5
Promising Practices and Challenges for Successfully Competing for DoD Research Funding and Workforce Development Support
To address its charge to examine best practices and provide recommendations for advancing the capacity of Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other minority institutions (HBCU/MIs) to compete for and conduct defense-related research, the committee collected expert opinions through commissioned papers, public workshops, and a series of confidential focus groups. Since peer-reviewed literature on the topic was often not available, the committee relied also on its own members’ expertise. Ultimately, the committee found that it could not prescribe one singular route as a “best practice” due to the wide variations that exist across more than 400 HBCU/MIs, as well as the lack of a rigorous base of evidence for evaluating the effectiveness of different practices. As noted in a recent White House report, the term “best practices” has become ubiquitous across education, policy, and other settings, often without a greater consideration of what makes a certain practice “best” or even better than other alternatives (EOP, 2021).
Instead, as noted in Chapter 1 and re-introduced here, the committee anchored its insights within a framework of institutional capacity (Figure 5-1) composed of three mutually enforcing areas: a strong institutional research grant and contract base, research faculty support, and ancillary services. These areas are critical for all institutions of higher education to effectively compete for research funding from the Department of Defense (DoD), successfully carry out the work that is funded, and position themselves to build on that success for additional awards in the future. The committee used this framework to highlight challenges that HBCU/MIs have faced in competing for DoD funding, as well as promising
practices that may overcome these challenges and allow these institutions to build research capacity.1
ILLUSTRATIVE CHALLENGES TO SECURING DOD FUNDING FOR RESEARCH AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
As noted in Chapter 3, DoD sponsors programs for which only HBCUs and/or other MIs are eligible to apply. While these programs provide some important opportunities, representatives of HBCU/MIs participating in focus groups noted that targeted funding opportunities tend to be limited in number and come with relatively small award amounts, short cycles of performance, and uncertainty about future funding stability even with strong project performance (Essoka et al., 2021). These aspects can make it difficult for researchers to rely on master’s-level and undergraduate students for accomplishing their research goals; are not necessarily designed to help institutions establish sustainable relationships with the DoD sponsor; and are limited in building the sustainable research capacities that are critical to an institution’s long-term competitiveness.2
Recognizing that all institutions of higher education face challenges and stiff competition in acquiring and sustaining research support, the committee identified three areas showing gaps created or exacerbated by the relative lack of financial resources that HBCU/MIs have historically experienced: (1) underinvestment in research infrastructure and support, (2) weak knowledge transfer between DoD and institutions, and (3) superficial and inequitable partnerships. Several of the issues have “chicken-and-egg” characteristics; for example, less support for proposal development means less success in winning grants, which in turn means fewer resources to support the research infrastructure for future success.
Under-investment in Research Infrastructure and Support
The lack of research infrastructure funding serves to limit institutional abilities to conduct more DoD-relevant research.
Physical Research Facilities and Equipment
The committee’s focus groups pointed to the need for investment in enhancing research laboratories and equipment, which includes computing capabilities and specialized instrumentation. One institution mentioned the need for well-resourced libraries for better and modern access to current information on specialized areas of research (Essoka et al., 2021). From the DoD perspective, several
_____________
1 There are other factors specific to each program announcement or solicitation that could be considered in assessing institutional research capacity. The committee’s framework suggests three overarching areas to support the capacity to conduct DoD-related research.
2 See Chapter 2 for a discussion on the student composition at HBCU/MIs.
representatives noted that some institutions simply do not have the facilities to do the research that DoD needs. Some facilities were described as “limiting” or “out-of-date,” which is compounded by the difficulty faced by some institutions to maintain equipment because of a lack of resources or personnel, and/or being located in a rural, underserved location (e.g., technicians need to be flown in).3
Research Faculty and Students
At some institutions, a lack of research-oriented faculty and early-career professionals may limit research capacity and translate to less funding success. This, in turn, may hamper efforts to recruit research-oriented faculty and graduate students who would strengthen the institution’s position. Focus group respondents noted two reasons for the inadequate numbers of researchers: (1) difficulty in recruiting and/or retaining faculty researchers who may be offered more competitive compensation packages and other incentives elsewhere, and (2) limited time available for faculty to conduct research due to high teaching loads. Some participants described their institutions as primarily “teaching institutions” that have historically placed greater emphasis on instructing their undergraduate student populations than on research (Essoka et al., 2021). As one participant from a teaching institution noted, while teaching is an important priority, in practical terms it can limit the recruitment and retention of research-oriented faculty who could contribute to the school’s research capacity.4
Teaching workloads, which refer to the number of courses faculty are expected to teach, are high in most HBCU/MIs. In some departments, the per-faculty workload can exceed 10 courses a year, which creates significant challenges for faculty interested in pursuing non-pedagogical research. While academic faculty at institutions of higher education across the nation are expected to balance teaching, research, and service responsibilities (Easterly and Pemberton, 2008), the weights given to each role in review, tenure, and promotion decisions are strongly dictated by institutional, college (or school), and departmental norms and resource constraints. These factors influence how faculty distribute their time and shape the intensity of the research culture that faculty and students experience at that institution.
One U.S. Navy representative said that investigators at HBCU/MIs who submit (or want to submit) research proposals identified the key barrier to be time available to prepare quality proposals, with release time from teaching the main
_____________
3 Committee’s second public meeting, December 7, 2020. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/12-07-2020/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions.
4 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
challenge.5 Although the student-centered mission of HBCU/MIs is an important driver for many faculty (Blake, 2018), participants from nine of the institutions involved in focus groups suggested that high teaching loads pose a challenge to faculty seeking to balance teaching and research responsibilities.
