they do not meet the requirements in the new GPG.  Yes, this has happened to at least one faculty member at UNF.

The complete list of reasons for returning a proposal without review can be found in GPG Chapter IV.B. Proposals Not Accepted or Returned Without Review. Below are the most common reasons for return without review for proposals previously submitted to the Engineering Directorate.


Project Summary


  • Should ONLY be uploaded as a PDF if the use of special characters is required. 
  • Must include separate sections labeled "Overview," "Intellectual Merit," and "Broader Impacts" if uploaded as a PDF. 


Project Description



  • Must include properly formatted "Results from Prior NSF Support" over the past five years for each PI and Co-PI. 
  • Must include a section — with a mandatory heading — for "Broader Impacts of the proposed work.” 


Some other known reasons for return without review:



  • Proposal is a duplicate of, or substantially similar to, one already under consideration by NSF from the same PI/Co-PIs. 
  • Proposal was previously reviewed and has not been substantially revised. 
  • Broader impacts are not addressed in separate section in (a) Project Summary, (b) Project Description – proposed work, and (c) Project Description –NSF support section. 
  • Recent (last 5 years) NSF support section (up to 5 pages) is missing from Project Description – This is required for each PI and Co-PI, regardless of whether the support was directly related to the proposal or not.  The description MUST include the NSF award number, amount, time period; title; results of the completed work in two separate sections on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact; and now MUST provide a complete bibliographic citation, either in this section of the Project Description or in the References Cited section of the proposal. 
  • Reference section: title missing; incomplete list of all authors of each Reference (Do not use et al.) . The common format of Initial.LastName (J. Smith ) is sufficient.  PIs are cautioned to properly reference and quote published work (figures, tables, and text). There is no limit on the size of the reference section, so these changes will not cause problems with length limits. 
  • Bio Sketch section: incomplete list of all authors of each publication (Do not use et al., use full names); title missing 
  • Bio Sketch section incomplete (list full names and affiliations of: collaborators within 4 years; co-editors within 2 years; graduate advisors; postdoctoral sponsors; postdoctoral scholars within 5 years; all prior graduate students) – required for each PI, Co-PI, and senior project personnel. The new PAPPG also clarifies that the total number of collaborators and co-editors, and graduate advisors and postdoctoral sponsors, must be identified in the appropriate areas in the Collaborators & Other Affiliations section. If these changes make your biosketch too long (2 page limit) (some researchers have hundreds of collaborators), contact your NSF program manager. Smaller font can be allowed in these sections, for instance. Additionally, new information is being requested in the Professional Preparation section – the location of the individual’s undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral institution(s) must be provided. 
  • Current and Pending Support section incomplete – required for each PI, Co-PI, and senior project personnel. Include the project you are applying for now as “pending.” 
  • Letter of Collaboration (formerly called Letter of Commitment) that goes beyond a brief statement confirming collaboration; additional remarks about PI/Co-PI’s past accomplishments or planned undertakings may not be included. In other words, such letters should be limited to stating the intent to collaborate and should not contain endorsements or evaluation of the proposed project. (Program managers can request that you delete a letter even after you have submitted your application.) 
  • Small font size and margins. See GPG for allowed size/margins. 


How do you make sure that your submitted grant gets reviewed?



  • CHECK for the changes and now-common mistakes above. 
  • CHECK with ORSP at least 5 days before the deadline. Your research development coordinator at the ORSP is trained and ready to help be sure your grant meets the GPG requirements for NSF and other types of grants. In order to provide this very important service, ORSP needs to receive your grant 5 business days prior to the deadline.  
  • You may PLAN to submit to NSF at least 2 weeks before the deadline. Yes, this is even earlier than the ORSP 5-day deadline. In many divisions, the NSF Program Officers look at the grants they receive and contact the PI if they see problems with the grant. This increases the likelihood that you will have sufficient time to resubmit a modified proposal before the deadline. They are not required to provide this service, but many do. 


Argonne New
UNF Access to Argonne National Laboratory User Facilities

UNF has an agreement in place with the US Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory to provide researcher access to its user facilities. Based near Chicago, these facilities include the Argonne Tandem Linear Accelerator System, Advanced Photon Source, Center for Nanoscale Materials, and Argonne Leadership Computing Facility. More information can be found at Argonne National Laboratory User Facilities website. If you are interested in submitting a proposal for user facility access, please contact Dr. John Kantner.

Research News
Share Your Research News with the Public
Working on an exciting study or project that might be of interest to the general public or your university colleagues? Don't keep that news to yourself! The Department of Public Relations provides venues for faculty, staff, as well as graduate and undergraduate students to promote various programs, research, courses, activities, and events to the public through the media. More information on what to share and how to do it is available here.
NSF EAGER Program Needs Applications
The Early-Concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER) program is NSF's mechanism to fund "high risk/high reward" projects that are not likely to make it through the regular review process. Instead, EAGER applications receive internal NSF merit review to ensure they're proposing radically different approaches, appying new expertise, and/or engaging novel disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspectives. Science noted last year that NSF receives relatively few applications under the EAGER mechanism and rejects proportionally fewer of them. If you are interested in learning more, click here. Note that a Program Officer must approve of EAGER application prior to submission.

Recent Awards

Congratulations to the following faculty and staff members receiving funding for their research projects!


