Docstoc

The 1100-square foot Exercise Science laboratory is located in

Document Sample
The 1100-square foot Exercise Science laboratory is located in Powered By Docstoc
					The 1100-square foot Exercise Science laboratory is located in Gatke Hall, a beautiful old
building with 14-foot ceilings and marble and wooden floors. The space was renovated prior to
the start of the fall semester 2003 for use by the Exercise Science Department, and has become a
significant component of our success in attracting students for collaborations in research projects.
The laboratory features a flexible floor plan to accommodate up to 20 students and space for all
the equipment.


No clinical facilities are available at Willamette University.


An animal care facility comprising three rooms totaling 600 square feet is available. Two side-by-
side animal rooms are connected to an adjacent quarantine room. The rooms meet all
requirements of the Animal Welfare Act. Animal use is not a part of this proposal.


The Exercise Science laboratory houses 4 PC and one iMac computers, all connected to the
campus network. The laboratory is also part of the wireless network. The computers are used for
data collection with the electromyography (EMG) system, video digital analysis of human
motion, and student research.

The PI’s office is approximately 200 square feet and is located in the second floor of Sparks
Center, a short distance from the laboratory. It is equipped with a new Gateway laptop computer
with a docking station and LCD panel, and an ink-jet printer. The office is linked to the
University’s local area network and to the Internet via both hard-wire and wireless
connections. The office phone has voice mail. Copy services and FAX are available in the
Departmental office on the second floor of Sparks Center.


The Department of Exercise Science has exclusive use of the newly renovated Currey classroom
in Sparks Center, equipped with a data projector and sound system, and a capacity for 60
students, and the Honors classroom, which is equally equipped and seats about 30 students. The
laboratory will be equipped with a data projector in the near future.


The Exercise Science laboratory already houses one treadmill in need of replacement), two
Monark cycle ergometers (models 824E) for aerobic testing, one Monark cycle ergometer for
anaerobic testing (model 834E), an old Quinton electrocardiograph not suitable for use under
exercise conditions, one step ergometer, a new Genesys 10 spectrophotometer, scales, and small
equipment for determination of body composition. The shared space also houses all equipment
used in the Biomechanics course, such as force platforms, a new electromyography system,
digitizing software and hardware. Finally, the laboratory houses a Biodex isokinetic system in
need of repair and upgrade.

The Department of Exercise Science employs one full time and one part time administrative
asisstant who handle the logistical support for the Department. They will be assisting the PI with
orders, payments, and secretarial support. The PI has access to a bank of five laptop computers,
two videocameras, a digital videocamera, and an assortment of computer peripherals (such as
scanners, CD recorders, and ZIP drives). All computer hardware, software, and networks are
maintained by the staff of the Office of Integrated Technology Services. All supplies are
maintenance are supported by the Department’s annual operating budget.
1. One reviewer was concerned that the proposal does not make clear
how students in the Exercise Physiology course will be supported in
articulating a scientific question, proposing a method of inquiry,
reviewing relevant literature, and identifying the strengths and
weaknesses of their experimental designs. In other words, can
students actually do all of these things while working outside the
normal class meeting times and, if not, how will they be guided?

The program in the Department of Exercise Science is set up to
develop these skills in our students over several years. It was a
consensus decision with the program reorganization in 1992 to focus
on developing students’ abilities to thoroughly understand the
requirements and pitfalls of research. Students are initially introduced
to searching for and evaluating relevant literature, as well as research
design and real-world applications in ExSci 135 – Concepts and
Contemporary Issues in Exercise Science and Sport. In Biol 260 –
Human Physiology (which I also teach) they take their first steps at
investigative learning using equipment obtained with a previous NSF
grant (DUE CCLI 0309546). The culminating class is ExSci 356 –
Research Design in Exercise Science which focuses exclusively on the
issues related to your question. The terminal assignment for this class
is a complete research proposal (Introduction, Review of Literature,
Methods). By the time students get to ExSci 360 – Physiology of
Exercise, they have considerable experience in identifying and
articulating research questions and have honed their skills in refining
methodological issues. In Physiology of Exercise the foundation is built
upon by the existing class structure which is directed specifically
toward developing research ideas in exercise physiology.

