Transcript Proposal Development Workshop

GRC Services &
Proposal Development
Workshop
Grants Resource Center
American Association of State
Colleges and Universities
Mimi Tangum, Director
Ariel Herman, Program Advisor
February 23-25, 2005
© 2005 AASCU
The Grants
Resource
Center
provides both federal and
private grants information,
support services, and advice
to its member colleges and
universities nationwide. GRC
was created over 35 years
ago to help strengthen
institutions by providing latebreaking information on
grant opportunities and
technical assistance in
competing successfully
for them.
© 2005 AASCU
If you’re in
Washington,
DC,
our home is
your home
Grants Resource Center Services
•Daily electronic publications
•Rich resources posted to our
Web
•Personalized information and
advice
•Representation at Washington
meetings
•Networking with colleagues and
federal/private program officers
•Campus presentations and
consultations
© 2005 AASCU
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing, Informing, Consulting
Researching
Representing
•Locating award recipients and
facilitating connections with them
•Meeting with program officers to ask
members’ general questions
•Identifying appropriate funding
sources for various faculty ideas
•Attending agency budget briefings and
technical assistance workshops
•Finding the experts who can
interpret government regulations
•Arranging for meetings with agency contacts
•Monitoring the legislative process
© 2005 AASCU
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing, Informing, Consulting
We publish:
Informing
•GrantWeek every Monday - an
electronic magazine containing indepth articles on pending legislation;
new grant programs; proposed changes
to agency rules; and the federal budget
•Latest priorities and pending
legislation
•GRC Bulletin (three times weekly)
and GRC NIH/NSF Bulletin (every
Wednesday)—providing hundreds of
funding alerts
•All information posted for
members’ viewing exclusively at
http://www.aascu.org/grc
•GRC Deadlines—giving members a
head start on proposal writing
© 2005 AASCU
We monitor:
•Outcomes of proposed policy
revisions
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing, Informing, Consulting
Consulting
Campus Presentations
•Agency program and budget reviews,
tailored to members’ requests
Individual Meetings with Faculty
•Helping faculty determine the most
useful funding possibilities
•Proposal Development Workshops
•Assisting faculty to develop their ideas
into proposals
•Mock proposal reviews
•Advising new faculty on handling first
meetings with program officers
© 2005 AASCU
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing, Informing, Consulting
GRC WASHINGTON CONERENCES
GRC Spring
Conference
“Gaining New
Ground
Through
Proactive
Alliances”
March 20-23,
2005
© 2005 AASCU
Where researching, representing,
informing, and consulting come together
•Building networks with colleagues
•Building federal partnerships
•Listening to and talking with federal and
private funding agency experts
Specialty GRC Resource
Publications
http://www.aascu.org/grc/publications/referenceguides/
© 2005 AASCU
Proposal
Development
Handbook
Foundation
Grants Handbook
Provides tips for
proposal
development, from
start to finish
A documented
overview of the
process of securing
foundation funding
(under revision)
(under revision)
GrantSearch
Contains over 2,000 funding opportunities specifically
selected for GRC member-institutions.
•Searchable by
»Keyword or Title
»Subject
»Program name, sponsor, and/or activity
»CFDA number
•Entries include
»Description of the funding opportunity and links to
on-line information
»Deadline and last verification date
»Contact information
© 2005 AASCU
Overview of Federal Funding
• Largest supporter of university research projects
• Compartmentalized, with pointed research interests that respond to
Congressionally mandated priorities
• Funds localized projects primarily through basic research programs
• Maintains stringent reporting requirements under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA) to ensure that goals of agency
programs are met
• Processes program information electronically
• Especially interested collaborations, in leveraging federal dollars
© 2005 AASCU
Overview of Foundation Funding
• Approximately 60,000 private foundations in the U.S.