Cheryl Fountain, School Readiness Technical Assistance and Support Initiative 2015-2015, $1,562,839

Alan Harris,Senior Capstone Design - Community Partner Project Enhancement, $61.323

Paul Eason, Senior Capstone Design - Community Partner Project Enhancement, $61,323

Joshua Melko,Mechanistic Details of Iron Based Fischer-Tropsch Catalysts: Ion Trap Experiments on Model Active Sites, $55,000

Don Resio,  Flooding Evaluations for PSEG Salem and Hope Creek Plants, $10,000

Jeff Will, Healthy Start/Magnolia Infant Mortality Reduction Project, $81,974


Total July 2015: $2,018,805

Robert Wood, Teaching Point Agreement, $700,000

Don Resio,Technical Support for Appeal of FEMA NYC Flood Insurance Rate Maps, $37,500

Amy Costa, DCPS Steam Passport Title I - Eco Adventure Program, $5,950

Thobias SandoCenter for Safe and Accessible Transportation for an Aging Population, $146,365

William Dally, MRI: Development of an Amphibious Remotely Operated Vehicle for Coastal Research and Education, $515,195

O. Patrick Kreidl, Adaptive Control Strategies for Self-Tuning Dynamical Systems, $83,444

Sanjay Ahuja, Google Glass for Manufacturing, Phase II, $91,243

Cheryl Fountain, Head Start Collaboration 2015-2015, $225,000

James Gelsleichter, Cooperative Atlantic State Shark Pupping and Nursery Survey in Florida Waters, $5.000

Mary Rose, Evaluation of Duval County Public Schools Behavioral Health Proof of Concept Initiative: Collaborative Proposal with Jacksonville Public Education Fund as Lead Agency, $15,955

Emma Apatu, Evaluation of Duval County Public Schools Behavioral Health Proof of Concept Initiative: Collaborative Proposal with Jacksonville Public Education Fun as Lead Agency, $15,485

Aaron Spaulding, Evaluation of Duval County Public Schools Behavioral Health Proof of Concept Initiative: Collaborative Proposal with Jacksonville Public Education Fund as Lead Agency, 15,485

Cheryl Fountain, College Reach Out Program (CROP): JAX Precollegiate Connections 2015-2016, $54,445
Thomas Mullen, RUI: A Molecular-Ruler Processto Create Nanostructures through Self- and Directed-Assembly, $90,226

Corey Causey, RUl A Molecular-Ruler Processto Create Nanostructures though Self- and Directed-Assembly, $80,201

Daniel F. Santavicca, RUI: A Molecular-Ruled Processto Create Nanostructures through Self- and Directed-Assembly, $80,201

James Gelsleichter, Cooperative Atlantic States Shark Pupping and Nursey (COASTSPAN) Survey of Georgia waters, $7,000


Total August 2015: $2,187,695
Cynthia Cummings, Fl Blue mini-grant program: Improving student performance through simulation activities, $45,082
David Lambert, Duval County Maritime Management Plan, $66,666
Heather Truelove, Climate, Drought, and Agricultural Adaptations: An Investigation of Vulnerabilities and Responses to Water Stress Among Paddy Farmers in Sri Lanka, $14, 147
Christopher Kelso, Developing a Dark Matter Analysis Tool, $33,885
Stephen Stagon, Bi-Layer Complementary Metal Nanorods for the Detection of Parts per Billion Concentrations of Organic Materials, $49,912
Ching-Hua Chuan, Mobile Applications for gFPS and eDHR2, Phase II, $73,197
Cheryl Fountain, National Consortium for School Counseling and Postsecondary Success (NCSCPS) White House Convening on School Counseling and College Advising, $25,000
Juan Aceros, Hybrid Rocket Motor Competition - Osprey Space Program, $750
Len Roberson, Educational Interpreters Project 2015-2016, $42,239


Total September 2015: $250,878
Janice Donaldson, Small Business Development Services for St. Johns County 2015-2016, $40,000
O. Patrick Kreidl, Holistic decision systems for distributed enclave defense using configurable edges (DEDUCE), $149,949
Juan Aceros, Osprey - FSGC Hybrid Rocket Program 2015-2016 - Precision Altitude Category 2000 ft., $750
Christopher Brown, Little Colorado River (LCR) at Winslow, $6,825
Michael Binder, Clay County Quality of Life Survey, $8,600
Michael Binder, Jacksonville Public Education Fund Annual Survey 2015, $13,500
Christopher Brown, Independent External Peer Review (IEPR) of the Battle Mountain, Nevada Detailed Project Report (DPR) Update, $4,400
Heather Truelove, Rebounds vs. Gateway Effects of Pro-Environmental Behavior, $93,429


Total October 2015: $317,453
Quincy Gibson, Anthropogenic Impacts on Estuarine Dolphins, $16, 520
Janice Donaldson, Small Business Development Services for Marion County, $50,000
Courtney Hackney, Glass Eel Sampling and Site and Equipment Evaluation, $12,258
Maged Malek, National Housing Endowment Grant 2015, $100,00 
Brandi Denison, Building Bridges among New, Multidisciplinary Religious Studies Programs in the South, $30,000


Total November 2015: $208,778
Christopher Brown, Independent External Peer Review (IEPR) of the Battle Mountain, Nevada Detailed Project Report (DPR) Update, $880
Jeff Will, Evaluation Assistance, Single Parent Project, $5,000 
Stuart Chalk, The IUPAC-NIST Solubility Data Series v2.0: Development of REST API for Semantically Enabling Solubility Data, $5,311
Christopher Brown, AMEC Qatar ASR Project, $1,085


Total December: $12,276


ORSP Home | University of North Florida | Privacy | Unsubscribe