Submit full application for CZI EOSS Cycle 4

[hammer]

Full applications are due no later than May 19, 2021 by 5 pm PT.

• RFA
• Application Instructions
• Grants portal

[hammer]

A subtask: confirm that NumFOCUS can be the fiscal sponsor, or get Oxford moving right away.

[jeromekelleher]

Definitely - we're pushing my internal deadlines even without Oxford being the lead institution!

[jeromekelleher]

Writing subtasks:

• Work plan: A description of the proposed work the applicants are requesting funding for, including resources the applicants will provide that are not part of the requested funding. For software development-related work (e.g., engineering, product design, user research), specify how the work fits into the existing software project roadmap. For community outreach related activities (e.g., sprints, training), specify how these activities will be organized, the target audience, and expected outcomes (maximum of 750 words)
• Milestones and Deliverables: List expected milestones and deliverables, and their expected timeline. Be specific and include (where possible) any goals for metrics the software project(s) are expected to reach upon completion of the grant (maximum of
  500 words)
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Statement: Advancing DEI is a core value for CZI, and we are requesting information on your efforts in this area. Describe any efforts the software project(s) named in this proposal have undertaken to increase
  diversity, equity, and inclusion with respect to their contributors and audience. Please see examples from applications funded in previous cycles (maximum of 250 words)

Most of the other requirements are coming from the LOI form, I think, which will need minor updating at most.

[hammer]

FOR REFERENCE: SELECTION PROCESS

Applications will be evaluated for their existing impact, the quality of the open source software project(s) involved, the feasibility of the proposal, the expected value of the funded work to the biomedical community, and their diversity, equity, and inclusion statement — each of which will be assessed through quantitative and qualitative factors. Relevant materials will be provided by the applicants and obtained by CZI from publicly available sources where possible (e.g., GitHub or other public code repositories).

For those applicants asked to submit a Full Application, additional quantitative metrics on software projects will be solicited. Independent expert review will be solicited, and final decisions will be made by CZI staff in consultation with our expert advisors.

Impact will assess the importance of the open source software project(s) involved in the proposal to science and the open source ecosystem, in alignment with our mission to support the science and technology that will make it possible to cure, prevent, or manage all diseases by the end of the century. Reviewers will evaluate:

Demonstrated scientific impact and adoption of the software project, with a particular focus on its use in biomedicine

The role of the software project in the scientific open source ecosystem

Alongside qualitative materials, expert evaluation may utilize metrics such as:

Number of users and recent growth,

Adoption within relevant communities,

Number of citations or mentions of the software project in scientific literature,

Number of potential contributors and diversity of the organizations they represent, and

Number of past contributions to related software projects in the relevant software stack (pushing changes upstream to dependencies, receiving changes from other nearby software projects).

Quality will assess the maturity of the software project(s), its compliance with best practices in open source development, and the existence of a healthy and diverse contributor community. It will again be assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. Reviewers will evaluate:

Composition and leadership of team,

Governance structure of the software project,

Software project communications and community engagement,

Existence, clarity, and recency of software project roadmap,

Clarity of process for external contributions,

Evidence of external contributions from outside of the core developer team (in the form of code, bugs/issue reports, documentation, etc.),

Availability of tutorials and examples, and

Quality and comprehensiveness of documentation.

Alongside qualitative materials, evaluation may leverage metrics such as:

Frequency and growth trajectory of commits over time,

Size and make-up of current developer team,

Frequency of external contributions,

Number of open issues, and rate of issues both opened and closed, and

Time between opening and closing of pull requests.

Feasibility will assess the plan of work described in the proposal and whether it can be accomplished given the requested budget and key personnel involved. Reviewers will evaluate the following based on qualitative materials:

Specificity and clarity of plan of work to be accomplished,

Proposed use of funds (relative to plan of work),

Likelihood of the work being accomplished,

Plan for tracking and validating progress against goals,

Degree of unmet need given existing resources, and

Future plans for sustaining or maintaining the work funded by the grant.

In addition to the above criteria (and new for EOSS Cycle 4), reviewers will evaluate the value to the biomedical community of the proposed work, in particular:

How the output of the proposal will advance project(s) adoption among biomedical researchers or produce value to their work

Biomedical user needs that are unmet by the software project(s) in their current state and that will be addressed through the proposal

Any improvement or integration with other tools that will improve the adoption, usability, functionality, extensibility, ease of use, or performance of the project in the context of the biomedical research community

Lastly, all applicants invited to submit a Full Application must include in their proposal a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) statement, describing (a) any efforts the software project(s) named in this proposal have undertaken to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion with respect to their contributors and audience; and (b) the results of such efforts, if applicable. This statement will be reviewed alongside the above criteria. Please see examples of DEI statements from successful proposals funded in previous cycles.

[hammer]

Submitted! Whew.