|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2005 NASA Grant Recipients Released
We received a NASA Grant (JPL) for the So Cal regional in years 2002 and 2003, however our rookie year was 2001. I remember other teams shocked in 2003 to find out we had a NASA Grant in our third year. They simply thought the NASA grants were only open to rookie teams, that is a misunderstanding - read the grant qualifications more closely. KUDO's to those veteren teams for taking advantage of the grant and for writing a GREAT grant (you do have to spend a bit of time to convey your program and reasoning to NASA, it's not like you just put your name down and they give you money!).
Let's use this experience to remind ourselves to read carefully and pursue all avenues of funding. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
NASA gives out money- it is a good thing.
I think this is part of the reason why teams like 71 and 93 are still around. By surviving this long, they have demonstrated the ability to find sponsors. By excelling at the competition they have demonstrated the ability to find engineers and all sorts of help. It is not an easy thing to do. I was involved in a grant process at my church, and it was a very difficult thing to write.
We look at 71 with admiration for their robot. We look to them for how to do things, but stop at the engineering. Why not look at this as another way to emulate them? This shows that they are out there actively looking for more funding, and you should be too. This is not a six week competition, it is a six week production time, with the rest of the year being time for building the business side. Organization and funding are crucial to being able to hit the ground running and start engineering the day of kickoff. As Doug G pointed out, reading the fine print is a very important thing to do. Those that do tend to see things that everyone else passed by. Those little things add up. Wetzel |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2005 NASA Grant Recipients Released
I’ll add my voice to the thread, echoing what many have already said. It may not be public knowledge to all teams in all areas of the country, but for the past few years NASA personnel have been surprised that not very many teams have applied for their grants. Each year there are a handful of perceptive, and well intentioned veteran teams who apply for some of these grants and get them. This 16, 71, 93, 135, 399, 801 thing this upcoming year is nothing new. Everyone who’s upset (because they’re also a 3rd year or older team, and didn’t apply) should keep this in mind, read the fine print, and do some legwork next season and, if you can, sign up for a NASA Regional and apply for a grant, yourself. This is a learning from mistakes thing, not a “let’s [cry] and moan about how we didn’t read the guidelines for grants” thing. While you’re at it, look at things like Team Ford FIRST.
<edit> I would also like to thank NASA for their support of FIRST. I (along with countless others) would most definitely not have been exposed to FIRST had NASA not been sponsoring teams and Regionals. Thank you so much everyone! </edit> Last edited by Bill Gold : 30-11-2004 at 02:52. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2005 NASA Grant Recipients Released
First off, I would like to say thank you to NASA for the tons of money that they put into FIRST. FIRST would not have half of the teams it has today if it weren't for NASA. They sponsor several teams, several regionals, and provide many talented engineers to help us all.
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by tkwetzel : 30-11-2004 at 17:36. |
|
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2005 NASA Grant Recipients Released
Congratulations to all the teams who successfully received a NASA grant whether it be some rookie teams trying to gain some ground against all of us novices, or a couple novices who just needed some extra funding in these times of financial uncertainty.
Also a big Thank You should go out to NASA for helping these teams. |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2005 NASA Grant Recipients Released
Quote:
With regard to the selections for the NASA Challenge Grant awards, I was the approving official for the full set of selections. The selections were made under my authority, and I signed off on the full list. I have final responsibility for every one of the selections, and responsibility for every choice not to award a grant. If you don't agree with or don't understand the selections, you can complain to me. But when you call to complain, the very first thing that I will do is ask five simple questions: 1 - did you read (and I mean really READ) the grant application and eligibility criteria to find out if your team was able to submit an application? 2 - if you submitted a rookie application, then I will ask, "did you satisfy all the required criteria for a rookie team?" (e.g. Did your application answer ALL the questions? Was it submitted on time? Did you supply ALL the required information? Do you have official, documented support from your school or parent organization? Did you pay attention and make sure that you submitted an application for an event where rookie grants were available? [this was not the case for all events] Did you make a valid case for why NASA should want to fund you? You are responding to a legally binding Federal Government procurement solicitation - does your application indicate that you are taking this seriously and have given the application the appropriate amount of time and effort that it deserves?) 3 - if you submitted a second-year application, then I will ask "did you satisfy all the required criteria from your rookie year for continuation funding?" (i.e. Did you send NASA the required copy of your Chairman's Award submission? Have you made arrangements to mentor a rookie team? Did you submit the application on time? Did you raise $6000 in matching funds from another sponsor? And by that, we mean $6000 Not $3000. Not $5500. Not $5999. Did you get a rookie grant from us last year? Did you actually show up at the competition event for which you were funded, and participate? These are all binary items - you either did them or you didn't. Again, you are choosing to participate in a Federal Government procurement action, and you have to satisfy the qualification criteria - close doesn't count.) 4 - did you bother to read this message? 5 - did you make any effort to find out the specifics of the situation about which you are calling to complain? Is all your information based on hearsay and miscellaneous posts by other people that don't know what they are talking about? Or have you taken the trouble to actively seek out and discuss the methods, procedures, criteria, and philosophies under which that NASA Challenge Grants are evaluated and selected with one of the seven people who actually run the system (and don't you DARE say that you can't find out who they are - if you ever wanted to know, all you had to do was ask)? Do you really have factual information regarding the situation associated with a team's application, including how and why they applied? In other words, do you have a serious, well-researched concern, or are you just rumor mongering? After we have discussed these questions, we will go back through the five questions again. Because the answers to all the issues are right there. Just where they have been all along. -dave Last edited by dlavery : 30-11-2004 at 14:55. Reason: My lithium is kicking in, and I've calmed down now... |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| NASA Grant | chocolateluvrlr | General Forum | 7 | 30-11-2004 21:17 |
| NASA Grant 2004-05? | ALySsAaGrAJiZeD | Fundraising | 3 | 28-09-2004 16:48 |
| Looks like NASA will be hiring soon... | IMDWalrus | NASA Discussion | 3 | 08-03-2004 00:02 |
| NASA Grant | Rickertsen2 | General Forum | 19 | 05-12-2003 15:32 |
| St. Louis anyone? | Jeremy_Mc | Regional Competitions | 8 | 07-02-2003 12:06 |