Didn’t see this posted anywhere else here.
The NASA Grant application has been posted.
http://rcs.arc.nasa.gov/rcs/app/directions.php
No Regional Challenge Grants this year, but the Sustainability Grants have been continued for another year alongside the rookie/2nd year grants.
Is anyone familiar with how these grants apply to VEX rookie teams? What exactly does it cover, and for what amount?
It appears that the grant covers one event registration regardless of competition chosen.
That said, let me make sure I’m reading this correctly:
Let me make sure I’ve got this straight:
-NASA is soliciting grants for all robotics competitions.
-NASA has not selected an organization to stage the competitions that they will support, but will select one organization.
-If your competition’s organization is selected and your grant is approved, you get the money.
-If your competition’s organization is not selected, then your grant is not approved…but NASA may still be able to support you depending on their procurement rules.
I’m not saying this is a bad thing–as a taxpayer, I’m glad NASA is examining the best use of its resources–but I’m also trying to make sense of the new language included in this year’s announcement.
Thanks for the the thread posting. I also saw the announcement today. I suspect that a lot of organizations will be thinking hard about the grant application process.
Trying to Help
I am asking someone in the know like Dave Lavery to post in this thread and verify Billfred’s assessment.
It seems clear that there will be no Regional Challenge grants this year, which makes sense, since FRC has not been named as a ROC winner, and they can’t specify grants specific to any one robotics competition. A natural question would be then - does NASA expect to fund additional Program Growth and Sustaining Grants to make up for the removal of the Regional Challenge grant funding?
What is most perplexing to me is that the language of Mark Leon’s message constantly refers to a singular ROC “winner” that is yet to be determined; however, it is mentioned how in past years, teams from a variety of robotics competitions such as FIRST, BotBall, BEST, VRC, NURC, etc. have received NASA grant support. Is that changing? I’m sure teams who participate in these robotics competitions would appreciate some official enlightment regarding the decision status and nature of this new “ROC-CAN” selection process and what it potentially means for them. Getting a general idea of when the official ROC selection will be finalized would also be a plus, if such information is available.
Don’t know if this information on theFIRST websitehelps clarify anything at all,
NASA Grant Application Online Process
Begins 10/08/2010 and ends 10/30/2010 at 11:59 PM EST
**Grant winner announced by region **Planned 11/24/2010
http://robotics.nasa.gov
Travis, have you seen this? It will probably help answer some of your questions. Particularly section 3.
I am guessing Billfred’s assessment is reasonable.
As far as I can tell, probably for contracting reasons, NASA is trying to not play favorites with FIRST. No “Program Growth” grants this year that have historically been FIRST specific, no requirement for grant award winners to submit a Chairman’s Award this year, again FIRST specific, etc. This year’s NASA grant application seems more generic and open to all the major robotics competitions than I remember in the past.
From what I can gather NASA has reached some sort of contracting issue or limit with the way they have done the grants in the past and are now going through new contracting procedures. I’m just guessing here and have no idea how this is going to play out or effect the future of NASA support for FIRST, VEX, BotBall, NURC, BEST, etc. but hopefully things will be bigger and better for all. I guess we will all find out in early January. The anticipated award date is January 7th. Oddly the CAN has a typo stating January 7th, 2010 but it should obviously be 2011. Hmm, Sure would make for a big anouncement at Kickoff wouldn’t it?
At the same time, some of the milestones in this CAN sound pretty FRC-specific…
I don’t claim to analyze federal government documents any better than the next man, but these milestones (and several others in the linked document) would seem to greatly limit the chances of BEST, VRC, FTC, NURC, and Botball from winning the CAN (and thus limiting their teams’ support to the as-we-can-swing-it basis laid out as before).
Take from this what you will.
Color me confused.
Mark Leon’s introduction talks about past support of many STEM programs and invites teams to apply for competition registration grants.
However, common sense would say that handing out a lot of money, $50 to $500 at a time, would be inefficient. That hints that the grant approval process is tilted toward writing big checks for expensive competitions’ fees (FIRST’s big blow-outs come to mind).
Similarly, if the $4M CAN at the URL in DeepWater’s message describes the strings attached to the big pot of money from which the registration grants will be doled out; teams other than FRC teams need not apply. Does that CAN apply to the money behind this grant opportunity?
