Review

Applying

Student Grants

Proposals are evaluated in a double-blind review process to ensure applicants receive fair and informed evaluations of their proposed projects and comply with university policy.

Project Categories

Proposals are evaluated by one of six sub-committees based on the following project categories (selected at the time of application).

  • Arts and Humanities
  • Business
  • Education
  • Life/Biosciences
  • Math, Physical Sciences and Engineering
  • Social and Behavioral Sciences

Ensuring Blind Review

Proposals must not contain the student's or mentor's personal information (name and gender) to ensure the integrity of blind review. Make these substitutions in your proposal:

  • "student" for the student's name
  • "mentor" for the mentor's name
  • "additional supervisor" for the supervisor's name
  • "lab/research team" for the team's name
  • "they" for gendered pronouns (s/he)

Review Criteria

  • Context and Objectives: The project proposal's objectives are clearly positioned within the "bigger picture" of the disciplinary frame or wider context.
  • Methodology and Strategy: The project proposal clearly explains the methodology and/or strategy to achieve meaningful outcomes and objectives.
  • Scale and Scope: The project proposal achieves meaningful learning outcomes in the award period without interfering with regular coursework and extracurricular obligations, including a timeline of activities.
  • Relevance: The project proposal advances the student’s academic goals and/or professional aspirations.
  • Resources and Materials: (Individual Grants Only) The project proposal makes thoughtful, efficient use of available resources.
  • Originality and Creativity: (Individual Grants Only) The proposal demonstrates originality of thought and creativity in approach and project design.
EligibilityTimelineExpectationsComplianceReview

ÌıÌıPresentation:Ìı
Ìı Ìı Ìı

ÌıÌıWorksheet:Ìı
Ìı Ìı Ìı

ÌıÌıWorksheet:Ìı
Ìı Ìı Ìı

ÌıÌıWorksheet:
Ìı Ìı Ìı

Avoid these common errors:

The proposal contains inaccurate information, typographical errors, etc. Be sure to carefully proof your writing well before the application deadline.

Either the student or their mentor are not eligible to apply for UROP funding. Review the eligibility guidelines and consider adding ineligible mentors as an "additional supervisor."

The proposal contains personally identifiable information (PII), such as the student or mentor's name. Remove all PII—even on the mentor's endorsement.

The application misses an important campus policy compliance procedure. Talk to your mentor if you have questions about working with human or animal subjects, planning travel or contributing to an NSF and/or NIH-funded project.