How Proposals Are Evaluated

Grant Review Committees evaluate each proposal using the following criteria.

Importance of the Problem

Proposals should clearly identify the agricultural issue, challenge, or opportunity being addressed and explain its significance to North Dakota producers, commodity groups, or agricultural industries.

Reviewers consider:

  • The importance and relevance of the problem.
  • The need for the proposed research.
  • The potential benefits to North Dakota agriculture.
  • The likelihood that project outcomes will address an identified industry need.

Potential Impact

Projects should demonstrate meaningful outcomes and measurable benefits for agricultural stakeholders.

Reviewers consider:

  • Economic impact and return on investment.
  • Potential improvements in productivity, efficiency, quality, or profitability.
  • Benefits to agricultural producers, industries, and consumers.
  • Opportunities to advance agricultural knowledge and future research efforts.

Innovation and Advancement

Preference is given to projects that generate new knowledge, technologies, management practices, or production systems.

Reviewers assess:

  • Originality of the proposed research.
  • Potential to address emerging challenges or opportunities.
  • Contribution to scientific knowledge and agricultural advancement.

Funding is generally intended to support research that expands current knowledge rather than routine testing, standard demonstrations, or activities with predictable outcomes.


Scientific and Technical Merit

Projects should be supported by sound research methods and a clear plan of work.

Reviewers consider:

  • Appropriateness of the research design.
  • Quality and feasibility of proposed methods.
  • Clarity of objectives and expected outcomes.
  • Adequacy of data collection and analysis plans.

Investigator Qualifications and Resources

Successful projects require qualified personnel and appropriate resources to achieve project objectives.

Reviewers evaluate:

  • Experience and expertise of the project team.
  • Demonstrated ability to complete similar research.
  • Availability of facilities, equipment, and support resources.
  • Partnerships that strengthen project outcomes.

Budget and Use of Funds

Budgets should be reasonable, justified, and directly related to project objectives.

Reviewers consider:

  • Cost effectiveness of the proposed work.
  • Appropriateness of requested expenditures.
  • Availability of matching funds when required.
  • Efficient use of Agricultural Research Fund resources.

Matching Funds Requirements

Matching funds requirements vary by funding category.

Commodity Research
  • Projects led by North Dakota institutions must provide a minimum match equal to 25% of the amount requested.
  • Projects led by organizations outside North Dakota generally require a dollar-for-dollar (1:1) match.
Animal Agriculture Research
  • Matching funds are not required but may strengthen a proposal.
New and Emerging Crop Research
  • Matching funds are not required but may strengthen a proposal.

Collaborative and Regional Projects

Collaborative and multi-state projects may be considered when they address issues relevant to North Dakota agriculture.

Applicants should clearly demonstrate:

  • Direct benefits to North Dakota producers or industries.
  • The role and contribution of each participating organization.
  • Why collaboration is necessary to achieve project objectives.

Award Considerations

The Agricultural Research Fund does not establish fixed minimum or maximum award amounts.

Funding recommendations may include:

  • Full funding of the request.
  • Partial funding of selected project components.
  • Reduced project scope based on available funds.

Funding decisions are based on proposal quality, reviewer recommendations, available funding, and alignment with Agricultural Research Fund priorities.


Project Duration

Most projects are funded for one to two years; however, longer-term projects may be considered when justified.

  • Projects may extend up to five years.
  • Multi-year projects are subject to annual progress review.
  • Continued funding may depend upon satisfactory progress toward project objectives.

Multiple Proposal Submissions

Applicants may submit more than one proposal during a funding cycle provided that each proposal represents a distinct research project with separate objectives and budgets.


Eligible and Ineligible Expenses

Eligible Expenses - Agricultural Research Fund awards may support expenses such as:

  • Research personnel and technical support staff.
  • Equipment directly related to project objectives.
  • Research supplies and materials.
  • Travel necessary to conduct the research.
  • Laboratory and analytical services.
  • Data collection, analysis, and publication costs.
  • Professional services that support project objectives.

Equipment Purchases - Equipment requests must:

  • Be necessary to achieve project objectives.
  • Include appropriate cost justification.
  • Be supported by a vendor quotation when required.

Ineligible Expenses - Agricultural Research Fund awards may not be used for:

  • Indirect costs or overhead charges.
  • General-purpose office equipment and furnishings.
  • Routine administrative expenses unrelated to project objectives.

Final Funding Decisions

Grant Review Committees evaluate and rank proposals within their respective funding categories and make funding recommendations. Award recommendations are subject to final approval through the established Agricultural Research Fund review process.

Applicants are encouraged to review the Policies and Procedures, Frequently Asked Questions, and current Call for Proposals before preparing and submitting an application.


See Criterion Provided as Guidelines for detailed information.

Proposals are not limited to a specific dollar amount. Each year, the amount of funds available to the committees will vary. Grant committees are given latitude in awarding of funds; the award may be greater or less than the requested amount based on committee findings and on level of available funds. The committee may fund only portions of proposed research. The grant committee (or designated representative) and the investigator will negotiate changes in the proposal relative to changed or partial funding. Modified proposals will be returned to the SBARE administrative representative for tracking and accounting. For multi-year projects, committees have similar latitude. They can terminate projects immediately if progress is totally unsatisfactory; they can elect to terminate ineffective projects before the completion date; or they can decrease or increase funding based on the annual progress reports. If the researcher proposes substantial changes to the scope, direction, or nature of a multi-year project, a new submission should be prepared. Multiple applications from the same applicant will be considered if each application covers distinctly different research projects. Applications that have been submitted under other state grant programs may be considered simultaneously by ARF. The ARF will not fund projects that are fully funded by other sources.