• Often have restrictions on eligibility, such as that of location or type of
institution (GRC screens foundation opportunities to determine whether
public institutions are eligibile to apply)
• Often have very specific areas of interest
• Many provide significant support for projects which federal agencies support
in only a limited fashion
• See the Foundation Center Website for more information: www.fdncenter.org
© 2005 AASCU
Federal vs. Private
Federal Funding
• Priorities set by legislation
• Likely to make large awards
• Large staff
• Well-established application
process
• Proposals usually evaluated using
objective scoring or rating criteria
• Proposals usually evaluated by
experts or knowledgeable staff
members
© 2005 AASCU
Foundation Funding
• Priorities set by the board
• Likely to make small awards, good
for start-up
• Limited staff
• Annual reports are best source of
information
• Proposals sometimes evaluated
without specific quantitative
scoring criteria
• Proposals often evaluated by
foundation board members who
may not be experts
Key Words in Current Funding
Climate
• Interdisciplinary Projects
• Collaborations
• Partnerships
© 2005 AASCU
Seed / Exploratory Grants
• For researchers exploring new, innovative, or high-risk
research areas
• For those beginning or returning after career
interruption
• More specifically:
– For reduced-scale projects, to break new ground, or explore
partnerships/collaborations, internally and externally, to
“grow” a project for later application for larger grants or
external funding
© 2005 AASCU
Some Examples
• Sampling of small, seed, and exploratory programs (nearly
350 appear in the GRC database)
– NIH Academic Research Enhancement Awards (AREA), at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/area.htm
– NIH Academic Career Awards, K07, at
http://grants.nih.gov/training/careerdevelopmentawards.htm
– Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality Small Research Grant
Program, at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-01040.html
– Dreyfus Foundation Teacher-Scholar Awards Programs, at
http://www.dreyfus.org/tc.shtml
– NSF Earth Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowships, at
http://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=EAR
– Educational Leadership Foundation Grants, at the American College
Personnel Association, http://www.elfacpa.org/
© 2005 AASCU
Turn your idea into a project
• Develop a prospectus
• Identify possible funding sources
• Obtain specific program information
• Contact the program officer:
– Early, frequent contact builds the relationships and
provides the knowledge that pay off at review time
© 2005 AASCU
Obtaining and Using Funded
Proposals
• Useful?
– Can be useful as guides (if not followed too closely)
– Request for funded proposal can lead to contact with successful Principal
Investigator for inside information on program, funded project outcome,
collaborative potential between prospective PI and PI
• How to obtain funded proposals (not using FOIA)
– Use GRC, Sponsored Research Office, agency contacts, awards lists and
databases to locate/request copies of funded proposals
– Prospective PI to successful PI is best to reap benefits of other’s
experience
© 2005 AASCU
You already have...
• Found a likely funding source
• Studied the proposal guidelines
• Called the program officer, who was
encouraging
• Gotten a sample funded proposal and
talked with the very helpful PI
• Written a proposal, and . . .
© 2005 AASCU
Dear Professor:
• “This cycle we received an
unusually high number of excellent
proposals.
• Unfortunately, . . ..”
© 2005 AASCU
ONLY ONE TASK REMAINS:
A closer look at the proposal
development process….
© 2005 AASCU
Beginning Again:
• Obtain the reviewers’ comments.
– Put them away for two weeks.
• Grit your teeth, and:
– Study them closely;
• Call the program officer;
• Work to resubmit.
© 2005 AASCU
“WRITING IS THINKING.”
--Wise Saying
• Think about the audience:
– What do they already know about you, your
institution, your idea?
– What do they need to know for your proposal to
rise to the top of the stack?
© 2005 AASCU
“WRITING IS MORE THINKING.”
--Wiser Saying
Continue to:
•
Put yourself in the place of the readers:
–
What can you do to make it easy for them to follow your
complex proposal?
–
As an NIH program officer put it, “There is no such thing
as being too explicit.”
© 2005 AASCU
“WRITING IS REWRITING.”
--Wisest Saying
• Get feedback from an excellent writer NOT in
your specific or general area of expertise:
– Did you leave out anything called for by the guidelines?
– Is there repetition or anything that diverts the focus of the
proposal?