The existing model (which will be extended to the proposed
curriculum) consists of nine weeks of structured laboratory activities
and six weeks of independent laboratory investigations by groups. In
each of the first nine weeks, I identify a general area of study (such as
cardiovascular responses to exercise of increasing intensity) and I
design a set of lab activities which aim to:
1) familiarize students with the specific tools and equipment they will
need to use during these tests
2) provide a framework for shaping students' thought processes as
they perform these experiments
3) expose strengths and weaknesses of testing procedures. As an
example, consider the physiological parameters the students usually
examine in response to exercise of increasing intensity: changes in
heart rate, blood pressure, rate of oxygen consumption, blood lactate
levels, catecholamine levels, etc. I explain to students all of the
techniques available to measure each of these parameters (e.g. heart
rate via a heart monitor or palpation, blood pressure via a manual or
automated sphygmomanometer, blood lactate analysis via
spectrophotometric determination of via lactate strips, etc.). Students
are then asked to review relevant literature or work by previous
students and conduct a small experiment of their own, to test the
variables under consideration. These in-class activities do not aim at
developing new scientific knowledge. Rather, they serve as precursors
to the "real thing" which will take place during the last six weeks of the
semester. They help students begin the process of developing
empirical questions; practice collecting and analyzing data, organize
their findings and conclusions in proper lab reports on a weekly basis,
and provide supporting documentation for every interpretation of data.

As the nine weeks end, students have been exposed to a variety of
questions and they have become familiar with a multitude of
experimental techniques that can be used to test a variety of
physiological parameters associated with the physiology of exercise. At
the end of week nine, students arrange meetings with me and they
propose their mini-research projects, which are often borne out of our
laboratory experiences, class readings, or personal interests. For
example, following a class discussion on lactate threshold, one group
investigated the effects of an external nasal dilator on the lactate
threshold. At the completion of the course, the students (G. Boggs and
J. Ward) secured a Carson grant (Willamette University competitive
student research award) to expand their work into a senior-level
research project. Their findings were eventually presented at regional
and national conferences (see below).

The meetings with each group take place outside of lab time, and can
be best described as screening sessions for student ideas and
experimental procedures. Based on their experience from the previous
classes and the first part of the Physiology of Exercise course students
are expected to be familiar with the literature in the area in which they
are proposing to conduct experiments and to have a clear
methodology planned before our meeting. Students are also
encouraged to have discussions with the other faculty in the
department, one of the benefits of the cooperative nature of a small
liberal arts program. When all details have been agreed to, students
submit an IRB application, which is often reviewed within a day or two
(the IRB is always notified in advance and is accustomed to receiving a
large number of applications from my classes at that period in the
semester. The committee always arranges a special session to process
all such requests in an expeditious manner). Students then have six
weeks to carry out their projects.

During the six-week period students conduct experiments at their
convenience (they usually prefer the flexibility of adjusting their
schedules to the needs of their study participants). There are no
structured lab activities in those weeks; instead, I use the scheduled
laboratory time to consult with each group, get updates on progress
on their experiments and review literature with them, and make any
necessary adjustments. By the end of the sixth week, students have
completed their experiments, processed their data, written their
reports in a journal format, and presented their findings to a well-
attended seminar session open to the entire campus community.

In answering your first question, I want to re-emphasize that students
actually can do all of these things by working both within the
scheduled class time and outside the class/lab period. I have followed
this plan for the past five years, and I can verify that it has worked
well for my students. I welcome you to visit the student presentation
section of the course website at the URL below:
http://www.willamette.edu/~stas/360/studentwork/studentindex.htm
If you are interested in receiving a copy of a student PowerPoint
presentation, I will happily provide it.


2. What specific plans do you have for publishing the results of your
project? In other words, when do you anticipate publishing, and what
kinds of data will the resulting papers contain? How will you help
other exercise physiology programs at other universities to meet the
important objectives for student learning as delineated in your
proposal?

