Skip to main content
College of Veterinary Medicine
Two researchers examine a laboratory sample together, with one holding a glass tube while the other looks on.

PVM Research Catalyst Awards

A Funding Program to Advance Basic, Clinical, and One Health Research

Funding Opportunity Announcement

The Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine (PVM) Office of Research is pleased to announce a funding program designed to support innovative basic, clinical, translational, and One Health research that advances the health and well-being of animals and people. The goal of this funding program is to enable promising early-stage studies, generate critical preliminary data, and establish the foundation for competitive external funding. The EXPECTATION is that each pilot project will lead to submission of an external grant proposal within one year of project completion. Appropriate funding opportunities may include federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), as well as foundations and other external sponsors aligned with the proposed area of research.

New this year, the program will use a two-tier funding structure designed to support projects at different stages of development. Applicants should select the tier that best reflects the maturity of the proposed research. Tier 1 is intended to establish feasibility or proof of concept for new research directions, whereas Tier 2 is intended to build upon an established scientific premise and existing preliminary data to accelerate progression toward external funding.

Tier 1: Seed Award

Tier 1 supports new research directions that are distinct from the specific aims of currently funded projects and for which dedicated preliminary data are limited or unavailable. Preliminary data are not required.

  • Maximum award: $20,000
  • Projects should generate preliminary data or proof-of-concept findings that position investigators for future peer-reviewed funding.

Tier 2: Accelerator Award

Tier 2 supports projects for which investigators have preliminary data and a clear path toward competitive external funding and peer-reviewed publication.

Both single-investigator and collaborative projects are eligible; however, collaborative projects are highly encouraged when the integration of complementary expertise strengthens the proposed research and creates opportunities for future multi-investigator or multi-PI funding.

  • Maximum award: $50,000
  • Projects should build upon existing preliminary data to generate the additional evidence needed to support competitive external funding applications.

Anticipated Number of Awards

The number of awards will depend on the availability of funds and the number of meritorious applications received.

Eligibility & Restrictions

All ranks of faculty members are eligible to apply (tenure-track, tenured, clinical/professional, or research). Faculty members may be named on more than one application, including as PI, Co-PI, or Co-Investigator. However, an individual faculty member may not hold more than one active PVM funded project at any time. For purposes of this restriction, an active PVM-funded project is defined as a competitive internal research award administered by the PVM Office of Research for which the project period has not ended. All applicants requesting funds to conduct the proposed work, including PIs, co-PIs, and co-investigators, must be PVM faculty members with a minimum 50% appointment in BMS, CPB, or VCS. Investigators from outside PVM may participate as collaborators; however, funds will NOT be distributed outside PVM.

External Funding Submission Requirement

Awardees are expected to submit an external funding application that builds upon the supported research within one year of completion of the PVM-funded project. Awardees who do not meet this requirement or complete all required progress reporting will not be eligible to receive a PVM Research Catalyst Award in the next funding cycle.

Cost sharing: Cost sharing is NOT required.

Budget, Allowable Costs and Project Period

  • The maximum allowable budget is $20,000 per Seed Award and $50,000 per Accelerator Award.
  • The intent of this program is to provide funds for student/staff effort, reagents, and services that will support lead to submission of an external grant proposal within one year of project completion submission of application. The appropriateness of other funding items will be taken on a case-by-case basis and must be well justified.
  • Funds MAY be used for trainee support, project-related supplies and expenses, and user fees at Research Core Facilities.
  • Equipment purchases are not envisioned as part of this pilot program. However, equipment that would bring significant new capabilities to a project may be considered if carefully justified.
  • Conference presentation and publication expenses directly related to the funded project are allowable but should represent a minor component of the overall budget.
  • Funds MAY NOT be used for PI salary support, clerical or administrative staff support, equipment service contracts or equipment repair.
  • Funds will be released AFTER all required regulatory approvals are received. Required approvals must be obtained within three months of the award start date unless an exception is approved by the Associate Dean for Research.
  • Significant rebudgeting or changes in project scope require prior approval from the PVM Office of Research.
  • Unexpended funds remaining at the end of the approved project period will be returned to the PVM Office of Research.