High teaching loads also create barriers to proactive relationship-building with funders, discussed more fully below. Although interviewed faculty realized that serving on review panels and advisory boards, networking at conferences, or otherwise interacting with research sponsors and partners helps them to increase the chances of success for their own applications, the time commitment involved can be prohibitive for faculty who may be teaching four or five courses per semester (Essoka et al., 2021).
Administrative and Programmatic Ecosystem
The committee’s findings also pointed to a need for institutional investments to develop robust administrative and programmatic ecosystems to support the research process at HBCU/MIs. At the pre-award stage, this support includes a dedicated office or staff responsible for identifying and disseminating DoD research opportunities and helping prepare, manage, and track proposal submissions (Essoka et al., 2021). At the post-award stage, it includes assistance to faculty in managing grants and contracts. Post-award staffing is essential for research awards that exceed $1 million, since a strong performance provides the opportunity to elevate the institution’s reputation with the research sponsor.
Of the HBCU/MIs participating in interviews, faculty researchers and others at institutions with personnel dedicated to grants and contracts management were more likely to receive information about available funding sources (including DoD opportunities) than those without this type of staff support (Essoka et al., 2021). Ultimately, without institutional grant/contract support, research pursuits are undertaken on a more ad hoc basis or achieved via outreach from another organization or institution seeking to collaborate. Recognizing the institutional support gap, many HBCU/MI faculty can be deterred from pursuing opportunities from agencies with which they are less familiar. One participant at the public workshop noted that faculty unfamiliar with the world of contracting are understandably fearful of pursing an opportunity with DoD without institutional support to ensure they remain within compliance.6
_____________
5 Committee’s second public meeting, December 7, 2020. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/12-07-2020/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions.
6 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
CONCLUSION: To expand HBCUs’ and MIs’ capacity to conduct DoD-relevant research, there is a need for strategic investments in infrastructure, personnel, and programmatic support by both DoD and HBCU/MIs themselves.
Weak Knowledge Transfer and Relationships Between DoD and Institutions
In the focus groups, faculty in institutions with current DoD grants spoke highly of their interactions with program officers, with five institutions setting a goal for themselves to strengthen their relationships and involvement with DoD. Moreover, in presentations to the committee, panelists from the DoD military departments (U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force) and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering stated their appreciation of what HBCU/MIs can offer DoD and described a variety of outreach efforts either underway or planned.
However, the findings point to a need for greater understanding and stronger relationship-building between DoD program managers and HBCU/MIs. In some cases, the committee observed a disconnect between what DoD thinks it is offering HBCU/MIs in the way of guidance and outreach, and what the institutions perceive as available.
Several HBCU/MI representatives said that they lack a complete understanding of the DoD research enterprise: its priorities, needs, processes, solicitations, and key points of contact and sources of current information. Institutions also perceived an insufficient understanding on the part of DoD program officers of the HBCU/MI universe and its complexity, challenges, and strengths, including the institutions’ unique contexts, competing priorities, and research experiences and capacities. Competing priorities were things such as a focus on community-focused research, high faculty teaching loads, undergraduate research experiences, graduate degree portfolio, and others. Without understanding the HBCU/MI context, DoD research sponsors may generalize HBCU/MIs as a category less capable of conducting research than non-HBCU/MI institutions. For this reason, several focus group participants perceived that DoD program officers, across military departments and defense agencies, often favor long-standing non-HBCU/MI partners with strong track records as performers, without considering the strengths that other applicants can offer (Essoka et al., 2021).
In addition, several HBCU/MI focus group participants felt that a lack of proactive communication from DoD makes existing opportunities less visible. Others commented that DoD’s size and diversity make it challenging to identify who to reach out to in the organization. One HBCU representative commented, “There are so many different networks of the Department of Defense, so many smaller divisions . . . a lot of tie-ins that we could be tapping into. But we don’t necessarily know about them and they don’t necessarily know about us.” Another pointed out that “some of these smaller schools don’t have the funding to go to
conferences. . . . It’s hard for you to reach out and connect with the Department of Defense when you’re . . . just trying to keep the shop open” (Essoka et al., 2021).
Sharing another perspective, a DoD representative noted that lower participation and success rates of HBCU/MIs in funding opportunities was in part due to insufficient resources in the institutions’ offices of sponsored research to handle grant submissions.7 In the committee’s review of data submitted by DoD, it found that the most commonly cited reasons for non-reviewed or non-funded proposals were administrative in nature, including late submissions and failure to meet specified requirements of the funding opportunity announcement or not following the instructions in the broad agency announcement.8 Other common reasons included lack of technical merit, proposed research that did not meet the definition of basic research, and budgets that were not well aligned with the work proposed.
At the public workshops, DoD representatives highlighted their outreach (guidance and training) to all institutions of higher education on writing and submitting effective proposals, such as the Navy’s annual Naval Opportunity Awareness Workshop. They expressed openness for HBCU/MIs to reach out to DoD to make connections with the appropriate program officers. One DoD representative noted that institutions are clearly told that help with the submission process is available, yet the committee was unable to obtain clear information about the formal mechanism by which an individual institution can request DoD support beyond broadly contacting the HBCU/MI targeted program offices in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the military departments, and defense agencies. In addition, many DoD research programs do not have specific outreach strategies to inform HBCU/MIs about non-targeted opportunities or websites to serve as repositories for compiling all opportunities for which these schools may be eligible.9
In summary, the committee observed a disconnect between what DoD thinks it is offering HBCU/MIs in the way of guidance and what the institutions perceive as available. While connections between DoD HBCU/MI program offices and the HBCU/MI community have existed for decades, the committee understands that individual HBCU/MI institutions may find it complex and time-consuming to try to navigate all the program offices and opportunities in defense research that are open to institutions of higher education.