The expected results of the project are two-fold: educational and
scientific. On the educational side, I plan to publish the results I will
collect from the assessment of the student learning objectives (SLO) in
journals such as Advances in Physiology Education, Research Quarterly
for Exercise and Sport, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and
Dance, and The Sports Journal which I feel are the most appropriate
venues. These journals publish such findings as shown in the sample
references below:
       1. Fred W. Kolkhorst, Cheryl L. Mason, Dana M. DiPasquale,
Patricia Patterson, and Michael J. Buono. An inquiry-based learning
model for an exercise physiology laboratory course. Adv Physiol Educ
25: 45–50, 2001.
       2. Pankey, R. Piloting Exercise Physiology In The Web-Based
Environment.
http://www.thesportjournal.org/VOL2NO3/HENRICH2.htm
       3. Karper, W.B. Exercise physiology course content - is it
practical for most teachers? JOPERD - The Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation & Dance 68(2)46-48, 1997.
At this juncture I have already contributed in a variety of ways to
disseminating pedagogical information. I am the first author on an
article to be published this June in Advances in Physiology Education
(ADV-00004-2005: Teaching Glycolysis Regulation to Undergraduates
Using an Electrical Power Generation Analogy, co-authored with Dr. T.
Silverstein, Willamette University Chemistry Department) on using a
teaching analogy in a physiology course.

The findings from the assessment of this grant proposal will be
submitted when there are sufficient data to allow for a determination
of the impact of the new laboratory curriculum. The Department of
Exercise Science at Willamette University has excellent ties with other
Universities in the region (Pacific University, Linfield College, Central
Washington University, University of Oregon, Oregon State University),
and these findings will be presented in workshops and colloquia with
colleagues from these institutions. Interim reports will be presented at
regional and national conferences in the field: the Annual Meeting of
the American College of Sports Medicine, the Annual Meeting of the
Northwest Chapter of the American College of Sports Medicine, and the
Council for Undergraduate Research Annual Meeting. I have presented
such findings before on my work with technology in education, during
the PT3 conference (Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to use
Technology), funded by the U.S. Department of Education. Another
avenue will be the course web site, which will delineate all aspects of
the work, along with periodic updates. The content and design of the
course web site have received several accolades, including unsolicited
comments from Dean Charlotte (Toby) Tate, former President of the
American College of Sports Medicine.

On the scientific side, it is very unlikely that the student projects will
yield significant results worthy of publication in a scientific journal.
However, these small efforts at original investigation often lay the
foundation, inspire and motivate students to undertake bigger
projects, either as summer research or as senior research projects
(see for example
http://www.willamette.edu/cla/scrp/students_2004/johnna_jager.htm.
These student-faculty collaborations have resulted in no less than
three reviewed student presentations at regional conferences over the
past three years:
        1. Boggs, G.W., Ward, J.R., and Stavrianeas S. (2003). Effects
of an external nasal dilator on aerobic performance among college-age
women. Poster Presentation, Northwest Chapter of the American
College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting, March 2003. (Abstract
published in the NWASCM Newsletter, Spring 2003)
        2. Clifton, H., Southard, G., and Stavrianeas, S. (2004) Onset of
cardiovascular drift does not alter energy expenditure during
prolonged exercise. Poster Presentation, Northwest Chapter of the
American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting, February 2004.
(Abstract published in the NWASCM Newsletter, Spring 2004)
        3. Jager, J. and Stavrianeas, S. Cardiovascular drift:
bioenergetics and methodological considerations. The M.J. Murdock
Charitable Trust College Research Program for the Life Sciences
Conference, November 2004)
and one presentation at a national conference (Boggs, G.W., Ward,
J.R., and Stavrianeas S. (2003). Effects of an external nasal dilator on
aerobic performance among college-age women. Medicine and Science
in Sport and Exercise. Vol. 35, No. 5 (supplement), p. S372.)
One complete manuscript co-authored with undergraduate students
and previously submitted to the International Journal of Sports
Medicine is being revised, and a second manuscript on cardiovascular
drift is in preparation.

In short, I trust that my record of publications indicates my capacity to
appropriately disseminate information.

3. Can you provide evidence that Willamette University will assume
the costs of equipment maintenance and upgrades?

I have attached a letter (signed via e-mail) from my Dept. Chair,
Professor Russ Cagle who confirms that the University will indeed
assume all costs associated with equipment maintenance and
upgrades. The Department already has specific line items available for
this purpose for our existing instruments. I hope his letter will be
sufficient for this purpose. I will gladly provide letters from the Dean of
the College of Liberal Arts and/or the President of the University if you
judge it to be necessary. They have both been very supportive of our
efforts in the past.

