They're From the Government...

...and they really are here to help you. I'm speaking about the National Science Foundation, and specifically about its Law and Social Sciences (LSS) Program. For the folks reading this, the LSS Program is probably the single best source for external funding of one's research; yet it's received relatively little exposure on this blog. While details about proposal submission deadlines, proposal formats, etc. can all be found on the Program's website, I want to highlight three common misconceptions about the LSS program that should be of particular interest to ELSBlog readers.

Misconception #1. The LSS Program (and/or the NSF in general) only funds quantitative research.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Not only does LSS (and NSF) fund qualitative research (for examples, take a look at some of the recent awards made by the program), but the Program and the Foundation have been active in helping to developing standards for evaluating qualitative research, and in strengthening qualitative methods in the social sciences.

Misconception #2. There's not enough money there to bother going after.

The last time I checked, the LSS program was awarding grants totalling around $3.5 million a year. That's not crazy money, but it is a substantial amount nonetheless. And, as I often reminded researchers when I oversaw the Program, somebody's going to get it.

Misconception #3. It is improper/inappropriate to discuss my project/proposal with the NSF program officer.

Again, nothing could be further from the truth. NSF program officers (POs) are the individuals who oversee the proposal, review, and award process; their job is to serve their program's research community. As long as you don't try to bribe them, threaten them, or otherwise violate federal law, they are generally happy to answer questions about the proposal process, review criteria, and other aspects of the funding game, and even to offer suggestions. In fact, a short discussion with a program's director is probably the best place to start a proposal, since POs can often tell you immediately whether or not your idea is a good "fit" for their program (and suggest an alternative if it is not). (FYI, the current LSS Program's officers are Isaac Unah and Kevin Gotham).

Comments

[Christopher Zorn]

Bill: You're absolutely right. In my experience, law faculty author a very small percentage (probably around 5%, and no more than 10%) of proposals to LSS. As a rule, law faculty also don't fare as well in receiving funding as do researchers from the other social sciences, though that is changing. In my two years there (2003-2005), I can recall only 4-5 full-time law faculty (excluding people with joint appointments) that received awards.

You are spot-on about how proposals are judged. During my time at NSF there was always at least one fully-in-a-law-school member of the review panel, and many (but probably not most) LSS review panelists had joint appointments in law and some social science department. More generally, it is the NSF, so the emphasis on there being (social) scientific content to the work it supports comes with the territory.

[William Henderson]

Chris, I would be interested to know how many law professors (a) applied for and (b) received NSF grants, either on your watch or others. A rough number would be helpful to put things in perspective. I suspect the law faculty submissions are relatively few.

Further, my impression (based on one submission and the peer feedback and some due diligence) is that submissions are judged as contributions to the social sciences--indeed, I suspect that the majority of review panelists have non-law school academic appointments. Law is not viewed as a freestanding, autonomous discipline. The law appears to be the subject matter; in contrast, the social science discipline provides the theory and methodology. (And this may be entirely appropriate; this may be the outer limit of what "law and social science" really means. I an unaware of an alternative characterization that is intellectually coherent.)

I mention the above because most law faculty have not had the experience of getting roughed up by a single or double blind social science review panel. The standards are quite different (demanding, exacting) than the law school world. Most law professors are not positivists.