» Galvin Project to End Congestion Homepage

Galvin Project to End Congestion
Innovations Prize

The Galvin Project to End Congestion identifies new solutions to improve mobility in U.S. urban areas. The project is based on the conviction that congestion is a problem that can be solved, and that innovative, modern, well designed, and well managed roadway capacity will be a major part of the solution.

The Innovations Prize is an effort to identify and support new engineering solutions and technologies that facilitate the construction of new capacity, particularly in dense urban areas.

Innovations may involve the use of materials, construction processes, designs or other means of overcoming the challenges involved in adding capacity.

The Galvin Project will identify and support the development of innovations in these areas through research grants of up to $40,000. The purpose of these grants is to encourage innovation in roadway design, construction techniques, materials and processes. While grants will be awarded primarily for publishable research papers, applicants are welcome to propose alternative products.

Application Process Phase I: Statement of Interest

Applicants should submit a Statement of Interest, no longer than two pages, covering the following items:

• Applicant's name, organizational affiliation, contact information, background and accomplishments (1/2 page)
• Description of the innovation (1 1/2 pages)
• Why the solution is considered innovative?
• To what extent can this solution be “mainstreamed?
• During what stage of project development will the innovation be applied?
• To what extent will the innovation result in cost efficiencies?

Statements of Interest are due at 3 PM Eastern on November 1st 2007, submitted electronically in Microsoft Word to Amy Pelletier, Reason Foundation, amy.pelletier@reason.org.

Individuals who will be invited to submit detailed Phase II Proposals will be notified on or about December 1, 2007.

Application Process Phase II: Full Application

If your two-page, Phase I proposal is selected, qualified applicants will be asked to submit a detailed application.

The Phase II Proposals will be due at 3 PM Eastern on January 4th 2008. All Proposals must be submitted electronically to Amy Pelletier, Reason Foundation, amy.pelletier@reason.org. The document must be submitted in Microsoft Word and must not be locked. PDF documents will not be accepted.

The detailed application will have a maximum page requirement of 10 pages. The following outline should be followed with no exceptions. Applications will be disqualified if the outline and page limitations are not adhered to.

1. Title Page. Project Title, Project Principal’s Name, Organizational Affiliation, Contact Information
   
   
2. Project Description. Describe the context of the project including the innovation objectives that were set forth in the very beginning of the project.
   
   
3. Methodology. What methods (e.g., design, construction, processes, materials, other) were used to achieve the project objectives? Did the project team need to modify the methods even slightly during the life cycle of the project? If so, why? Did your project involve multiple phases and multiple methodologies (e.g., planning, design, construction,) and did you include innovations in more than one project development phase? To what extent were your methodologies/solutions mainstream methods? Would the industry characterize your methods as truly innovative, new and unique?
   
   
4. Results. Is the project complete or at some developmental stage? Has the project been evaluated by someone within or external to your organization? Please describe the evaluation process and the findings. Were the innovative project objectives met? Why or why not? Were cost efficiencies gained in the project or in some part of the project? Why or why not? Is this project or any part of the project replicable for the transportation, engineering and construction industry?
   
   
5. Research Problem Statement/Conclusions. Based on your current effort, what conclusions and research problem statements do you believe should be set forth for further consideration by the research community based on your experiences with your project?