So… Are Mr Leon’s references to to programs other than FIRST simply references to past accomplishments or are they supposed to encourage teams from many STEM programs to apply?
If they are supposed to encourage non-FRC teams to apply, then the dollars to be awarded need to come from sources that are not governed by the particular CAN DeepWater linked us to.
Finally this statement at the end of this RAP page puts the nails in the coffin for me. “Demonstrate at least $6,000 of existing corporate or community funding,”
I will be completely flabbergasted to learn that any single team in a program outside of FRC requires both that sort of sponsorship, and needs a NASA grant to pay registration fees. I can see a group of several teams from a single location needing that sort of money; but not just one. However, I might just be ignorant of other expensive programs.
I’m going to be optimistic that NASA will continue to support the many successful non-FRC and non-FIRST programs Mark mentions in his opening remarks; but this particular opportunity appears to be for FRC teams.
Blake
It costs a lot more than simple registration to run an FRC team: forget about all of the buttons, shirts, pit demos, and supposed ‘nuance’ things that seem frivolous to the robot itself. FRC still costs $12k assuming the regional is local (30 miles, no overnight stays), the KitBot is used, and no major tools are purchased. Teams have done it for less in the past, but I’d almost bet my collection of FRC coach badges that they prioritized of cost over all else in the design process.
So I think we are agreeing - This grant application opportunity is aimed at FRC programs (or at FRC and some other expensive programs I don’t know about) - Correct?
FRC doesn’t qualify for this since the official competition season opened with registration on September 30.
I don’t get it. What part of FRC registration says that the official competition season has begun?
This statement seems to sum it up.
Season Overview
The official FRC season starts with event registration in the fall, proceeds from the Kickoff in early January through the six-week robot design and build period, and continues to the robot shipment deadline in late February. The Regional events occur late February through early April, culminating at the FIRST Championship, which will be held in St. Louis from 2011 through 2013](http://usfirst.org/aboutus/content.aspx?id=15777).
Although, I suppose a semantical argument might be the dates of the first competition event and the last event. That’d have to be published in a FIRST official document in those matching terms I suppose, but it’d be splitting hairs.
P.S.
This isn’t to say that the grants won’t apply to FRC. I’m sure it’ll all be interpreted to our advantage.
P.P.S.
Havoc also occurs when you consider the southern hemisphere school calendar.
My daughter just got off Spring break in Australia…
Since the FRC Manual (Rule R25) specifically says
But absolutely no final design, fabrication, or assembly of any elements intended for the final ROBOT is permitted prior to the Kick-off presentation.
I don’t know how the beginning of the season and the beginning of the competition season could be equated.
Semantically, I don’t see how that rule quote (from last year) can be applied. It makes no reference to a season at all, it only references a single day (Kickoff), when some FRC schools are not even in session much less a month afterwards. At least locate an official quote that says “competition season.”
But I didn’t mean to derail this thread into semantic arguments. I just like to poke fun at the difficulty of contractual wording…
I guess semantically it applies as much as your quote which doesn’t refer to a competition season at all.
Touché 
So this kinda got me interested in the “semantics”, and there appear to be conflicting “inferred” definitions of the competition season in the 2010 manual.
Under definition of Withholding allowance, there is a note that refers to “the entire period between robot ship date and the start of the competition season”, which would infer that it starts with the actual competition events. However, in Rule 25 an example of the fabrication schedule describes a part which is fabricated “during the competition season” being illegal because it was designed prior to kick-off, which would imply that the build season is part of the competition season and thus it starts at kick-off.
Hmmmmmm…
Appreciate all the interpretations here from people I respect.
But as someone who is trying to mentor (ya know, all that non-robot stuff) teams and mentors both in FIRST programs as well as other robotics programs like VRC, I am flummoxed. For FRC teams, there is a considerable chunk of $$ maybe in the offering, and there are dozens of teams in this area who have benefited from this terrific partnership over the years.
But is this clearly not worth the effort for VRC?
ps. I would love to have a Mark/Gary thread on interpretations. I have a few I can throw in from my fat file “I’m really not making this up” but not appropriate for this thread.