Award Project Period

  • Projects should begin within three months of the award date and must have an initial project period of 12 months or less. Expenditures and project progress will be monitored.
  • Awards are contingent upon obtaining all required regulatory approvals, as applicable, including IRB, IACUC, PACUC, or other required approvals. Because awards are intended to support projects that can begin promptly, investigators should initiate required regulatory processes as early as possible. If required regulatory approvals are not obtained within three months, the award will be terminated, and the investigator asked to reapply in a future funding cycle.

No-Cost Extension (NCE)

  • A one-time no-cost extension of up to six months may be requested, allowing for a maximum total project period of 18 months.
  • Extensions are not automatic and must be approved by the Associate Dean for Research, with input from the PVM Research Advisory Board.
  • No exceptions will be made to the extension approval process.

Progress Reporting

Final Progress Report: due within 60 days after project completion
Follow-up Outcomes Report: approximately 12-18 months after project completion

The purpose of this reporting is to assess the return on investment from the program and to capture both near-term accomplishments and progress toward future external funding.

The final progress report (2-page maximum) should include, as applicable:

  • External grant proposals submitted, including sponsor, mechanism, and status;
  • Publications resulting from or supported by the project;
  • Presentations, abstracts, or other dissemination of project findings;
  • Trainee outcomes, including student or postdoctoral involvement, research experiences, presentations, publications, or other indicators of professional development;
  • Preliminary data, methods, or other research resources generated that strengthen subsequent research or funding applications; and
  • Other significant outcomes that demonstrate how the funding advanced the research program.

While a primary objective of this program is to position investigators for competitive external funding, we recognize that development and award of major grants can take considerable time. Accordingly, progress will be evaluated using both intermediate indicators of research productivity and longer-term external funding outcomes. Awardees may be contacted for follow-up information after completion of the project to capture subsequent grant submissions, awards, publications, and other outcomes attributable to the pilot funding. Compliance with progress reporting and external funding submission requirements is required to maintain eligibility for future PVM Research Catalyst Awards.

Additional Award Requirements

  • Grant Reviewer: Acceptance of an award indicates the investigator's willingness to serve as a reviewer for PVM Research Grants for at least two consecutive review cycles.
  • Acknowledgment: Awardees must acknowledge PVM support in publications, presentations, and posters resulting from the funded project, as follows:“Supported by a Research Catalyst Award from the Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine.

Submission Deadlines and Other Information

  • The proposal deadline is noon on Dec 7, 2026.
  • Funding decisions will be announced by late February or early March of 2027.

Submission Process

One Electronic copy of the proposal in Word or PDF format must be received by the Office of Research Programs, Joy Nix (jholdman@purdue.edu) by the set deadline. The submission is to be sent in one file only and should be titled as PI lastname_PVMCatalyst2026.docx or PI lastname_PVMCatalyst2026.pdf