4. Do you want to revise your budget to include travel to the ACSM,
HAPS, AAHPERD and CUR meetings, and if not, will the university
support this projected travel?
I sincerely appreciate having been asked this question, as it shows the
insight and care of the reviewers and the Program Director. However,
Willamette University has a great system for prioritizing faculty
resources. Accordingly, I have received considerable support for all my
travels to conferences as a presenter or attendee over the past five
years. More specifically, the University has paid for all costs associated
with travels to regional ACSM (Spokane, WA 2002; Missoula, MT 2003;
Seattle, WA 2004; ; Boise, ID;2005), national ACSM (San Francisco,
CA 2003; Indianapolis, IN 2004), two CUR meetings in less than a
year (Wisconsin LaCross 2004, Washington DC 2005), and HAPS
meetings (Baltimore, MD 2001; St.Louis, MO 2004).

This support is expected to increase over the next two years as
Willamette views such activities to be of paramount importance in
increasing the intellectual rigor of our campus. I believe that there is
no need to include such expenses in the budget for this proposal.

5. You will need to be more specific about the consultant costs, both
on your budget pages and in your budget justification. What is the
name of the consultant or consulting firm who will be helping with the
assessment? Keep in mind that the Federal Government limits the
cost of consulting to $537/day. We need a day-by-day explanation of
the consultant costs so that we can ensure that this level is not
exceeded.

Dr. Fuzhong Li, Senior Research Scientist with the Oregon Research
Institute will serve as the outside consultant for the assessment and
implementation evaluation parts for this proposal. His impeccable
research record, long list of grants and publications, and considerable
experience in designing and analyzing such assessment methods, are
evidence of the seriousness with which we are approaching this
element of the grant (see information about his work at
http://www.ori.org/Research/scientists/liF.html). Dr. Li and I have
already discussed the educational objectives and we have sketched out
a general framework for the development of the assessment
instrument(s). Our plan is to spend approximately 10 days during the
first year of the grant, to finalize the design of the assessment, collect
data on the implementation and preliminary outcomes, and generate
the first interim report. Thereafter, we anticipate that 5 days each for
years 2 and 3 will be sufficient for the proper data collection,
interpretation, and report. Dr. Li’s consultation fee is $225 per day
(see attached document), what I consider a very reasonable rate by
Federal Government standards.
                                   BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

Equipment
In addition to the factors described in the Project Proposal, selection of equipment was performed
carefully, based on four simple criteria:
1. Curricular Goals: All equipment listed in this proposal was selected to complement existing
   instrumentation and to satisfy the curricular goals of the Exercise Physiology course described
   in the project proposal. Specifically, students will connect their experiences in the laboratory
   to interpretation in the classroom. The ability to use the students’ own data has proven to be a
   great asset in driving a point home. The equipment must be reliable, accurate, and appropriate
   for the measurement of physiological parameters relevant to the assessment of the various
   components of physical fitness. Finally, through well-designed testing protocols the students
   will gain an appreciation for the methodology and complexity of scientific investigation.
2. Quality: The ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 system is considered one of the best commercially
   available gas analysis metabolic systems. The company has consistently provided on-site
   training and support for three years, and any upgrades will be offered at minimal cost. In
   addition, the system is capable of providing very accurate data for a number of measured
   variables, and will be the primary instrument for student research projects.
   The addition of this high-quality system to our existing Physio-Dyne Max II gas analysis
   system will allow for simultaneous measurements of multiple participants in teaching
   situations. Furthermore, it will add a much-needed layer of flexibility for student research
   projects.
   The Biodex System 3 is considered the best system available, designed to accurately measure
   performance in isokinetic movements. Such measures can greatly enhance training for specific
   sports, or accelerate physical rehabilitation in sports, both of great interest to our students.
   The Quinton electrocardiograph and treadmill have been used for years in hospitals and
   laboratories for stress testing. The systems are designed to minimize noise and electrical
   interference that may disrupt the function of other devices operating simultaneously. In
   addition, the electrocardiograph interfaces seamlessly with the ParvoMedics True 2400
   metabolic system for simultaneous recording of exercise heart rate.
   Monark is the only company that provides an electronic version of a cycle ergometer for
   anaerobic testing (Wingate and modified Wingate tests). The new model, 894E, is software-


