AM-ME: Securing Project Funding

AM-ME Budget 

The total budget for AM-ME was $1,749,723. Check out the downloadable resources below to see categories of costs to consider for your CEnR Budget.  

AM-ME was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF), which has specific policies and procedures found in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG). It is important to understand your funding source’s specific rules for allowability of costs and to make plans for supplementary funding if necessary costs are unallowable.  

Consider types of labor needed: When forming the project team, we created a balance of senior team members who served as task leaders and provided thought leadership, as well as junior team members with appropriate skill sets to complete tasks and build new skills through mentorship. This balance was essential for staying in budget on this project. When considering the level of effort (LOE) for team members, we budgeted for the core team, communications team, and ad hoc team members. Labor costs were $644,322.  

• Core team: AM-ME was a five-member core team. Costs included salary and benefits for the PI and co-PI, research scientist, senior research analyst, and senior project manager from Child Trends. Time for the core team was estimated using WBS Bottom-up estimation to produce the most accurate possible estimate by considering the amount of time each team member will spend on individual projects tasks to determine LOE.  
• Communications team: The communications team processed products for dissemination. Planning for dissemination products early in the project ensured time allocated for the communications team was sufficient for dissemination. Bottom-up estimation was used for the communication team members, too.  
• Ad hoc supports: Throughout the project, ad hoc team members worked to complete discreet tasks such as copyediting, fact checking, or RedCAP support. Thinking through the types of ad hoc support that might be needed can be challenging for CEnR projects due to their iterative nature, so a best guess or PERT Kernal method of estimation was helpful in budgeting for their costs.     

Subrecipient Agreements: The AM-ME project is a collaborative partnership between the research institutions Child Trends, McREL International, and Search Institute. Co-PIs from McREL and Search Institute led predetermined portions of the scope of work and have subrecipient agreements that outline those tasks with funding for related costs. Subrecipient costs were $705,798.       

Travel: Travel costs include airfare, hotel, per diem, and ground transportation, and totaled to $30,090.  

• Travel to AM- ME research group meetings: Meeting with youth in-person when possible was prioritized for this project. Most of the research group meetings were held in person at schools after school hours. Ground transportation (GSA rate per mile, now $0.70/mile) was allocated for travel to school sites for research group meetings.   
• Travel to data collection sites: Researchers traveled for data collection for in-person focus groups. Travel costs for data collection included airfare, hotel, ground transportation, per diem for out-of-town team members, and ground transportation for local team members. 
• Conferences: Team members from AM-ME traveled to several conferences to serve on panels to discuss methods and present findings. The cost of conference registration is budgeted in line G6, while travel is budgeted in line E in NSF budgets. When considering travel to conferences, we budgeted for airfare, hotel, ground transportation, and per diem within GSA rates.

Software for analysis 

• We used Dedoose for qualitative analysis; subscriptions range in price from $13.95-$17.95 per month per team member.  

Incentives 

• District partner, Bloomington Public Schools (BPS): The work of this project would not have been possible without our district partner, BPS. BPS provided location for meetings and data collection, administered the survey through their online LMS platform, deidentified survey data, and provided achievement data correlated to the final AM-ME survey. For these services, they were provided with incentives of $45,000 per year. 
• Research subjects: Students and teachers who participated in data collection efforts were compensated for their time and effort through incentives.  

Consultants: Be sure to know if your costs are categorized as participant support costs, or costs that can incur indirect costs. For example, advisory board and research group members are contributing to project work, not attending these meetings for the purpose of learning or receiving training, so their compensation is not participant support costs according to NSF’s definition.  

• Advisory board (AB) members: Advisory board members provided evaluative feedback to the research team to ensure deliverables are produced at a high-level of rigor and with contemporary effective practice for relevant disciplines and methodologies. They completed prework, attended the meeting, then sent evaluative feedback in written form post-meeting. AB members were compensated $1,000 per meeting.   
• Research group team: The research group was comprised of teachers and students who were each compensated $4,000 per year for their efforts. 

Translation and Transcription 

• DayTranslations and independent translators provided translation services from English to Spanish and Somali to share the community facing resources with the BPS community. The cost for Spanish translation was $0.14/per and the cost for Somali translation was $0.18/word. 
• TranscribeME was used for translation of in-person recorded data collection from focus groups. The cost for this service was $1.10/audio minute.    

Miscellaneous 

• Zoom subscription: Team members attempting to join calls from BPS devices were not able to access Microsoft Teams. We found it necessary to host online meetings via Zoom, which was $167/year. 
• Office supplies: Various office supplies were required for RG meetings and data collection such as construction paper and a microphone. 

AM-ME Contracts  

After finalizing the agreement with the funder, subrecipients, consultants, and vendors will need proper agreements to ensure any required flow-downs of requirements are known to those who will be paid from the grant.   

Subrecipient agreements for Co-PI organizations were prioritized to ensure the work of the Co-PIs was an allowable cost incurred, data security agreements were in place, and scope and budget were clear to all parties.  

For BPS, prior to beginning the work of this project, a data security agreement and MOU were established to ensure student data would be protected and completely deidentified and the district was very clear on expectations for their responsibilities in the scope of work. 

Student and teacher contracts (see downloadable resource for sample) set expectations for everyone working together. Minor students needed a parent to complete the agreement, but they were asked to sign as well. Likewise, the advisory board MOUs established expectations for their contributions to the project.  

Vendor PO and data security agreements were needed for TranscribeME due to the handling of research data.