Athlone IT	Nuala Harding
Cork IT	Marese Bermingham
Dublin City University	Billy Kelly
Dundalk IT	Moira Maguire
Galway-Mayo IT	Carina Ginty
Institute of Art, Design and Technology	Therese Moylan
IT Carlow	Gina Noonan
IT Sligo	Perry Share
IT Tralee	Tom Farrelly
Limerick IT	Brendan Murphy
Letterkenny IT	Deirdre McClay
Mary Immaculate College	Emma O’Brien
Maynooth University	Alison Hood
National College of Art and Design	Siún Hanrahan
National College of Ireland	Leo Casey
NUI Galway	Michelle Ni Chroinin
St Angela’s College	Declan Courell
Trinity College Dublin	Linda Darbey
TU Dublin	Margaret Whelan
University College Cork	Laura Lee
University College Dublin	Aine Galvin
University of Limerick	Mary Fitzpatrick
Waterford IT	Derek O’Byrne

No, that is a decision for each institution. Institutional leads are nominated by the Registrar/Vice-President for Teaching & Learning, or equivalent, in each institution.

Yes, providing the initiative shows what is additional to the work carried out under the previous call.

There is no upper or lower limit on the number of proposals that can be submitted. Institutions are asked to include all funding initiatives.  Each initiative can have a different budget, but the resource, ambition and deliverables should be reflective of the funding allocated.

Yes, each institution will submit one application, containing all individual proposals and associated presentations from that institution. A dedicated link to each institution’s application portal has been sent to the institutional lead in each institution. This link must be used for detailing and uploading presentations related to each teaching and learning initiative to be supported by the fund allocated to the institution. Essentially, it will be one master applications form that will require separate details and presentations for each proposed teaching and learning initiative.

Yes, LEPs can be funded under the SATLE 2020 call. Separate proposal/project details do not need to be submitted for each LEP. This initiative, irrespective of the number of local enhancement projects included in it, is considered one initiative and so each institution should have one proposal for that initiative type within their overall application. The video/recorded presentation submitted as part of that proposal should give a high-level overview of the approach taken by the T&L unit in seed funding local enhancement projects. Details of the individual LEPs is not required at proposal stage.

As the focus of the SATLE 2020 call is on Student Success, money can be spent to fund Student Success Champions within institutions. Money can be spent on staff and supporting them within the institution to support their Student Success initiatives. It can, for example, be spent on consultation to support a teaching and learning initiative and/or it can be spent to recruit staff or to buy out staff time. There is no upper limit for spending on appointments. Money can be spent on equipment, providing any single item does not cost more than 15K and the total equipment spend per quarter does not exceed 20% of all costs for that quarter. The equipment that is purchased must be essential to ensuring the proposal plan deliverables are achieved. The funding can be spent on software, for example to pilot a particular approach, but careful consideration should be given to sustainability and how such software would be funded post 2021.

No, overheads cannot be charged under this funding.

Yes, providing this does not lead to double funding and the teaching and learning initiative planned would be a clearly identifiable extension of the exiting project that meets a particular local priority.

Inter-institutional collaboration is not required but is encouraged if appropriate.

Proposals involving collaborations across institutions are, of course, encouraged. In cases where institutions are collaborating on a proposed initiative, each collaborating institution should include the given teaching and learning initiative proposal in their application, identifying clearly the amount of their particular institutional funding to be allocated to the given initiative. The proposal in each case should also indicate that this is a collaborative initiative and who the partner institutions are. The proposal video should be developed in partnership between all collaborating partners and should be included within each individual institution’s submitted version of the proposal.

In practice, this will mean that where a collaboration is intended, it will be necessary for the institutions to agree on the collaboration and funding breakdown first and then include the individual proposals and the co-designed video in each institutional application accordingly.

Each of the collaborating initiative leads is responsible for their allocated funding and when reporting they must submit individual financial summaries using the templates provided by the National Forum. The initiative workplans, and videos should be developed in partnership between all collaborating partners and should be included within each individual institution’s submitted version of the proposal.

A programme team can be any group who is responsible for a given programme (even across disciplines), while a discipline group is specific to a subject area. People in different institutions define the discipline subject areas differently and we are happy to respect that.  Some institutions may be looking at whole of institutional approach e.g. a single institutional student success champion and this should be reflected by ticking the institution box.

Institutions already have the money allocated (see appendix 1 of the call document) and, following their Stage 1 applications since December 2020 there is no barrier to institutions starting initiatives and/or identifying staff/recruiting staff before the completion of their Stage 2 review process.

The CC BY license is the National Forum’s preferred open license. This is the most permissive license, enabling reuse, revision, remixing and redistribution by others, although all who use the resource must provide attribution to you as the creator. The specific choice of license is up to each creator (individual or group), however. For example, if a resource contains sensitive subject matter, you may determine that a different Creative Commons license is most appropriate (e.g. CC BY-ND). You are encouraged to consult with the National Forum and/or your institution to determine which license type should apply. If you would like further information on creative commons licenses please consult the National Forum Open Licensing Toolkit.

No breakdown of the budget is required for Stage 2 submissions.  However, all teams must develop a workplan and associated budget from the outset.  Teams will be asked to submit their progress against their workplan and their actual and projected spend at the review stage (Spring 2022)

There will be considerable overlap between institutional strategic priorities and the enablers of Student Success: Enabling Policies and Practices, Engagement and Student Partnership, PD and the Centrality of Staff Who Teach, Evidence-based Decision-making, Supporting Transitions and Cultivating Belonging, and Assessment and Feedback. Institutions may direct allocation towards key areas of focus aligned with one or more of the key enablers of Student Success.

You will receive feedback on your Stage 2 applications by 23 April 2021.

The same 15K equipment cap that applies for equipment also applies for software, but careful consideration should be given to sustainability and how such software would be funded post 2021. Such spending on software does not count as equipment/infrastructure. Any software purchased must be essential for the particular initiative.