How to get that first grant:A young scientist’s guide to (AI)

funding in America

Jim HendlerUniversity of Maryland

All opinions are the author’s and do not reflect official policy of the AAAI, the University, the US government or any other fund-granting organization

This is not a grant writing seminar!

Many places offer grant writing seminars – If you think you need help WRITING a grant,

take one. Offered by Universities, US Govt, others

– You should be able to take one at low cost or free, high cost ones also exist

This talk focuses at a different level than those seminars– grant strategies as opposed to writing tips

Outline

Entre Acte: grant writing is a skill Background: the main funders of AI/CS

– Corporate– DoD services– DARPA

Grant Advice – some hints from researchers and funding agts

Entre Acte

The SCIENCE must be there – Doing good science is a necessary condition to

receiving any grant from anyone– It is not, however, sufficient

Getting a grant is not a “game”– it is a skill (like writing a good paper, giving a

good talk, etc.)– Like these other skills it cannot be easily taught,

but there are pointers and tips that can help

Terminology: Gifts, Grants, Contracts

Gifts have few strings attached– Corporate Education Funds– Industrial Affiliates Programs

Grants are “monitored”– Deliverables generally underspecified– PM primarily interested in the Science

Contracts, legal documents– Deliverables specified– PM has specific programmatic goals– PM may often direct/re-direct efforts

strings

attached

LOW

HIGH

$$$

AI/CS funders

Where do grants and contracts come from?– Companies – The National Science Foundation– The Department of Defense

• Darpa

• Service Funding programs

• Labs

– Other Govt Agencies• NIH, NLM, DoE, NASA, etc.

The DoD funds more than 80% of CS research in the US! (not incl. High performance computing)

Corporate Funding

Corporate Contracts Corporate funds generally answer to “The Bottom

Line”– Your research must be “value added”

• one exception is education/training function• Gift funds, unusual but not unheard of

– usually small compared to a contract

– You need to show where it will have a real, and usually fairly direct impact

• Corporate contracts generally have strings attached in the form of deliverables

– prototypes– improvements to their systems

Corporate Contract Caution

(Local) Corporations are often interested in more than your technology– Your name on their grants

– Your school’s reputation

– YOUR STUDENTS

Take this as both opportunity and caution– Your name is an asset you should keep control over

– Companies may be more interested in the university’s CS undergrads, rather than your grad students

• You can end up a local corporate recruiter -- for better or worse

Corporate Contract tips

Personal contacts are everything– Work closely with groups at local corporations– Take advantage of university contacts

The written proposal is often a “formality”– money is committed based on statement of work– but may be needed for higher level

• Often require iterations and patience

Pitfall: Legal issues– make sure licensing/patenting etc. are worked out in

advance (if applicable)

Government Funding

US Government Funding

Important to understand the mechanics– How is funding announced?

• RFPs and BAAs

– How is govt funding categorized?• 6.1 - 6.3

– Who makes the funding decisions?• Funding Decision making• Program Oversight

Calls for proposals

BAA: Broad Agency Announcement

RFP: Request for Proposal– Goals of Program– Requirements for Proposers– Format of proposal– Program Budget– Deadlines and dates– Where to look for further information– Who is in charge

Finding out about funding

All govt external funding (BAA/RFP) must be announced in the “Commerce Business Daily”– but that goes way beyond AI/CS

Fedix Alert is a push service (keyword based) for routing CBD announcements– but free service doesn’t include all agencies (incl. DARPA)

Agencies announce RFPS & BAAs on their Web sites– But this means you need to monitor

Tips

Many universities/companies have someone who monitors the CBD– You need to search them out if your school/company doesn’t

have an active grants group (ORAA)

The PMs send out email to lists of people they think might be interested– some of the folks in your community are likely to know

• Form Alliances (it is NOT a zero-sum game!)