Proposal Guidelines and Requirements

Formatting: Single-spaced, 0.5” margins on all sides, 11 pt. Arial font

Required Proposal Components

  • Cover Page (Not Included in Page Limit, NIPL): Please use template provided.
  • Project Proposal:
    • Tier 1 Seed Award –Research Proposal limited to 3 pages
    • Tier 2 Accelerator Award – Research Proposal limited to 5 pages
    • Application Cover Page and other materials identified as NIPL do not count toward these limits.
  • The Research Proposal should address:
    • Specific Aims: Overall objective and specific aims.
    • Background. State the problem, what is currently known in the field, the significant gap the proposed work will address, and the expected impact of addressing that gap. Provide the scientific rationale for the proposed work, including relevant preliminary data when available. Preliminary data are expected for Tier 2 applications but are not required for Tier 1 applications.
    • Significance and Innovation: Importance, innovative aspects, and relevance to human or animal health.
    • Approach: Study design, methods, analysis plan, anticipated challenges, and alternative strategies.
    • Timeline and Expected Outcomes: Timeline, expected outcomes, and how the work will advance future publications and/or competitive external funding.
    • Plan for Future External Grant Submission: Describe how the project will support a future competitive external funding application and, when possible, identify the anticipated sponsor, program or mechanism, and submission timeline.
  • Budget and Budget Justification (2-page limit, NIPL): Briefly describe how the proposed budget will be used. See above for allowable costs. The budget does NOT need to be routed through the PVM Business Office or PERA prior to submission.
  • Biographical Sketch (NIPL): Provide a current NIH-, NSF-, or USDA-style biographical sketch for each faculty investigator. Include a list of external research grant applications submitted during the preceding 18 months, including sponsor, mechanism/program, role, and current status.
  • Literature Cited (NIPL): Any format is allowable.
  • Prior Review Materials, if applicable (NIPL): Prior summary statements may be included. Applicants planning to submit a revised application may also include a one-page introduction addressing comments from the previous review and explaining how the proposed incentive funding will address identified needs and strengthen the resubmission.

Contacts for Questions

Susan Mendrysa, Vet Med Associate Dean for Research, mendrysa@purdue.edu

Joy Nix, Administrative Assistant, jholdman@purdue.edu

Review Process

All proposals will be reviewed by an ad hoc committee composed of Purdue faculty and staff.

Reviewers will assign scores from 1 to 9, with 1 representing the strongest score and 9 the weakest, for each of the following review criterion and for Overall Impact.

Tier 1 and Tier 2 applications will be evaluated according to the objectives and expectations of the respective tier. Tier 1 applications will not be disadvantaged for the absence of preliminary data. Tier 2 applications are expected to demonstrate an established scientific premise supported by preliminary data and a more developed trajectory toward external funding.

Research Project Evaluation Criteria and Scoring Weights
Criterion Weight Core Question
1. Significance & Relevance to Human or Animal Health 15% Does the proposed basic, clinical, or translational research project address an important problem, unmet need, or critical gap? Is the scientific rationale well supported, and does the proposed work have the potential to meaningfully advance human or animal health?
2. Innovation & Transformative Potential 15% Does the project incorporate novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, or applications, and does the proposed work have the potential to advance the field or open new avenues of investigation?
3. Scientific Premise & Rationale 10%

Is there a compelling scientific basis for the proposed work?
4. Approach & Feasibility 15% Are the objectives and specific aims clearly defined? Is the proposed approach scientifically sound and appropriate to accomplish the stated goals within the proposed timeframe? Are potential challenges and alternative strategies adequately considered?
5. Expected Outcomes & Impact 10% Are the anticipated outcomes clearly defined and achievable? Is the project likely to lead to meaningful research products, such as preliminary data, publications, presentations, trainee development, or external grant submissions?
6. Investigator & Team 5% Does the investigator or team have the expertise and capabilities necessary to successfully complete the proposed work? When applicable, has the investigator demonstrated productive use of previous internal research funding? Reviewers may also consider recent grant submission activity and evidence of continued efforts to secure external funding.
7. Potential for Future External Funding 30% Is there a clear and compelling path to future external funding? Will the proposed project generate the preliminary data, proof of concept, or other outcomes needed to strengthen a competitive application to a federal agency, foundation, or other external sponsor?
Total 100%

Overall Impact

Reviewers will also assign an Overall Impact Score (1-9; 1 = best) reflecting the likelihood that the proposed project will make a meaningful contribution to its field and advance human or animal health, considering the individual review criteria.

The Overall Impact Score should also consider the likelihood that the internal investment will enhance the competitiveness and probability of success of a subsequent external funding application.

The Overall Impact Score should not be calculated as a mathematical average of the individual criterion scores. Reviewers should use scientific judgment to provide a holistic assessment of the application's overall merit, potential impact, and likelihood of leveraging the internal investment into future external support.