Modernizing Academic Appointment and Advancement (MA3) Challenge

No. While we encourage proposals to modernize academic appointment and advancement like hiring, review, promotion, and tenure, proposals can focus on just one aspect, such as hiring OR promotion OR tenure.

While we are able to receive multiple submissions from one institution, please note that the principal investigator and proposed activities must be different, and that the MA3 Challenge organizers will most likely reach out to the applicants to encourage coordination and partnership, as applicable.

Both the application guide (as of October 3rd) and the application portal include recommended word counts for each question. We do not have a set or required page limit, but we suggest that applicants not go over the recommended word limits. 

We also do not have a specific budget template because we encourage flexibility in approaches; however, we do ask for a spreadsheet. Please carefully read through the budget section of the application guide for specific guidance on the types of fundable activities, and note that 1) no more than 15% of the total award budget can be used for indirect costs and that 2) no more than 50% of the activities should be planning period activities (research, focus groups, etc.).

While research, measurement, and evaluation are integral to successfully modernizing how researchers are and should be incentivized, we are prioritizing proposals that describe clear plans for making explicit changes to their academic appointment and advancement processes, policies, and guidelines. 

Research is allowed as part of planning period activities, and measurement and evaluation a component of how you evaluate your activities, but should not be a primary focus of the proposal. Note that we ask that institutions share how they plan to measure and evaluate success in the application, but we do not necessarily need specific measurement and evaluation outcomes. 

The timeline is intended to spur participating institutions to be rigorous and focused in their approaches, as well as begin to provide case studies for other institutions engaging in their own RPT modernization efforts.

There are no rigid parameters to limit a proposal’s scope. We anticipate and encourage a diversity of approaches to achieve the goal of modernizing academic hiring, review, promotion, and tenure criteria to explicitly reward activities that align with institutional values. A nonexclusive list of the types of projects that would be within scope includes the following: 

• Advancement of complete lifecycle – e.g., development, socialization, implementation, and assessment – of new research evaluation approaches, procedures, and/or criteria.

• Development of training modules, tools, and infrastructure to effect the rapid transformation of review, promotion, and tenure processes, hiring, and/or awards.

• Creation of qualitative indicators and datasets for effectively recognising diverse research contributions, societal impact, etc.

• Facilitation of traditionally under-resourced partnerships among researchers, community organizations, policymakers, and/or the general public, as well as criteria to recognize the impact of these activities.

• Development of public science communication and outreach efforts, as well as criteria to recognize the impact of these activities.

• Enhancement of tools and platforms for team science and interdisciplinary science, as well as criteria to recognize the impact of these activities.

As a condition of Award, representatives from the Challenge winners will participate in a community of practice over the duration of the program, overseen by the Open Research Community Accelerator (ORCA).  This will provide them with support in the development, execution, and assessment of their modernization strategies.  It will facilitate the rapid sharing of challenges and lessons learned across the cohort, and create the conditions under which key findings can be efficiently and rapidly shared with the wider higher education community.

Eligible principal investigators are members of the administration team at eligible U.S. colleges and universities (provost, vice provost, dean, etc.) or are leaders working closely with the administrators to move activities forward. They have visibility into and influence on institutional policies and practices, and access to the resources needed to optimize and implement the award. They also possess the skills needed to cultivate trusting relationships with faculty governance bodies and other campus stakeholders. If the PI is not a member of the executive leadership team, please provide a letter of support from your institution's administration.

MA3 Challenge funding must go to one college or university where the PI is employed, but a cohort or system-wide approach to activities and outcomes is welcome and encouraged. For example, if a cohort of universities or departments will be participating in MA3 activities and modernization efforts, then the PI would most likely apply for a Tier 1 award.

Yes. While the principal investigator must be based at a US-based accredited, tax-exempt college and/or university, partnerships are allowed. Another organization outside of the academic institution can serve as a sub-awardee, and we encourage partnerships with, for example, professional societies. This also includes independent contractors, who can serve as sub-awardees, but not PIs.

While institutional context and readiness for change is a key piece of the proposal and evaluation process, we understand your institution may not have started conversations about modernizing appointment and advancement. This will not disqualify an applicant, as you may have activities and approaches to reform that will still achieve the four MA3 goals.

We encourage you to include details about awareness-raising in your approach and activities section of the application.

The MA3 Challenge welcomes proposals focused on modernizing teaching and service criteria. We will prioritize proposals, however, that take a more holistic approach to evaluation reform by considering multiple dimensions of faculty work. Institutions are encouraged to examine and modernize their broader appointment and advancement systems, including how they evaluate teaching, service, and research.

Separate from the project budget, applicants may identify additional institutional resources they are prepared to provide to advance the proposed project. These resources may include direct financial contributions (e.g., mini-grants or recognition awards) or in-kind support (e.g., faculty or staff time, teaching release, summer salary, administrative support, or other resources that directly enable project implementation).

Institutional support is optional. Applicants will not be advantaged simply because they identify a larger financial or in-kind contribution. Please also note that an institutional support commitment will not increase the total award amount beyond the $250,000 granted to the institution.

You can still apply! While your application activities might look slightly different than an institution just starting the process, you are welcome to apply for funding to continue modernization efforts.

In its first cycle, MA3 offered both $250,000 grants to institutions and large divisions and $50,000 to smaller units like departments. The vast majority of applications received were for the former. ORCA is actively fundraising to support targeted disciplinary support for modernizing academic incentives. Stay tuned!

You are welcome to apply from a different campus unit. However, to maximize the reach of our funding and support as many institutions as possible, we do not anticipate making awards to the same institution in consecutive cycles.