Proposals are not limited to a specific funding period. One- and two-year awards should be common, with a maximum of a five- year duration. Because ARF funds are competitive, proposals in each funding category must be considered at the same time. At the end of any funding period, a completed-project report will be submitted within 90 days.

Researchers are expected to complete grant projects within their specified time frame. Extensions of time are discouraged and, in most cases, will be limited to a one-time extension.

A call for proposals will be issued with the month of August of each year. Applicants should complete the ARF grant application form.

Researchers must select the funding categories (major crop, animal, minor crop) within which the proposal will be evaluated Researchers are responsible for completeness, accuracy, clarity and honesty of the submission. Each is also responsible for compliance with state and federal regulations governing conduct of research.

Award decisions by the committees are binding and not subject to review or appeal. Concerns about the process can be addressed to SBARE with the intention of improving the ARF funding system.

Grant committee members must disclose any potential conflict of interest. Conflicts could include sponsored research conducted on their property, they are related to the proposer, they have ownership interest in a company that is the proposer, or they would otherwise have direct financial interest in the grant money, e.g., they would be paid from the proceeds (as distinguished from just benefiting from the research generally). Less than 5% equity ownership interest in any publicly held company or in any cooperative shall not be considered a conflict. A grant committee member with a conflict of interest must abstain from voting on that specific proposal unless all of the other members of the committee present unanimously approve allowing the member with a conflict to vote.

All conflicted proposals will be reviewed by SBARE for final approval with the conflict disclosed to the full SBARE prior to the final determination. SBARE members are also bound by conflict of interest restrictions. Should a conflict arise after approval, e.g., the research ends up being done on the committee member's property, that member will disclose to the committee and to SBARE in advance or as soon as the situation is known, and the committee and SBARE will determine a suitable course of action. For matched- or joint-funded projects, the conflict of interest restrictions of all sponsors must be satisfied. (R. Johnson, General Counsel, Letter 8 June 98)

Successful applicants are expected to adhere to the conditions outlined in these guidelines. Following approval of the grant award, a formal grant contract will be executed between SBARE and the grantee. This agreement will specify the agreed upon objectives, tasks to be performed, timeline and budget, a fund release schedule, and any other conditions specific to the individual application.

Designated in the terms of all grant contracts, will be the requirements for annual reports of progress and both timeline and budget compliance.

Grantees will be required to submit a final written report describing the work performed and the results obtained. This report must be supplemented by a financial report of all expenses actually incurred and income generated by the project.

To protect the investment of SBARE, co-supporters and the people of North Dakota, all financial documents, books, receipts, orders, expenditures, electronic data and accounting procedures and practices of the grantee are subject to examination by or for SBARE.

  • The ARF grant funds may be used for the purposes indicated in an approved budget during the funding period. Generally, the purposes include salaries other than faculty salaries, equipment, supplies, travel, publication (communication), data analysis and fees.
  • Requests for equipment (equipment is defined as having an individual cost of $5,000 or more and a useful life of more than one year), only will routinely be funded. In the event it is critical for a researcher to submit an equipment only request, the following conditions will apply:
    • an itemized quote from the vendor must be included with the proposal.
    • supplies required to operate the equipment are not allowed.
    • general purpose equipment is not allowed, i.e., office equipment and furnishings, telephones, etc.
    • If requesting equipment as part of an SBARE research grant, the same conditions will apply.
    • supplies, training, and maintenance costs of equipment are allowed only within the first year from date of purchase
  • Other uses of funds may be considered by the ARF Grant Review Committees if sufficient justification is provided. Indirect costs (overhead) are not allowed. Changes to the budget between line items is allowable if the expense provides a direct benefit to the project, but in the event of a breach of contract or non-performance, all or a portion of the grant award may be reclaimed by SBARE.

All research results are to remain in the public domain (SBARE Minutes February 9, 1998).

Subject to the policies of participating public programs and entities, rights to use products, processes or services developed under the SBARE-ARF grant program will remain with the grantee.

Potential applicants wishing to discuss specific proposals for SBARE-ARF are encouraged to contact the SBARE representative at: North Dakota State Board of Agricultural Research and Education.

North Dakota State Board of Agricultural Research and Education
Chantel Shorey, Coordinator for the Agricultural Research Fund, NDAREC
701-667-6416 or Toll free: 800-234-0518
E-mail: cshorey@ndarec.com

Proposals are limited to five typed (in greater than 10 point font) single or double-spaced 8.5" by 11" pages, plus supplements and attachments. Applicants should follow the provided application format. Applications will be submitted electronically as a PDF document to the SBARE administrative representative.

Awarding of ARF grants is competitive. So that applications can be expeditiously reviewed and so that information is sufficient for adequate consideration, a uniform application process is adopted. Requesters should prepare their proposals in the format presented at the Downloadable Forms site.