_____________
7 Committee’s second public meeting, December 7, 2020. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/12-07-2020/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions.
8 DoD data submissions to the committee can be accessed via the study’s public access file upon request. See the study’s webpage for more details on requesting access: https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions#sectionContact.
9 Committee’s second public meeting, December 7, 2020. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/12-07-2020/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions.
CONCLUSION: There is insufficient two-way transfer of knowledge between HBCU/MIs and DoD research sponsors.
CONCLUSION: DoD communication and education strategies regarding targeted HBCU/MI opportunities are disparate and unclear. Institutions of higher education that have better-resourced offices of sponsored programs have a better understanding of DoD culture, priorities, and processes.
Superficial and Inequitable Partnerships
All 13 institutions that participated in the focus groups reported involvement in research partnerships (current or past) at the federal, university, and corporate levels that included funding for research infrastructure and/or collaboration around workforce training and development (Essoka et al., 2021). HBCU/MI participants acknowledged the need to form partnerships and they welcomed truly collaborative and equitable partnerships. Yet HBCU/MIs reported that they receive invitations to partner with non-HBCU/MI institutions or businesses with whom they have had little or no prior relationship or understanding of their research capacity. They are also sometimes offered partnership opportunities that do not align with their research goals or capacity-building needs. Such invitations are perceived as “forced partnerships” or partnerships to “check a diversity box” (i.e., meet a research sponsor’s diversity requirements) rather than opportunities to form substantive collaborations and relationships in line with their strengths and goals. In addition, if proposals emerging out of such partnerships are awarded, HBCU/MIs report that funding is rarely equitably distributed. In most cases, non-HBCU/MI partners that receive large grants to collaborate with HBCU/MIs provide the HBCU/MI with little funding for the research and/or infrastructure support. Partnership requirements meant to encourage HBCU/MI participation but without clear expectations or guidelines from the funding agencies (including minimum resource allocation to HBCU/MIs) may unintentionally lead to this outcome. According to one interviewed HBCU representative, “We get lots of invitations to be partners in research proposals. And those partnerships, most of the time, don’t work out because they look at us as an outreach station” (Essoka et al., 2021).
The committee acknowledges that it is all too common for entities to seek to cast HBCU/MIs in the limited function of pipelines for diverse talent, rather than as collaborators in quality research. However, there are opportunities for research sponsors and other stakeholders to shift this norm. For example, there are opportunities for HBCU/MIs to develop partnerships with the private sector, such as industry-sponsored HBCU/MI student scholarships, paid workforce experiences, internships, and/or mentorships that focus on student and faculty development. To this end, there would be value in convening research sponsors, stakeholders, and other potential partners to provide input on the types of incentives beyond
simple increases to funding that could help further such partnerships. Community input may help inform DoD on what might serve as genuine incentives for such partnerships.
CONCLUSION: Superficial and/or inequitable research partnerships involving HBCU/MIs do not provide substantive opportunities for joint research and/or collaboration or advance an HBCU/MI’s capacity to conduct DoD-funded research. True partnerships with research partners and sponsors are those that are grounded in mutual benefit, meaningful engagement, and equitable funding and resources.
PROMISING PRACTICES TO EXPAND INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH CAPACITY AND INCREASE ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN DOD AND HBCU/MIS
With strategic, longer-term investments by DoD, HBCU/MIs that want to strengthen their research capacity to meet the country’s national security needs can do so. Keeping in mind the challenges expressed above and the disparities in existing federal investments discussed in Chapter 4, the question remains of how to turn ambitions into reality. The committee identified a set of promising practices to support the transition of HBCU/MIs across the research spectrum. This transition, in turn, would build increasing levels of research experience, productivity, and capacity, and position a wider set of institutions of higher education to successfully compete for funding for and conduct defense research. These promising practices, directed to DoD, interested HBCU/MIs, and other research partners, would (1) establish critical infrastructure, (2) increase proactive communications and relationship-building efforts, (3) form true partnerships, and (4) consider other agency programs and practices for DoD adoption/adaptation.
Establish Critical Institutional Infrastructure
In the committee’s public sessions, participants from Carnegie R1 institutions of higher education including the Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Maryland, University of Michigan, and the University of Texas at El Paso discussed the strategic research infrastructure and support that their institutions have in place, including strong support by top leadership (boards of directors, presidents, provosts, vice presidents for research, deans). The committee identified these research infrastructure and support elements as overarching features of a framework for institutional research capacity. As noted, the committee identified three key components: a strong institutional research and contract base, research faculty support, and ancillary services support (see Figure 5-1 for an expanded version of this framework). These elements, when in place and functioning well,
position researchers within the institution to progressively build that institution’s research productivity and capacity.
Strong Institutional Research and Contract Base
The first component, a strong institutional research and contract base, encompasses appropriate physical research facilities and skilled research support to enable competitiveness.