                                                   1
  controlled, has adjustable duration and recording capabilities, and it is based on the successful
  tradition of Monark ergometers. The 881E upper body ergometer will allow the study of
  physiological parameters such as blood pressure and oxygen consumption per workload
  between different muscle groups.
  The spirometer is a simple, yet essential tool for the evaluation of lung volumes and
  ventilatory capacity. Vitalograph has produced a strong line of reliable equipment over the
  years, and their latest model (6800) is considered by many the most precise instrument
  available. The handheld blood glucose and blood lactate monitors will provide quick and
  accurate measurements of these physiological variables during exercise. Their widespread use
  has lead to increased accuracy of results, and the immediate result is perfect for use in a
  laboratory setting. Finally, activity monitors have recently become essential components of
  fitness assessment and inexpensive estimation of energy expenditure. Their incorporation into
  the laboratory curriculum is one of the innovative aspects of this proposal.
3. Ease of Use: This criterion is very important when considering the relatively short time
  available during each laboratory session to train students in the use and capabilities of each
  piece of equipment and to obtain and analyze data. To that end, each device was selected in
  part because it is easy to operate and because all data is stored digitally for later processing. In
  addition to the analytical modules that accompany each device, it is possible to transfer data
  into software (MS Excel) appropriate for statistical analysis and generation of reports. Ease of
  use removes the equipment intimidation factor that often deters students from undertaking
  research projects. This criterion became particularly important as we planned activities with
  the Directors of the outreach programs on our campus.
4. Cost: Price was the final major criterion used in the selection of equipment. Based on pricing
  information provided by the manufacturers, in almost every case, the equipment selected also
  had the lowest price of all comparable models examined.
The equipment requested in this proposal will provide much needed investigative experiences for
students, so the laboratory will complement the Exercise Physiology curriculum. This request is
made at a time when the need for this equipment became apparent only after the course was
restructured according to current pedagogical models.




                                                  2
Consultation and Assessment
Although the PI has experience in grant evaluation and assessment, a professional consultant Dr.
Fuzhong Li, Senior Research Scientist with the Oregon Research Institute has been retained for
this portion of the proposal. Dr. Li’s considerable expertise in assessment will be combined with
the PI’s educational background and experience. The Pi and Dr. Li will design and implement the
assessment instrument and evaluation timetable before the start of the first cycle of the grant. All
data will be collected and compiled by the PI and submitted to Dr. Li for the periodic
implementation, progress, and summative evaluations. One advantage of an external evaluator is
that the reports will be objective and all recommendations will be designed to maximize the
learning benefits for our undergraduates as well as those K-12 students who stand to benefit from
their experience with our outreach programs.
It is anticipated that the design and implementation of the assessment plan, and the generation of
appropriate reports will require approximately 10 days of consultation during year 1, and 5 days
per year each, for year 2 and year 3. Dr. Li’s consulting rate of $225 per day is appropriate for the
magnitude and budget of this proposal.


PI Course Release
The variety of equipment and multitude of software and hardware to be incorporated into the
laboratory curriculum will require a period of familiarization and training on the part of the PI. A
course release will allow the PI to dedicate time and energy to the successful implementation of
the project. The requested funds will be used for the hire of a qualified substitute instructor for
the ExSci 330 – The Science of Nutrition class taught by the PI during Spring semesters.




                                                  3
Dear Dr. Stavrianeas,

Thank you for responding to my first set of questions regarding student independence, publication,
departmental support of new equipment, travel, and your assessment expert. Your answers are, for the
most part, complete. However, several other questions have arisen. I will list them below:

1. I would like you to reorganize your budget justification to reflect the organization on the actual
budget sheets. In other words, provide a line-by-line description of all of the expenditures on each
budget line for which you are requesting funds. Beginning with the academic release time request for
you the PI, explain what course you will not be teaching and who will be teaching that course in your
stead. (If you do not know the name of the person, indicate that the course(s) will be taught by
someone to be hired.) Does the replacement instructor get benefits? If so, that will need to be added to
the budget.

A restructured Budget Justification (in PDF format titled “Updated NSF Budget Justification 2004)”) is
attached to this e-mail. In order to facilitate continuity and comparisons with the original version I have
used the same information, presented in the same order as the categories listed on the budget sheets.

