Transcript Getting Better Results from Your Proposal Writing

Getting Better Results from Your
Proposal Writing
Alex Heisterkamp
Laser Zentrum Hannover e.V.
Better Results from Your Proposals
Some Tips and Hints
Andrew J. W. Brown, PhD
Senior Director, Global Business Development
SPIE
With thanks to
Alex Heisterkamp
Laser Zentrum Hannover e.V.
Why Me?
•
•
•
•
Unfortunately Alex unable to attend
30 years in the industry
10 years in marketing and business dev
SPIE presenter, session chair,
conference chair, exhibitor, committee
volunteer and now employee!
Why do you write proposals?
•
•
•
•
•
To fund your research
Equipment
Travel
Collaboration
Attend Conferences (very important!)
– Stay on top of field
– Visibility via paper and proceedings
– Visibility, make connections, network,
network, network
What is important for Proposal/Grant
writing?
• Know your strengths
• Know customer and what they want
• Offer something unique, that meets
their needs (stay current on field)
• Talk to your peers about the idea
• Collaborators can be key brining
additional capability or connections
• Use your network!
• File a patent if idea is really unique!
More thoughts
• Talk to customer directly if possible
• Maybe even send them a White Paper
• If responding to a solicitation, do a
storyboard of your idea with reviewers
• Get a colleague to be a critic, help edit
and review
• Follow submission instructions
– Method (electronic) ,page limit, deadline, etc.
– So many submissions, looking for excuses
Real life story
• At previous company I took over a
program funded by a Gov customer
• Near end of funding and not delivering
• Gave honest status update to customer
and asked for more $ to complete
• Delivered world record performance and
subsequently multi-million $$ awards
• Be honest, build trust and relationships,
deliver. Customers will take care of you.
Starting your first proposal
tenure
assistant-professor
post-doc
PhD-thesis
undergraduate
Starting your first proposal
Travel-grants
Awards
Work on first
proposals
Travel-grants
Awards
First grant?
Fellowships
Work on
proposals
Travel-grants
Awards
First grants!
Fellowships
Work on
proposals
Travel-grants
Awards
assistant-professor
post-doc
PhD-thesis
undergraduate
tenure
Where money comes from...
• Industry, Foundations, Federal- and StateFunds, NSF/DFG, EU, Government (SBIR),
• International Grants
• VC’s, investors, private individuals
• Look at who is funding what. Get names,
make contacts, ask people. Use
announcements for your own research.
E.g. FedBizOps.gov. Use the internet.
• Do your research (like making travel plans,
buying a stock, gather all the info you can)
Make sure you are eligible
e.g. NSF/DFG
• „standard“ proposal
• coordinated programs
• Fellowships
must:
• own position and PhD/Doctorate
• free choice of topics
• application always possible
• typical funding period 3 years
• adequate effort
There are a lot of people out there!
• Know your competition, who might bid, and what
will they propose? What makes you different
• Knowledge of customer, technology, reputation,
team of collaborators, cost?
• Determine probability of being funded by a
particular source so you go in with eyes open
• Do your homework, propose something really
compelling. Differentiate yourself.
Recycle!!!
Tips
• „think broad“ (not narrow minded!)
• keep updated (new prizes, fellowships,
programs)
– study homepages of third party funding
– use local information (local research networks)
– newsletters (!!!)
• (if possible) contact to people in charge
What does a proposal look like?
(Depends on solicitation, be sure to check guidelines)
• Summary
• State of the art
• Preliminary work, experience
• Goals for the work or research
• Work program or statement of work with timeline, tells
them what they will get for their $$
• Reasoning for funding money
(investments, travel etc.)
Proposal Summary
• this is your “elevator speech” for the proposal
• “label of your proposal”
• (sometimes) only 15 lines for your whole
project and you must be succinct
• Clearly state relevance and goals
• Usually last part to write once proposal is done
State of the art
• careful and thorough literature research
analyze internationally leading groups
-> draw conclusion
mention opinion (/research) leaders
key-publications of competitors
Preliminary work
• trivial: good publications are most convincing
– Nature, Science etc... (impact factor)
• BUT: most young researchers don’t have that, yet!
– presentations at conferences, awards?
– manuscripts, preliminary results
• position your results/research to leading groups
– own competence
– present yourself/advisor
– why at your institute (mention history)
– infrastructure, existing collaborations
Goals
• precise and short description
• list achievable goals, but they need to be beyond state
of the art (or why fund it?) Aggressively conservative!
• set feasible timeline
• goals should
– be a logic consequence from summary (a reviewer may
only read the introduction then the statement of work)
– continue to advance “state of the art”
– be the basis for the work program
n
1.1 Aufbau mit Laserdiode und AOM
n

1.2 Vorrichtung zur prŠ
z isen Ortsmessung der Pinzet te
n
n

Work-program
1.3 Aufbau eines RŠ
c kk opplungssystems fŠ
r erhŠhte
n
Fallensteif-heit

1.4 Charakterisierung: Steifigkeit, Kraftmessungen
 n
n

1.5 Ausbau der Pinzet te (Erweiterung auf Mehrfach-  n
• heart-piece of the proposal
 
  


 
  


 
  


n 
  


n 
  
T weezers, Aut omatisation)


1.6 Trapping vor SNOM-Spitze?

  