An Institution’s Physical Research Facilities, Research Support Offices, and Personnel
Institutional representatives from HBCU/MIs and non-HBCU/MIs stressed the importance of state-of-the-art facilities to conduct research and become more competitive for future opportunities. As a promising practice, several institutions that have successfully raised their research profile reported that key early investments in state-of-the-art facilities opened the door to a range of opportunities with DoD, other federal agencies, and industry.10
Likewise, they pointed to a well-functioning research support office that enables researchers to learn about funding opportunities, comply with standards for submitting quality proposals on time, and manage spending, invoicing, and reporting details accurately and effectively. Institutional representatives from both HBCU/MIs and non-HBCU/MIs stressed the value of maintaining an institutional ecosystem that provides streamlined, well-understood, transparent processes to work on solicitation identification, proposal submission, negotiations, management, and funding close-out. One representative pointed out the value of a research office to monitor the thousands of opportunities published weekly on www.grants.gov and alert faculty to those relevant to their expertise.11
Sustained Investment in Research Infrastructure
The representatives from institutions of higher education who testified to the committee stressed that building capacity is a long-term endeavor. Even among the largest institutions that provided input for this study (e.g., Georgia Tech Research Institute, University of Michigan), growth in institutional research capacity spanned decades. Several shared that state and federal support resulted in part
_____________
10 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
11 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
from active engagement between university leaders and state elected or appointed officials and the congressional delegations from their states.12
Another important element of capacity-building identified by participants was overcoming the “spikiness” of project funding. Short grants, or gaps between grants, are particularly difficult when supporting graduate students. In contrast, longer-term support can attract and retain students.13 The depth and reliable availability of an awarded pool of research funds, and a fair and transparent process for researchers to apply for those funds, is critical for an institution of higher education to steadily grow its research productivity and reputation. Based on committee experience, if an institution of higher education’s research dollars are insufficient or inappropriately committed, researchers may become reliant solely on extramural research project funds, and, as a result, coverage gaps can occur.
In addition to funding agencies providing long-term support, there is also a responsibility for faculty to, as one university vice president said, “think in parallel and not sequentially.” In other words, he urged faculty to seek out and apply for funding on a regular basis, rather than waiting until a grant is ending before looking for the next one.14
Intellectual Property and Commercialization Support Offices
The committee recognizes that intellectual property and commercialization opportunities are not universally perceived as goals by all disciplines across a university. Yet for patentable ideas, an appropriate commercialization office can make the difference in whether researchers regularly seek to legally protect their intellectual property. Such a resource is also critical to an institution’s goals of collaborating with the private sector and other universities.
In the commissioned paper provided to the committee on this topic (see also Chapter 4), the author suggested promising practices to increase capacity for commercialization at HBCUs and, by extension, to MIs. These practices include awarding capacity-building grants to fund one or two staff members within an institution’s office of sponsored research to focus on technology commercialization, convening workshops to develop institutional strategies, and increasing awareness of Small Business Technology Transfer/Small Business Innovation Research (STTR/SBIR) opportunities. Other suggestions included expansion of the National Science Foundation’s (NSF’s) and National Institutes of Health’s (NIH’s)
_____________
12 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
13 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
14 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
I-Corps Program, in which faculty are engaged in the customer discovery process to understand how their research can be aligned to market needs. NSF’s EPSCoR (Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research) could also be leveraged to stimulate technology commercialization at HBCU/MIs (McCrary, 2021).
Research Faculty Support
The second component of capacity, research faculty support, includes an articulated vision and support for a research climate and culture by institutional leadership. An institution’s infrastructure can shape the time faculty have available to focus on research and affect other factors that influence research launch and continuity. An institution of higher education’s consistency in managing low faculty teaching workloads, providing competitive start-up packages and access to research and administrative support within their academic departments and schools/colleges, and offering reliable sources of intramural financial support for graduate students (independent of funded grants and contracts) are all critical to its ability to reach and sustain high research capacity and attract and recruit research faculty.
Lower Teaching Workloads
As noted, there is a wide range of expectations for average faculty teaching workloads, and there are often variations in teaching workloads within the different schools/colleges of a given institution of higher education (Gasman, 2013). As a promising practice, it is important to emphasize that the time faculty have available to conduct research is inversely proportionate to their teaching workload—lower teaching workloads provide faculty with more time for research, while high teaching workloads provide faculty with less time and bandwidth for research pursuits.
To mitigate the challenge of high teaching loads, participants in the committee’s public meetings described a need for additional funding to support the hiring of more faculty to share the teaching duties. They also suggested a need to institutionalize sabbaticals at HBCU/MIs to enable faculty to focus on and expand their research (Essoka et al., 2021).
Provision of Faculty Start-Up Packages
Start-up funds offered as part of a hiring package facilitate the establishment of a research program by new faculty members, without their having to immediately rely on funding from successful research proposals. The availability and appropriate use of institutional funds enable this significant recruitment tool. The committee found that creating an institutional funding base can be difficult for many HBCU/MIs because they are awarded fewer grants, receive lower amounts, and
have lower indirect cost recovery rates. While some institutions tap into philanthropy and tuition revenue to support faculty recruitment, both of these sources are lower at HBCU/MIs.
Institutional Graduate Student Support
In the committee’s experience, research programs funded by DoD grants and contracts often create a need for “bridge funding” until DoD funds arrive. Better-resourced institutions can help bridge the gap, but many institutions cannot. The absence of institutional bridging funds translates to delays in researchers beginning the work and hiring the necessary research personnel, which subsequently impacts project schedules and research outcomes.
Department- and/or College-Based Research Staff and Administrative Support
Pre- and post-award support personnel assist faculty in preparing proposals and budgets in response to federal solicitations, as well as managing budgets, purchases, spending, and hiring of students and other personnel. Based on committee experience, it is common for R1 non-HBCU/MIs to provide one administrative staff person to support three to five faculty within an academic department. In contrast, in R2 HBCUs and other MIs, it is common for one or two administrative staff persons to support the faculty of an entire academic department. In the majority of cases, the committee found that active faculty researchers at HBCUs and MIs are handling most of their research administration and research execution details themselves, except when the salaries of program managers have been explicitly budgeted into their grants and contracts.
Ancillary Services
Ancillary services encompass effective human resource and legal affairs support, public relations teams, robust government relations teams, and effective institutional research foundations/structures.