2. Your justification for the equipment items listed on line D is thorough, but includes several items
that are not listed as equipment. I am assuming these things (a Biodex System 3, Monark Cycle
Ergometer and Vitalograph spirometer) are part of the $21,824 that you have allocated as Materials
and Supplies. Please move the justification for these items to a category on your Budget Justification
sheet for Materials and Supplies. We will need to see how that $21,824 will be spent. Therefore, you
will also need to give the exact price of these items on your justification sheet.

The original submission included a table in the supplementary document titled “Project Budget” that
clearly laid out all costs associated with this proposal, separated according to the categories listed in the
budget sheets. My intent for the Budget Justification was to lump equipment and supplies together, and
discuss the justification of the choices on the basis of quality of these systems. The newly restructured
Budget Justification will hopefully eliminate any confusion.

3. Have you investigated educational discounts on all of these items? Please indicate whether any of
these items can be discounted for educational purposes.

All prices listed are direct quotes I obtained from the sales representatives of the various companies.
All quotes include educational discounts whenever applicable. For example, in the quote I received, the
Quinton Q710 Electrocardiograph has a list price of $9,700 and the price for our institution (after the
educational discount) is $8,536 plus $284 for shipping and handling, for a total of $8,820 as listed in
the project budget. Of that amount, I listed $4,410 in Line D of the Proposal Budget sheet. I followed
similar procedures for all discounted items (Quinton Medtrack ST55 Treadmill (listed at $6050,
purchased at $5200; ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 system listed in my quote at $26,000, to be purchased
at $21,600; etc.). If you require further evidence that every effort has been made to obtain the best
possible price I will happily request new documentation from the companies mentioned in my
proposal.

4. You will need to adjust the amount listed under G3 Consultant Services to reflect the amounts you
have indicated in your revised budget justification. (You may have already done that; I do not have
your most recent budget pages.)
The new revised budget sheets (document attached in PDF format, titled “Update Budget Sheets”) are
based on the NSF Excel template since I cannot upload updates to FastLane. All changes in Consultant
Services are reflected in the new sheets. It must also note that the forms require the electronic signature
of the grants officer, but that is not possible without FastLane. I hope this is sufficient for your
purposes until we know how to upload updates at this late date.

    5. This proposal should be added to your Current and Pending Support page, if that is possible.

At the risk of sounding repetitive, since I cannot update the online version via FastLane, I have
attached a PDF file titled “Updated Current and Pending Support Page” that includes the necessary
information. My apologies for the oversight.


I look forward to hearing from you in the next two weeks.

Best wishes,
Nancy Pruitt
April 25, 2005

Dr. Nancy L. Pruitt
Program Director
EHR/DUE
4201 Wilson Blvd. Suite 885
Arlington, VA 22230

RE: Maintenance Commitment

Dear Dr. Pruitt,

This letter is written in response to your e-mail requesting evidence that
Willamette University will assume the costs of equipment maintenance and
upgrade for the proposal NSF DUE 0511219 by my college Dr. Stavrianeas. I
would like to verify that the Department of Exercise Science has dedicated
budget lines for equipment maintenance and software upgrades. The
Department also has a flexible, rolling budget, which always allows us ample
funds to maintain equipment and purchase software upgrades in a timely fashion.
We have successfully supported our existing equipment for years, and we will
continue to do so with the proposed equipment as well.

I hope this statement provides strong evidence of the Department’s capabilities
and intent to provide equipment maintenance and support. Please feel free to
contact me with questions or concerns. Thank you for your thorough
consideration of this application.

Sincerely,

[signed via e-mail]

Russ Cagle PhD ATC
Chair and Professor
Department of Exercise Science
Willamette University
900 State St.
Salem, OR 97301
(503) 370-6420
NSF 96-115                                                                                                                                 Smith
Instructions to NSF Submitters: The functions below work on this spreadsheet only.                  Notes: If you delete a row created with the b
These functions may not work properly if you add any columns.                                              Do not enter anything in the red cells
These functions will add the necessary labels required for each row.                                       You should be entering the values yo
                                                                                                           FastLane will ignore all data in cells t
                                                                                                           If you want to create additional years
                                                                                                           The "create new budget years" butto

                                                                                                         PLEASE DO NOT ENTER CENTS IN
                                                                                                             YEAR       1
                                                                                                                 FOR NSF USE ONLY
ORGANIZATION                                                                                   PROPOSAL NO.               DURATION (MO
     Your Organization goes here                                                                               Proposed      Granted
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT DIRECTOR                                                       AWARD NO.                       Funds
                                                                                                                          Granted by NSF



