There are two grant cycles per academic year, in Fall and Spring quarters. The grant submission deadline for the Spring 2022 cycle is by 5:00PM on Friday, May 13, 2022.
The deadline for the next grant cycle will be announced once the submission period is open.
The Center for the Advancement of Teaching, in conjunction with the Committee on Instructional Improvement Programs, provides grant funding to support innovation, experimentation, and development of undergraduate curricula and pedagogy. The goal of the Instructional Improvement Grant Program is to improve the quality of undergraduate education through pedagogical experimentation in areas such as student-centered learning, course design, diversity and inclusion in the classroom, and instructional technologies. The program especially values innovations that will have a lasting impact on undergraduate education.
We recognize that there are many areas open to interpretation, and we strongly recommend a consultation with Dr. Kumiko Haas, Director of Instructional Improvements Programs, to clarify likely funding categories and project design. The Instructional Improvement Programs e-mail address is: iip@teaching.ucla.edu.
Consultation is intended to help develop a proposal and is not an opportunity for lobbying on behalf of a proposal. Please schedule consultation appointments well in advance of the deadline for submission. Appointments during the last week of the application period are not available. Phone consultation and e-mail are the most efficient methods for answering specific questions.
Participation in Faculty Improving Teaching (FIT) Communities
IIP grantees are invited to meet to discuss their projects funded by the IIP Grants. This faculty community of practice program is an opportunity for all grantees to receive ongoing feedback and support from the Center for the Advancement of Teaching consultants, as well as from fellow IIP-supported faculty members who have received funding this year.
Participation in this program helps faculty and students get the most out of IIP projects; it also helps faculty assess and demonstrate any successes or lessons learned, thereby increasing the likelihood that future proposals (to IIP and others) will be funded.
IIP Grantee Reporting
Every grantee is expected to share their experience by either publishing or presenting their project in some venue. This could take a variety of forms, such as:
Please acknowledge the Center’s support in all presentations and publications and notify us in advance of any presentation so that we may record it if we see fit.
Note that grantees will not be eligible for additional funding until they have satisfied the requirements listed above.
The CIIP has adopted the following policies:
In general, the CIIP has favored proposals which:
You will be required to upload the following documents in the application system:
A good project narrative would start with an explicit statement of what you aim to achieve with your work and what impact you expect it to have. Overall, a good narrative would answer the following questions:
Length is not rewarded, but neither is vagueness. The project narrative should not exceed six (6) pages.
A sample application form is available for your reference below. To submit your proposal, please click the online application submission button.
Why should I request consultation with the Center for the Advancement of Teaching prior to submitting my proposal?
We recognize that there are many areas open to interpretation, and we strongly recommend a consultation with Dr. Kumiko Haas, Director of Instructional Improvements Programs, to clarify likely funding categories and project design. To schedule a consultation, please contact iip@teaching.ucla.edu.
Consultation is intended to help develop a proposal and is not an opportunity for lobbying on behalf of a proposal. Please schedule consultation appointments well in advance of the deadline for submission. Appointments during the last week of the application period are not available. Phone consultation and e-mail are the most efficient methods for answering specific questions.
What should be included in the project narrative?
A good project narrative would start with an explicit statement of what you aim to achieve with your work and what impact you expect it to have. Overall, a good narrative would answer the following questions:
Length is not rewarded, but neither is vagueness. The project narrative should not exceed six (6) pages.
How much budget detail is necessary?
The budget sheet is an overview of the requested budget. Each element of the budget should be explained in the narrative. A proposal which, for example, requests $8,000 but doesn’t specify how it is to be spent is not likely to pass scrutiny. In general, there is no upper limit to the amount you can request in the proposal. However, for larger grants (exceeding $15K) the committee would likely be more favorable with matching funds from the chair/division or other external grants.
What kinds of monetary assistance are available?
Funds can be provided for undergraduate or graduate student assistance. The type of assistance should be consistent with the level of goals to be accomplished. For some specific work, compensation for staff time can be requested. This may include programming time from local computing support centers that goes beyond their normal job description. Consult with the departmental MSO regarding appropriate funding levels or pay scales for Staff Research Associates (SRA), undergraduates, or Graduate Student Researchers (GSR).