– If your PM knows your work you are more likely to be informed

• more on this later

Government Funding Types

6.1 Basic research 6.2 Exploratory Development 6.3 Advanced Technology Development (6.4 Development, Test and Evaluation) (6.5 Management and support)

Funding Decisions Virtually all federal grants receive some sort of peer review

– Scientific Review Panels (NSF, NIH)

– External Reviewers (NSF, AFOSR, ONR, ARL)

– Source Selection Teams (DARPA, DoE, etc,)

– Different agencies give PMs differing constraints re. these reviews• Regardless, someone must be impressed by your proposal

NLM/NIH NSFDoDDoE

Panel/Reviewer Recommendations

NASA

Program Managers

The PM is a scientist or a scientific manager who has proven him/herself to be very knowledgable– solid scientific background in their field

The PM has different scientific objectives than yours– yours: Give talks, Publish papers, get grants– PMs: Give talks, Publish papers, get grants

• but very different than yours

Program Manager’s Needs

The PM must defend his/her program to higher management– Program Objectives

• How it will have scientific &/or military impact

– What great research/researchers have been supported• Awards won

• Papers written

• Transitions to industrial or military development

Your work must help him/her do this!

National Science Foundation

NSF Requests for Proposal (RFP)

NSF accepts two kinds of proposals– Unsolicited (Sent in on “open” RFP)

• goes to a PM in an area for action• Reviewed by panel or by external reviewers

– Special Programs• Yearly

– Career

– Instrumentation

• Big “one of”s– KDI, Govt I, RI

NSF Open RFP Objective: Support best basic research

– Typically have one or two Pis• academic researcher

– generally small• $50-100k/yr

– Stress personnel support– PI support– Grad Students

Review criteria: Scientific basis, work plan– Lack of work plan is #1 rejection reason

NSF Special RFPs

Science with specific characteristics– Support some specific govt objective– encourage interdisciplinary research– provide research infrastructure for universities

Features– Multi-PI (often multi-dept, university)– Some go to $1M/yr or more– Personnel and infrastructure

NSF RFPs cont.

NSF Special Programs are a very good way for a younger researcher to get funding– but generally NOT as PI

• Especially good for interdisciplinary or team-oriented researchers

These larger grants are team oriented– Most common error: Team is formed for sake of grant

Grant makes that obvious

– Common Example: N PIs, N sections, each section has one author

NSF Career Awards

NSF has a special program for young researchers– Science Based (whatever you may have heard)

• grant is more important than track record

– Panel reviewed• Your work must stand out among similar projects

• Not everyone will be a specialist in your subarea

Most common errors– This is a grant, not a thesis chapter!

– Lack of enthusiasm (overly passive writing)

– “Trust me” doesn’t work in this program• Assume everyone else is as good as you are!

NSF tip

NSF is one of the few govt CSD funders that returns reviews– USE the reviews to revise and resubmit your grant

• Never resubmit without serious rework/rethinking– Assume the reviewers will be similar

• Assume the mistaken review was YOUR fault– Pretend you must have written it wrong if you could have

given such a misleading impression

» (Example: If the reviewer says you didn’t discuss X, but you did, assume you didn’t make it prominent enough)

Department of Defense Funding

DoD Service Funders The Services each have their own 6.1 funding

organizations– Air Force: AFOSR– Navy: ONR– Army: ARO

Each organization has an “Open BAA”– don’t get overly excited when the new BAA comes out

These offices administer special programs for the OSR(OFC DOD DDRE)– These are like NSF special program RFPs

• generally for large funding, big groups (MURI)• Sometimes specialized for govt priorities (Depscor, HBCU)

DoD Labs

DoD labs can administer/award 6.2 and 6.3 funding contracts– AF: AFRL (Wright, Phillips, Rome, others)

• Rome Laboratories (AFRL/I), Rome NY for IT and especially AI

– Navy: NRL• Naval Center for Applied Research in AI

– Army: ARL• Adelphi Maryland: Agents, language, robots

But, ...

DoD Lab BAAs

Getting funding from the labs (without Darpa in the loop) is pretty rare– BAAs usually call for White Papers– Geographic Proximity often a must – Personal contacts and joint work often prerequisite

The labs put out calls for White Papers– Watch for these!– These are a good opportunity to get lab people to

know your work - can lead to funding in the longer term

Know your Program Manager

The people making the funding decisions are trying to make sure they support high quality work– The quality of the scientists is important

• Track Record

– Knowledge of your past work by PM is often important

• The PMs are typically scientists• They enjoy meeting and talking to you

– (with certain caveats)

Know Your Program Manager

You should try to get to know your PM– Useful for NSF, very important for services and

DARPA

Note:PMs often come to conferences– attend talks– ask people about their work -- knowing who is

who can be useful!