A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI´S, Faculty and Other Senior Associates                      NSF Funded          Funds
     (List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets)                      Person-months        Requested By
0.             First Name           M Last Name                  Title                 CAL    ACAD SUMR          Proposer
1.        Stasinos                    Stavrianeas                Associate Professor   0.00    3.00 0.00            $4,500

   ( 1 ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1-6)                                                                       $4,500
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
 1.     0 ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES                                           0.00    0.00   0.00            $0
 2.     0 ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)                 0.00    0.00   0.00            $0
 3.     0 ) GRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                                 $0
 4.     0 ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                            $0
 5.     0 ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)                                                      $0
 6.     0 ) OTHER                                                                                             $0
     TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A+B)                                                                         $4,500
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)                                                               $0
     TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A+B+C)                                                      $4,500
D. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000)
          Biodex Isokinetic System 3 Quickset         ######
          ParvoMedics True 2400                        10800
          Quinton Medtrack ST55 Treadmill               2600
          Quinton Q710 exercise electrocardiograph      4410
     TOTAL EQUIPMENT                                                                                       $34,415
E. TRAVEL                        1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)                      $0
                                 2. FOREIGN                                                                   $0
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS
     1. STIPENDS                                          $0
     2. TRAVEL                                            $0
     3. SUBSISTENCE                                       $0
     4. OTHER                                             $0
   ( 0 ) TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS                                                                         $0
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
     1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES                                                                             $21,824
     2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION                                                         $0
     3. CONSULTANT SERVICES                                                                                 $2,250
     4. COMPUTERS SERVICES                                                                                    $0
     5. SUBAWARDS                                                                                             $0
     6. OTHER                                                                                                 $0
          TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS                                                                         $24,074
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)                                                                        $62,989
 I. INDIRECT COSTS (SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)
          Name of indirect cost item                  Amount                  Rate
          FirstIndirectCostItem                         $0                     0.00%        0
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS                                                                                          $0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H+I)                                                                   $62,989
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.D.7.j.)                              $0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K)                                                               $62,989
M. COST SHARING: PROPOSED LEVEL $34415                       AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $                      $0
PI/PD NAME                                                   DATE                      FOR NSF USE ONLY                           Initials-ORG
          PIFullName                                                 1/1/1999 INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
ORG. REP. NAME                                               DATE              Date Checked     Date Rate of Sheet
          InstRepFullName                                        F-1 1/1/1999
NSF 96-115                                                                                                                                  Smith
Instructions to NSF Submitters: The functions below work on this spreadsheet only.                  Notes: If you delete a row created with the b
These functions may not work properly if you add any columns.                                              Do not enter anything in the red cells
These functions will add the necessary labels required for each row.                                       You should be entering the values yo
                                                                                                           FastLane will ignore all data in cells t
                                                                                                           If you want to create additional years
                                                                                                           The "create new budget years" butto

                                                                                                         PLEASE DO NOT ENTER CENTS IN
                                                                                                             YEAR       2
                                                                                                                 FOR NSF USE ONLY
ORGANIZATION                                                                                   PROPOSAL NO.               DURATION (MO
     Your Organization goes here                                                                               Proposed      Granted
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT DIRECTOR                                                       AWARD NO.                        Funds
                                                                                                                           Granted by NSF



A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI´S, Faculty and Other Senior Associates                      NSF Funded          Funds
     (List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets)                      Person-months        Requested By
0.             First Name           M Last Name                  Title                 CAL    ACAD SUMR          Proposer
1.        Stasinos                    Stavrianeas                Associate Professor   0.00    0.00 0.00              $0

  ( 1 ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1-6)                                                                                  $0
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
1.   0 ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES                               0.00  0.00   0.00                                     $0
2.   0 ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)     0.00  0.00   0.00                                     $0
3.   0 ) GRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                                            $0
4.   0 ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                                       $0
5.   0 ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)                                                                 $0
6.   0 ) OTHER                                                                                                        $0
    TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A+B)                                                                                    $0
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)                                                                       $0
    TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A+B+C)                                                                 $0
D. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000)