Effective Human Resources and Legal Affairs Support
Effective and efficient human resources processes enable research departments to hire faculty, students, and other personnel (e.g., postdocs, research support staff) in a timely manner. Many aspects of research grant administration are growing increasingly complex, including government contracts, partnerships, compliance, intellectual property, procurement, and human resources matters. Legal assistance is often required in this complex environment, and sufficient legal staff in size and qualification is becoming a core cost of business. The committee believes that adequate legal resources and human resources support are necessary to compete successfully for DoD research awards.
Effective Public Relations
The committee believes that the strength of the public relations machinery is essential for communicating an institution’s research achievements and successes to internal and external audiences and thus influence an institution’s research reputation—the perceptions of funding entities and an institution’s peers of its quality and quantity of research programs. There are multiple instances of institutions of higher education having steadily produced valuable research contributions in key areas germane to DoD, without the national security community being aware of the work. While publishing research deliverables in well-respected peer-reviewed journals helps advance research reputation within a focused professional community, coupling that knowledge dissemination vehicle with strong public relations further builds the institution’s research reputation among relevant funders.
Robust Government Relations Teams
The solicitation-proposal “rules of engagement” differ among organizations, and, based on committee experience, the importance of leveraging reputation to build research relationships is relatively more complex when the relationship-building is with DoD. Institutions of higher education can benefit from a robust government relations team able to assist leadership and faculty researchers in building the necessary relationships and familiarity with potential DoD partners. This is one of the reasons why several R1 institutions of higher education have established subsidiary offices with university personnel in proximity to federal agencies.
Effective Institutional Research Foundation/Structures
Establishing a research foundation (e.g., the Georgia Tech Research Institute and the University of Maryland university-affiliated research centers) can position an institution of higher education to access and leverage a broader funding portfolio for collaborating with DoD. For example, a foundation can enable an institution to more easily hire retired DoD personnel to help inform its strategy for securing additional research dollars.15
In the absence of a research foundation, other mechanisms exist by which institutions of higher education can increase their access to DoD processes and norms. One possibility is to contract with an appropriate third-party positioned to acquaint the institution with key DoD programs and to accurately introduce the institution’s research strengths to key personnel within DoD. Another possibility is to collaborate with corporations that have a history of contracting with DoD,
_____________
15 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
and in this way strategically build familiarity with DoD personnel and processes. While all paths have their benefits and challenges, the committee believes that the leaders of institutions of higher education need to first determine their research portfolio goal(s) followed by targeted conversations with DoD personnel for additional guidance.
Increase Proactive Communication and Relationship-Building Efforts
The presentations to the committee and the focus groups highlighted the value of proactive communication to increase knowledge transfer and build stronger relationships between DoD and HBCU/MIs, as well as the challenges to achieving it. For example, on the institutions’ part, increasing understanding of DoD culture, priorities, and processes can lead to increased awareness of research and workforce development opportunities and the characteristics of successful applications for targeted and non-targeted funding. On DoD’s part, increased understanding of HBCU/MI research capabilities and expertise can help program officers tailor outreach to HBCU/MIs to increase the pool of funding applicants.
As a way forward, DoD can engage in more dedicated partner-building efforts—the Army’s HBCU Diversity Forum was offered as one example. During the focus groups, faculty across six institutions—five HBCUs and one tribal college or university (TCU)—reported that in-person visits and networking had a substantial impact on their ability to build individual relationships with DoD personnel. Several also mentioned the importance of hearing from other researchers with DoD grants in networking situations. DoD can also create and expand opportunities for faculty to sit on review boards or advisory boards with the understanding that when faculty have the appropriate support to accommodate low teaching workloads or release time for research pursuits, they are more likely to engage with these opportunities. In addition, there is potential in considering Intergovernment Personnel Act–like assignments for institutional researchers, expansion of pilot programs (e.g., LUCI), or, alternatively, with government grant and contract funding, the push for government researchers to participate in institutional research at HBCU/MIs.16 Other ways to strengthen relationships is for strategic involvement of HBCUs, TCUs, and other MIs in the pre-release development of funding opportunities, which would involve institutional representatives in early discussions about the structure, requirements, and focus of
_____________
16 The Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) Mobility Program provides for assignments that are intended to facilitate cooperation between the federal government and a non-federal entity through the temporary assignment of skilled personnel. These assignments allow civilian employees of federal agencies to serve with eligible non-federal organizations for a limited period without loss of employee rights and benefits. See https://www.usgs.gov/human-capital/intergovernmental-personnel-act-ipa-mobility-program-guidance.
funding opportunities or legislation around funding to mitigate barriers to access (Essoka et al., 2021).
The issue of proactive communication also extends to the stages after the submission of a funding proposal. DoD representatives who presented to the committee at a workshop said that their programs do not proactively provide feedback to applicants whose proposals were rejected unless requested by the applicant. DoD respondents did not specify the level of detail provided in response to applicant requests.17 Structured feedback to applicants, particularly first-time applicants, may be critical to assisting researchers in improving future applications.
It is clear from the committee’s findings that opportunities to build meaningful two-way relationships between HBCU/MIs and a broader array of DoD research offices are not only important but necessary to increase the representation of HBCU/MIs within the DoD network.