– important after granting of the
proposal
2.1 Frequenzverdopplung bei


n 

n
Arbeitspaket 2: Multiphot onenmikroskopie durch † berlagerung von fs-P ulsen
"Colliding
fs-pulse"- 
Anordnung
n
2.2 AuflŠsungsvermŠgen an biologischen P roben

• who is doing what/when, who coordinates?
– “why with this guy?”
• get outline from goals!


n n

 
n
 

  n



Arbeitspaket 3: Optisches Skalpell
3.1 Bestimmung von Schwellwerten

n
3.2 Dokumentation des AuflŠsungsvermŠgens
• describe methods and experiments
3.3 Selbstfokussierung
– how is the problem being tackled?
3.4 Kollaterale Effekte, Wechselwirkungsmechanismus
• no detailed recipes/laboratory secrets
3.5 Schneiden durch † berlagerung zweier P ulsspitzen
– (if necessary refer to preliminary work/papers
3.6 SNOM-Nahfeld als Optisches Skalpell
3.7 Experimente zur Manipulation biologischer P roben



  n

 
n
 
   n
n 

  n




  

n

  n
n








n 
n
 

n n 


  

n
  
n
  n n
What can I apply for?
• Personal support for a research activity (75 %
of all proposals)
• Provide thorough description and refer to
program
• describe area and tasks
• mention names and qualifications!!! Do all you
can to distinguish yourself
Name, akad. Grad,
Dienststellung
Grundausstattung
3.7.1.1
[1] Prof. Dr. Alexander
wissenschaftl.
Heisterkamp,
Mitarbeiter
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter
[2] PD Dr. Holger
Lubatschowski,
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter
[3] Prof. Dr. Rudolf Guthoff
Klinikdirektor
[4] Dr. Oliver Stachs
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter
[5] PD. Dr. Anaclet Ngezahayo
engeres Fach des
Mitarbeiters
Institut der Hochschule
oder der au§eruniv.
Einrichtung
Reasoning
Mitarbeit im Projekt in VergŠ
t
Wochenstunden
ungs(beratend: B)
gruppe
Biophotonik,Optik
UniversitŠ
t Hannover
20
Biophotonik, Optik
Laser Zentrum Hannover
10
konfokale
Mikroskopie, Optik
konfokale
Mikroskopie, Optik
Zellbiologie,
Membranbiologie
Pathologie, Histologie
UAK Rostock
4
UAK project
Rostock
15
• describe your contribution as
leader
UniversitŠ
t Hannover
• list input
of the researchersUniversitŠt Rostock
[6] Prof. Dr. med. Andreas
Wree
[7] Prof. Dr. med. T homas
Lenarz
Hochschule
• if possible describeHNOarea andMedizinische
tasks
Hannover
3.7.1.2
nichtwissenschaftl
.
Mitarbeiter
ErgŠ
n z ungsausstattung
3.7.1.3
[8] DoktorandIn der Physik
wissenschaftl.
Mitarbeiter
B
B
B
• collaborations:
Biophotonik,
– “why this guy/institute?”
Laser Zentrum Hannover
38,5
bildgebende
Verfah ren
– letter of intent (!!!), at a certain stage from your advisor
[9] DoktorandIn der Physik
konfokale
Mikroskopie
Zellpathologie,
Histologie
Zellbiologie
38,5
[10] MTA/TechnikerIn
UAK Rostock
19,25
– reviewers
(often) love interdisciplinary
collaboration
[11] MTA/TechnikerIn
3.7.1.4
[12] Hilfswissenschaftler
nichtwissenschaftl
.
Mitarbeiter
[13] Hilfswissenschaftler
UniversitŠ
t Hannover,
Institut fŠ
r Biophysik
Laser Zentrum Hannover
19,25
UAK Rostock
19
19
Reasoning
• mention other third party funding
• list funded project
• list proposal, submitted and in preparation
– goals
– timeline
– budget
– partners
• border between different projects
What can I apply for?
• apparatus
– (-quotes, quotes and quotes..., why laser A, not B?)
– time consuming!!!
• consumables
– detailed description
– be modest!
• travel money
– (roughly 750$/p.a. per position is ok)
– sometimes even more with good reasoning, for example
international conferences (already presented at this
conferences, international partner, idea exchange)
– during funding provide reports about conferences, etc.
– Communicate with customer
What reviewers look for...
• description of a “really important” problem
that meets their needs
• originality
• research- and problem- solving-strategy
should be convincing
• Clear statement of work (what do they get for
their $$?)
• competence of PI (publications, awards,
manuscripts...)
Reviewers
• May not be specialists in your field
• Likely sitting in a room where you
are making a presentation!
• Sometimes you can make
suggestions (e.g. NSF)
Really important:
...proposal writing takes a lot of time, is a lot of
work and requires a lot of research ahead of
time. Don’t go in thinking you can write a
good proposal without proper preparation!
Really important:
• Develop a proposal strategy
• If partners, coordinate and distribute tasks
• get the facts and state of the art right!
• describe little steps,
...but don’t loose focus on the main goal!
• proper language, get reviewers in place
• readable and appropriate level
Goal
Get the reviewer to be enthusiastic about the
project!
Proposal timeline
excellent idea – do a story board
convincing competence/preliminary work
thorough research, find partners
collaboration/work plan
write proposal
review by advisor/experienced people
Conclusion
• excellent idea
• thorough work
• straight outline