– Is anything unclear—taken for granted-- in any part of
proposal not requiring disciplinary expertise to
understand?
• Rewrite.
© 2005 AASCU
AND MORE REWRITING.”
• Get feedback from someone in your specific
disciplinary area:
– Is the proposal compelling in addressing a vital need of the
field?
– Is the methodology’s soundness persuasively presented?
• Rewrite. Again.
© 2005 AASCU
“NEARLY FINISHED
REWRITING”
• Think as the reviewers will:
– Critique your own proposal.
© 2005 AASCU
Writing Better Proposals
• What makes a proposal fatally flawed?
–
–
–
–
Project does not fit agency mission
PI is ineligible to hold grant from agency (check guidelines)
Institution/department is ineligible for program
Proposal violates mechanical guidelines (format, length,
budget)
– Use of out-of-date forms
© 2005 AASCU
Writing Better Proposals
• What makes a proposal fair (i.e., severely
flawed)?
–
–
–
–
–
© 2005 AASCU
Obsolete topic
Obsolete approach
Limited significance or impact
Arguments not compelling
Capabilities of investigators, students, institutions
not convincingly presented
Writing Better Proposals
• Flaws to a proposal’s success:
– Vague language; lack of clarity
– Poor organization (unclear abstract, repetitive, rambling
narrative)
– Ideas introduced that don’t illuminate point of the proposal
– Outcomes of project not specified
– Funder’s priorites not explicitly addressed
– “Mystery” budget
– Scope of project impractical in time or use of funds (see
“Mystery budget,” too)
© 2005 AASCU
Writing Better Proposals
• Some General Truths:
– Proposal readers are well-disposed toward research in your field
– A well-written abstract makes for a happier reader
– Over-familiarity with the project leads to obscure proposals and skipped
logic
– Proposals finished just before the deadline are not really finished
© 2005 AASCU
Evaluating Your Proposal
• Read the entire draft; make only obvious
spelling/grammatical corrections as you go:
Start with the abstract:
– Try to form an idea of the proposal from abstract (if you can’t, there’s
trouble).
– Does the abstract convince you that the problem is worthy of
investigation?
– Does it make you want to read more?
– Does its creativity/ingenuity impress you?
© 2005 AASCU
Evaluating Your Proposal (cont)
• Read Background/Significance/Preliminary Results:
•
Does the section clearly explain a gap in the knowledge, an area
requiring significant improvement, or a real need for the
activities, technology, etc.?
– Are you convinced, through preliminary results or prior experience cited,
that the P.I will be able to address the need?
– Are you left with the conviction that the solution to the stated problem
would significantly impact the disciplinary areas?
© 2005 AASCU
Evaluating a Proposal (cont.)
• Read the research plan (this should represent the majority of
the proposal)
– Is it easy to follow?
– Does it follow a chronological plan, and is it well-conceived?
– Does it flow, one concept clearly lead to another, in the true sense of a
narrative?
– Are procedures adequately supported with literature references, when
necessary?
– Is it clear exactly what the investigator expects to accomplish?
– Are contingency plans considered if certain outcomes do not occur as
expected?
– Is the language professional without being stuffy?
– Is the timeframe realistic?
© 2005 AASCU
Proposal Review Checklist
•
•
•
•
•
What are the strengths of the proposal?
Is the proposal written clearly for the assumed audience?
Is the proposal organized logically so that it is easy to follow?
Does the proposal persuade you that the project is significant?
Does it persuade you that the PI can direct the project and see it
through to completion?
• Is there evidence of institutional commitment?
• How can the proposal be strengthened?
© 2005 AASCU
Final Thoughts
• Do your homework before applying:
– Be aware of entire application process: letters of intent/preproposals/workshops/full proposals
– Ask questions:
• Sponsored Programs Office, GRC, program officers, colleagues
• Make clear that institutional strengths match priorities of
funding agency; that project responds to sponsor’s goals
• Build relationships, especially with program officers
• Ask for critiques by at least three colleagues
• Persevere!
© 2005 AASCU