Form True Partnerships with Other Institutions
In focus groups, representatives of HBCU/MIs emphasized that the strongest partnerships are those characterized by mutual and shared recognition that “all partners bring something valuable to the table,” including unique and diverse perspectives worthy of consideration. Additionally, successful partnerships were described as those in which faculty from all partner organizations are engaged in the design and implementation of the research (e.g., they assist with proposal development and reporting research outcomes). As one interviewed TCU representative said, “If we are worthy of partnership, then we are also worthy of the strategic planning that goes into that partnership” (Essoka et al., 2021). HBCU/MI faculty also welcomed partnerships with opportunities to collaborate with faculty at larger institutions, access research facilities, and develop professionally through interactions with researchers from other disciplines. The beginning of a partnership, a period dedicated to building trust among partners, can shed light on the needs, research goals, priorities, and expectations of the respective institutions; as noted during the committee’s workshop by one representative of a non-HBCU/MI university-affiliated research center, “Getting to know each other is job number one.”18
Successful partnerships were seen as ones that provide enhanced research opportunities for students, especially those in need of fellowships to attend graduate school, future employment (e.g., jobs or internships), and/or meaningful opportunities to build relationships with mentors (Essoka et al., 2021). Overall,
_____________
17 Committee’s second public meeting, December 7, 2020. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/12-07-2020/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions.
18 Committee’s third public meeting, February 16, 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/02-16-2021/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-institutions-meeting-3.
HBCU/MI focus group participants described successful and mutually beneficial partnerships with research partners and/or research sponsors as those that (Essoka et al., 2021)
- are grounded in mutual respect, meaningful engagement, and equity in funding and resources;
- present opportunities for joint research and collaboration; and
- effectively contribute to the infrastructure and capacities of HBCUs, TCUs, and other MIs to advance research activities in the long term.
The most valued research partnerships were described as those where the capacities, resources, and activities can be sustained beyond the life of the grant.
Consider Other Agency Programs and Practices
All institutions in the focus groups held up models of funding that can build capacity, and many attested to the long-standing, meaningful relationships developed with federal funding agencies. NSF, NIH, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture were all named for their practices to engage HBCUs, TCUs, and other MIs. Upon the committee’s further review, many of these other agencies’ programs have elements aimed at increasing outreach and access, increasing research capacity, and building the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. They range from fellowship programs to targeted research support, outreach efforts, and technical assistance, among other initiatives. Select programs representing a range of agencies are identified in Table 5-1.
CONCLUSION: There is a need for DoD to review programs and practices successfully employed by other government agencies (e.g., Department of Energy, NASA, NSF) to diversify the S&T workforce and increase research capacity at HBCU/MIs.
PROMISING PRACTICES BY STAKEHOLDER GROUP
The vision and commitment of leadership at HBCU/MIs, DoD, and other institutions together can ensure that HBCUs and other MIs expand their current research capacities and are more actively engaged in DoD research to benefit the competitiveness and security of the nation. Different stakeholders have different roles to play in implementing the promising practices described above related to establishing a critical research infrastructure, increasing proactive communications and relationship-building efforts, forming true partnerships, and considering other agencies’ programs. Figure 5-2 and the following may serve as a starting point.
TABLE 5-1 Examples of Federal Agency Programs
| Agency | Program or Activity | Goals and Practices |
|---|---|---|
| National Institutes of Health | Path to Excellence and Innovation for HBCUs (PEI) initiative | Launched in response to the 2017 Executive Order 13779 to enhance NIH engagements with HBCUs (EOP, 2017), this initiative’s goals include to “identify NIH programs and initiatives where HBCUs are underrepresented and improve HBCUs participation within them; develop strategies using existing small business rules/regulations to leverage potential funding opportunities; encourage public-sector, private-sector, and community collaboration to improve the overall capacity of HBCUs; seek funding to sustain contractual support for the initiative; and increase the number of PEI HBCU and business partner participants.” Additionally, to support the initiative, NIH has developed an HBCU reference manual on how to conduct business with NIH and other federal agencies and an HBCU database that streamlines acquisition resources and simplifies HBCU and private sector partnerships, among other initiatives. In 2021, the program included 21 HBCUs and 42 businesses (NIH, 2021e, 2022a, 2022b; Rosenthall, 2021). |
| Maximizing Opportunities for Scientific and Academic Independent Careers (MOSAIC) Program | The MOSAIC program was developed to “facilitate the transition of promising postdoctoral researchers from diverse backgrounds.” It offers an institutionally focused research education cooperative agreement and an individual postdoctoral career transition award (K99/R00) to enhance diversity (NIH, 2021c). | |
| Innovative Programs to Enhance Research Training (IPERT) Program | IPERT supports creative and innovative research educational activities designed to “complement and/or enhance the training of a workforce to meet the nation’s biomedical research needs” (NIH, 2021a). | |
| Institutional Research, Academic Career Development Award (IRACDA) | IRACDA promotes consortia between research-intensive institutions and partner institutions that have a historical mission and a demonstrated commitment to providing training, encouragement, and assistance to students from groups underrepresented in the nation’s biomedical research enterprise. IRACDA combines a traditional mentored postdoctoral research experience with an opportunity to develop academic skills, including teaching, through workshops and mentored teaching assignments at a partner institution. The program is designed to further the progress of postdocs toward academic research and teaching careers, as well promote research and teaching collaborations between research-intensive institutions and partner institutions (NIH, 2021b). |
| I-Corps Program | The NIH I-Corps Program provides funding, mentoring, and networking opportunities to help commercialize promising biomedical technology (NIH, 2021d). A similar program is conducted through NSF (NSF, 2022). | |