Typically, instructional costs (cost for instructors and TAs) are covered by the department. However, Teaching Assistant support can be provided in cases where additional instructional support will be needed due to the changes and improvements in the course you are proposing. Please include in the proposal how TA funding will be provided in the future. In such proposals, please include letters from the chair/dean indicating such support. Again, the departmental MSO can advise on the appropriate levels for TA funding. Please be aware that GSRs and TAs are not interchangeable positions and requests for each will be evaluated on different terms.
There is no remission support for GSRs provided through the Instructional Improvement Program (IIP) major grants. Remissions, TIF, worker’s compensation, and other payroll costs are the responsibility of the hiring department, and will not be provided. Therefore, these fees should not be included in the budget. CAT will provide 19900 funding for GSR salaries when possible, which enables fee remission reimbursement from APB for eligible GSRs.
The $6,000 limit is for equipment only. Equipment purchases come from a separate and limited account. The Committee is willing to support activities to develop new courses requiring equipment, which in most cases can be covered by $6,000. They will not fund individual laptop computers merely for presentation needs.
Faculty should only request a course release when the work is beyond the scope of normal course development that is expected as part of the faculty’s responsibility and cannot be easily delegated to a GSR, and the need should be well justified in the proposal. Senate faculty are not eligible to receive stipends for course development, and are generally not eligible to receive summer salary (except under very unusual circumstances and requiring substantial justification). For non-Senate faculty who propose to develop a course, we encourage consultation with Kumiko Haas to determine the best way to support their goals.
Course releases have to be approved by the department chair. Proposers should be aware that being awarded an IIP grant with teaching release does not necessarily guarantee the release. Ultimately it will depend upon the department finding suitable replacements for the proposer’s teaching obligations.
The course release is a set amount that is provided to the department to provide replacement costs, and not a salary replacement. The department can request up to $10,465 (0.13 FTE at Assistant Professor, Step IV) for both faculty and lecturers. For departments that have specified language about course development workloads in the contracts with their unit 18 lecturers, they may request that cost in lieu of a course release.
Also see section on in-kind assistance from CAT below.
What types of in-kind resources can I request from the Center for the Advancement of Teaching?
You may directly include in your proposal a request for resources or assistance (measured by hours) from the Center’s staff. We understand that faculty may not know exactly how many hours it would take to accomplish their objective, so we encourage consultation with CAT to obtain an estimate. In any event, please include a number of hours even if it is an estimate, and a description of the type of support you would need.
Why should proposals be shared with Local Support Centers prior to submission?
While IIP funds may assist in the development of projects, it is often the responsibility of Local Support Centers (such as the HumTech, SSCERT, and Center for Community Learning) to maintain or further develop such projects. It is important that they have the capability to do so in terms of personnel and/or expertise. Sharing proposals ensures such linkages and sometimes results in “co-developed” projects, which the applicant might not have anticipated as being possible.
What letters of support are required or recommended?
A letter of support from the department chair is required for each proposal. If requesting a course release, the letter from the chair should include explicit approval of release time. Additionally, the Committee encourages applicants to obtain letters of support from local support centers, other faculty who may use the deliverable, and/or other subject matter experts, where applicable.
Can a department submit a request for funding?
Yes! The Committee looks favorably on projects that involve collaboration among faculty. The project will need a “principal investigator” to contact for specific information, but the proposal can represent a department-wide initiative.
Can more than one request be submitted by a person or department at one time?
Yes. There is no penalty for submitting more than one request, although the Committee will look for evidence that priorities are clearly understood, and that sufficient time and other resources are allotted for each proposal. Each proposal will be considered separately.
How soon are applicants notified of the status of a proposal?
Every effort is made to provide a response as soon as possible. Even under ideal conditions, however, it may require several weeks to notify all applicants. Because many of the proposals may also include further negotiation with the appropriate Dean(s), no specific date can be provided for the response. The Committee meets twice a year to consider proposals and most applicants are notified by the end of the quarter.
If approved, how and when are the funds handled?
Funds are transferred to the requesting department and placed in the FAU as given by the department’s MSO via a funding form provided by CAT. Once transferred, the department is responsible for administering and monitoring the funds.
If the project is not completed by June 30th of the grant year, can funds be carried forward to the next fiscal year?
Yes, but carrying funds forward is not automatic. Permission is granted when it is not reasonable for the project to be completed as originally specified. CAT will send out a carry forward request form around the end of the fiscal year for PIs to submit if they need to request their funds be carried forward. Carry forward decisions will be announced in mid-to-late August.
For a list of previously awarded IIP Major Grants, please visit IIP grant showcase.
70 Powell Library
Box 951515
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1515