    TOTAL EQUIPMENT                                                                                                   $0
E. TRAVEL                      1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)                                $0
                               2. FOREIGN                                                                             $0
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS
    1. STIPENDS                                        $0
    2. TRAVEL                                          $0
    3. SUBSISTENCE                                     $0
    4. OTHER                                           $0
  ( 0 ) TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS                                                                                  $0
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
    1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES                                                                                         $0
    2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION                                                                  $0
    3. CONSULTANT SERVICES                                                                                          $1,125
    4. COMPUTERS SERVICES                                                                                             $0
    5. SUBAWARDS                                                                                                      $0
    6. OTHER                                                                                                          $0
        TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS                                                                                    $1,125
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)                                                                                 $1,125
I. INDIRECT COSTS (SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)
        Name of indirect cost item                  Amount                Rate
        FirstIndirectCostItem                        $0                    0.00%    0



TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS                                                                           $0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H+I)                                                     $1,125
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.D.7.j.)               $0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K)                                                 $1,125
M. COST SHARING: PROPOSED LEVEL                  AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $                   $0
PI/PD NAME                                       DATE                    FOR NSF USE ONLY                                         Initials-ORG
       Stasinos Stavrianeas                             5/6/2005 INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
ORG. REP. NAME                                   DATE            Date Checked    Date Rate of Sheet
                                                                              F-1
NSF 96-115                                                                                                                                  Smith
Instructions to NSF Submitters: The functions below work on this spreadsheet only.                  Notes: If you delete a row created with the b
These functions may not work properly if you add any columns.                                              Do not enter anything in the red cells
These functions will add the necessary labels required for each row.                                       You should be entering the values yo
                                                                                                           FastLane will ignore all data in cells t
                                                                                                           If you want to create additional years
                                                                                                           The "create new budget years" butto

                                                                                                         PLEASE DO NOT ENTER CENTS IN
                                                                                                             YEAR       3
                                                                                                                 FOR NSF USE ONLY
ORGANIZATION                                                                                   PROPOSAL NO.               DURATION (MO
     Your Organization goes here                                                                               Proposed      Granted
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT DIRECTOR                                                       AWARD NO.                        Funds
                                                                                                                           Granted by NSF



A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI´S, Faculty and Other Senior Associates                      NSF Funded          Funds
     (List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets)                      Person-months        Requested By
0.             First Name           M Last Name                  Title                 CAL    ACAD SUMR          Proposer
1.        Stasinos                    Stavrianeas                Associate Professor   0.00    0.00 0.00              $0

  ( 1 ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1-6)                                                                                  $0
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
1.   0 ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES                               0.00  0.00   0.00                                     $0
2.   0 ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)     0.00  0.00   0.00                                     $0
3.   0 ) GRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                                            $0
4.   0 ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS                                                                                       $0
5.   0 ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)                                                                 $0
6.   0 ) OTHER                                                                                                        $0
    TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A+B)                                                                                    $0
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)                                                                       $0
    TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A+B+C)                                                                 $0
D. PERMANENT EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000)



    TOTAL EQUIPMENT                                                                                                   $0
E. TRAVEL                      1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)                                $0
                               2. FOREIGN                                                                             $0
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS
    1. STIPENDS                                        $0
    2. TRAVEL                                          $0
    3. SUBSISTENCE                                     $0
    4. OTHER                                           $0
  ( 0 ) TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS                                                                                  $0
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
    1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES                                                                                         $0
    2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION                                                                  $0
    3. CONSULTANT SERVICES                                                                                          $1,125
    4. COMPUTERS SERVICES                                                                                             $0
    5. SUBAWARDS                                                                                                      $0
    6. OTHER                                                                                                          $0
        TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS                                                                                    $1,125
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)                                                                                 $1,125
I. INDIRECT COSTS (SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)
        Name of indirect cost item                  Amount                Rate
        FirstIndirectCostItem                        $0                    0.00%    0



TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS                                                                           $0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H+I)                                                     $1,125
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.D.7.j.)               $0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K)                                                 $1,125
M. COST SHARING: PROPOSED LEVEL                  AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $                   $0
PI/PD NAME                                       DATE                    FOR NSF USE ONLY                                         Initials-ORG
       Stasinos Stavrianeas                             5/6/2005 INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
ORG. REP. NAME                                   DATE            Date Checked    Date Rate of Sheet
                                                                              F-1

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:7
posted:8/10/2011
language:English
pages:16