| U.S. Department of Agriculture | National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) funding for 1890 land-grant institutions or HBCUs | NIFA was established under the Second Morrill Act of 1890, the 1890 land-grant program intended to “strengthen research, extension, and teaching in the food and agricultural sciences by building the institutional capacities of the 1890 institutions.” A significant amount of targeted support is provided to HBCUs through this program, including more than $21.8 million in 2021 to “build capacity for teaching, research, and extension activities, including curriculum design, materials development, faculty development, student recruitment and retention, and extension program development support” (USDA, 2021, 2022). |
| National Science Foundation | Historically Black Colleges and Universities—Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) | HBCU-UP provides awards to strengthen STEM undergraduate education and research at HBCUs through its Broadening Participation Research (BPR) in STEM Education projects and Research Initiation Awards (RIA), which provide support for STEM faculty with no prior or recent research funding to pursue research at the home institution, an NSF-funded research center, a research intensive institution, or a national laboratory (NSF, 2020). |
| Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology Program (CREST) | CREST provides support to enhance the research capabilities of minority-serving institutions though centers designed to integrate education and research. CREST Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (PRF) awards also provide research experience and training for early-career scientists at these centers (NSF, 2017). | |
| HBCU Research Infrastructure for Science and Engineering (HBCU-RISE) Program | HBCU-RISE targets HBCUs to support the “expansion of institutional research capacity as well as the production of doctoral students, especially those from groups underrepresented in STEM” (NSF, 2017). | |
| National Aeronautics and Space Administration | Minority University Research and Education Project (MUREP) | MUREP provides multi-year research grants as well as internships, scholarships, fellowships, mentoring, and tutoring for K-12 and institutions of higher education. NASA has supported more than 100 active MUREP awards to 71 MSIs, with 61.6% of the funding to Hispanic-Serving Institutions, 19.6% to HBCUs, 2% to TCUs, and 0.9% to Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (NASA, 2020, 2021b). |
| MUREP Small Business Technology Transfer Research Planning Grants (M-STTR) | M-STTR planning grants were created to incentivize partnerships between minority-serving institutions, including HBCUs, and small businesses, enhancing the potential for long-term collaboration and preparing teams to participate in the annual SBIR/STTR solicitation. M-STTR provides planning grants for minority-serving institutions partnered with a small business of up to $40,000 for a four-month performance period (NASA, 2021a). | |
| University Leadership Initiative (ULI) | The University Leadership Initiative was created to encourage collaboration between NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) and academia. One of the initiative’s strategic goals is to “promote greater diversity in aeronautics through increased participation of minority-serving institutions and underrepresented university faculties in ULI activities” (NASA, 2022). | |
| HBCU/MSI Technology Infusion Road Tour | The HBCU/MSI Technology Infusion Road Tour is an outreach effort led by NASA to support broadening participation in STEM. The Road Tour is a multi-day forum with a range of networking opportunities to “encourage minority-serving institutions to collaborate with the agency’s small business programs, STEM engagement, the Space Technology Mission Directorate, and NASA’s contractors, including Boeing and Lockheed Martin” (EOP, 2021; NASA, 2019). | |
| National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | José E. Serrano Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions (EPP/MSI) | EPP/MSI offers scholarships to rising juniors or fourth-year students in five-year programs who are full-time students attending minority-serving institutions. The program has objectives to increase inclusion, retention, and achievement of supported scholars through financial support, internships, and professional engagement. Outcomes of the investment include a significant increase in the education and graduation of students from underrepresented communities in STEM fields that support NOAA’s mission. The program also uses performance metrics as a program requirement, along with a database that contains student data and other information used to track and assess program performance (EOP, 2021; NOAA, 2021). |
| Department of Energy | Minority Serving Institution Partnership Program (MSIPP) | MSIPP aims to establish a “sustainable pipeline” between the Department of Energy’s sites and labs and minority-serving institutions, supporting 24 consortium-based teams consisting of participants from select institutions (DOE, 2022). |
| Dr. Samuel P. Massie Chairs of Excellence Program | The Dr. Samuel P. Massie Chairs of Excellence Program provides African American students with an opportunity to pursue research in environmental studies (Johnson, 2014; Rosenthall, 2021). |
| Small Business Administration | Mentor Protégé Program | The Small Business Administration’s Mentor Protégé Program is designed to help eligible small businesses (protégés) gain capacity and win government contracts through partnerships with more experienced companies (mentors) (Rosenthall, 2021; SBA, 2022). |
| Patent and Trademark Office | American Association for the Advancement of Science/National Science Foundation (AAAS/NSF) HBCU Making & Innovation Showcase training | The AAAS/NSF HBCU Making & Innovation Showcase training builds innovation capacity including through strategic partnerships and training on intellectual property and invention education for students and faculty at Howard University, the University of Puerto Rico, and the University of Houston/Texas Southern University, among others. The Patent and Trademark Office also works with the Society for Hispanic Professional Engineers, the National Society of Black Engineers, and others to build intellectual property literacy and encourage future innovators and entrepreneurs (EOP, 2021). |
HBCU/MI Leadership
HBCU/MI leadership can do the following:
- Define research goals aligned with institutional and DoD priorities
- Proactively shape partnerships to achieve prioritized goals
- Develop true partnerships with non-HBCU/MIs, government/quasi-government entities and industry, as well other HBCU/MIs
DoD Leadership
DoD leadership can do the following:
- Increase the consistent, coordinated engagement of HBCU/MIs in defense research, including regular outreach; early engagement in the structure, requirements, and focus of grant and contract funding opportunities; and support in grant and contract proposal development, administration, and management. This might include timely communication about available opportunities to engage in the DoD network, guidance for competitive proposals, and constructive feedback for future efforts.
- Build relationships with HBCU/MI researchers, such as increasing opportunities for faculty to sit on program, peer-review, or advisory boards for research sponsors or through institution-government exchange programs, such as IPA-type arrangements.
NOTE: The committee considers “true partnerships” to be those that are grounded in mutual benefit, meaningful engagement, and equitable funding and resources.
- Review select programs and practices from other government agencies that may be suitable for adoption and/or adaptation.
Other Stakeholders
Other stakeholders such as university-affiliated research centers and DoD-industry partners can do the following:
- Establish and evaluate true partnership opportunities with HBCU/MIs that are mutually beneficial
- Co-develop proposals and co-report research outcomes so that HBCU/MIs play an active, appropriately resourced role
- Create and sustain long-term relationships with HBCU/MIs that transcend discrete research projects
REFERENCES
Blake, D. 2018. Motivations and paths to becoming faculty at minority serving institutions. Education Sciences 8(1): 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010030.
DOE (Department of Energy). 2022. NNSA Minority Serving Institution Partnership Program (MSIPP). https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/nnsa-minority-serving-institution-partnership-program-msipp.
Easterly, D., and C. L. A. Pemberton. 2008. Understanding barriers and supports to proposal writing as perceived by female associate professors: Achieving promotion to professor. Research Management Review 16(1): 1–17.
EOP (Executive Office of the President). 2017. Executive Order 13779. White House Initiative to Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Washington, DC. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-03-03/pdf/2017-04357.pdf.
EOP. 2021. Best practices for diversity and inclusion in STEM education and research: A guide by and for federal agencies. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/091621-Best-Practices-for-Diversity-Inclusion-in-STEM.pdf.
Essoka, M., H. Muhisani, K. Macdonald, J. Marchand, N. Nayar, J. Mason, J. Howard, and P. Sonoda. 2021. Building capacity for defense research at historically black colleges and universities and other minority institutions. Paper commissioned by the Committee on Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Serving Institutions. AIR (American Institutes for Research). https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions.
Gasman, M. 2013. The changing face of historically black colleges and universities. Philadelphia, PA: Penn Center for Minority Serving Institutions. https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/335.
Johnson, J. 2014. Final report for grant DE-FG02-94EW11423. FY 2005-2010. Samuel P. Massie Chair of Excellence Program. Washington, DC: Howard University. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1165364.
McCrary, V. 2021. Technology commercialization at historically black colleges and universities: A snapshot on the current state of the practice. Paper commissioned by the Committee on Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Serving Institutions. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions.
NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). 2019. HBCU/MI NASA Technology Infusion Road Tour, Tuskegee University. Washington, DC. https://sbir.nasa.gov/content/hbcumi-nasa-technology-infusion-road-tour-tuskegee-university.
NASA. 2020. NASA STEM engagement: About MUREP. Washington, DC. https://www.nasa.gov/stem/murep/about/index.html.
NASA. 2021a. Minority serving institutions in space tech. Washington, DC. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/Minority_Serving_Institutions_in_Space_Tech/.
NASA. 2021b. NASA STEM engagement highlights 2020. Washington, DC. https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_ostem_highlights_2020_0.pdf.
NASA. 2022. ARMD: University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC. https://nari.arc.nasa.gov/uli.
NIH (National Institutes of Health). 2021a. Innovative Programs to Enhance Research Training (IPERT) (R25). Bethesda, MD. https://www.nigms.nih.gov/research-training/resources/innovative-programs-to-enhance-research-training.
NIH. 2021b. Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Awards. (IRACDA) (K12). Bethesda, MD. https://www.nigms.nih.gov/training/careerdev/pages/twdinstres.aspx.
NIH. 2021c. Maximizing Opportunities for Scientific and Academic Independent Careers (MOSAIC) (K99/R00 and UE5). Bethesda, MD. https://www.nigms.nih.gov/training/careerdev/Pages/MOSAIC.aspx.
NIH. 2021d. National Cancer Institute: I-Corps™ at NIH, Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) PAR-22-073. Bethesda, MD. https://sbir.cancer.gov/programseducation/icorps.
NIH. 2021e. The NIH Path to Excellence and Innovation Initiative. Bethesda, MD. https://oamp.od.nih.gov/nih-small-business-program-office/nih-path-to-excellence-innovation-initiative.
NIH. 2022a. Paving the path to excellence and innovation for historically black colleges and universities. White paper. Bethesda, MD. https://oamp.od.nih.gov/sites/default/files/SBODOCs/PEI%20White%20Paper-Jan2021.pdf.
NIH. 2022b. The path to excellence and innovation fact sheet. Bethesda, MD. https://oamp.od.nih.gov/sites/default/files/SBODOCs/PEI%20Fact%20Sheet-FY2021.pdf.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). September 7, 2021. José E. Serrano Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions (EPP/MSI): Prospective EPP/MSI undergraduate scholars. Washington, DC. https://www.noaa.gov/office-education/epp-msi/undergraduate-scholarship/prospective.
NSF (National Science Foundation). 2017. Centers of research excellence in science and technology. Alexandria, VA. https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/centers-research-excellence-science-and-technology.
NSF. 2020. Historically Black Colleges and Universities—Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP). Alexandria, VA. https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/historically-black-colleges-and-universities-undergraduate-program-hbcu.
NSF. 2022. NSF Innovation Corps program. Alexandria, VA. https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/i-corps.
Rosenthall, J. 2021. Enhancing Department of Defense engagements with historically black colleges and universities and other minority serving institutions. Paper commissioned by the Committee on Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Serving Institutions. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historicallyblack-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions.
SBA (Small Business Administration). 2022. SBA Mentor-Protégé Program. Washington, DC. https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/sba-mentor-protege-program.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2021. USDA invests over $21.8M to build agricultural capacity at HBCUs in the nation’s land-grant university system. July 28, 2021. Washington, DC. https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/07/28/usda-invests-over-218m-build-agricultural-capacity-hbcus-nations.
USDA. 2022. 1890 land-grant institutions programs. Washington, DC. https://nifa.usda.gov/program/1890-land-grant-institutions-programs.