Visiting (or calling) a PM

Use the analogy of visitors to your labs– You treat an interested student different from a know-it-all

kid

Do your homework before your meetings– Think about what you want to ask– These are busy people, but they’ll give you time if you’re

not wasting it• like you would a perspective student

Be prepared to listen– learn what the PM needs and is looking for

The White Paper A good outcome is if the PM asks for a white paper

– A SHORT description of your research

This is a great opportunity if you do it right– Think of it as an “advertisement” for your work

• Why is what you are doing IMPORTANT• What are you doing differently than others

– Use 3-4 pages• Technical arguments must be focused• Technical arguments must be precise

Service/Lab Open BAAs Rarely, if ever, is an unsolicted grant submitted under

an open BAA funded– Don’t just send grant

• All grants received MUST be treated correctly– lots of paperwork, headaches for PM and reviewers, especially when

there is no money in the budget

• Better:visit or call, white paper, invite for grant

– You can iterate the grant ideas with the PM• don’t submit a final grant until it is ready• Be responsive (especially about budget)

Money is usually very limited– being told there is no funding available is the expected value!

DARPA

(Defense) Advanced Research Projects Agencyhttp://www.darpa.mil

The Key to Understanding DARPA

DARPA is a results-oriented funding agency– They do like science and want/need to support

it, but that is not the primary mission

– The primary mission is to bring science to a military customer

– That science must be “revolutionary”• by MILITARY standards

– innovative science coupled with innovative doctrine or new technology

Common Misunderstanding

“Some people seem to get a lot of Darpa funding, all those grants must be wired”– DARPA is torn between two needs

– Support the best scientists

– GET RESULTS

• Going with a proven performer lowers the risk

– Already a well-known scientist

– track record of getting results

– The DARPA review process is closed, so there is no feedback if you are not funded

• helps perpetuate this misunderstanding

DARPA Reviewing

A panel of reviewers, usually all from DoD entities and/or national laboratories, rates all grants and ranks them with respect to fixed criteria– All proposals are ranked into two categories

• Selectable• Not selectable

The BAA specifies the criteria of review– The PM chooses weighting factors within criteria

The PM funds some, but not all, of the selectables as his/her funding allows and based on program needs

Example Review Criteria/ranking

1. Overall scientific and technical merit of the proposed program (30%)

2. Applicability of proposed technologies to <program area> (30 %)

3. Expertise and experience in <program area> and ability to complete the proposed work successfully (25%)

4. The degree to which technical data and/or computer software developed under the proposed contract are to be delivered to DARPA with unrestricted rights (15%)

5. Proposed cost, cost realism, and availability of funds. Applicable only in case of significant cost estimate error (0%)– Legally budget not included in selectable/not selectable ranking!

DARPA desires new ideas!

Darpa wants to bring in young scientists and new ideas– e.g.: Darpa sponsored a workshop at AAAI ‘97 for

young AI scientists to present their ideas to a number of PMS

(many of these folks were funded under 1998 BAAs)

BUT… DARPA is a results-centered organization– most young scientists haven’t learned to portray their

ideas appropriately

A Funded NSF Proposal

NSF grant on planning (Nau/Hendler):– Developing control strategies which use knowledge about goal

interactions to guide planning by making better selections among alternatives

– Exploring how limitations on goal interactions lead to characteristics of task networks which constrain the size and structure of the search space, thus enabling hierarchical planning to be done more efficiently

– doing a theoretical analysis of several competing planning strategies in terms of how knowledge about limited interactions can improve their search efficiency

– implementing the results of the above research in a planning system for the efficient solution of problems of practical interest

A Funded DARPA Proposal

DARPA grant on planning (Nau/Hendler):– Make realistic manufacturing example problems and knowledge bases

available to members of the <program> in a manner usable by the technologies being developed under current <program> support

– Develop an ontology of machining information in the standard ontology package being developed by <program> researchers

– Evaluate <program> work on realistic manufacturing problems…and provide comparisons with current tools used in manufacturing and manufacturing research

– Provide case-bases of manufacturing plans accessible to <program> participants …

– Make <program>-based manufacturing results and tools available to the manufacturing community via the NIST tesbed

See the difference?

For NSF we stressed the scientific goals– we later backed them up with details from the

application of the technology to show that the theory was viable

For DARPA we stressed the application of the technology– we later backed it up with scientific details to

prove we had scientific credibility and knowledge

Specific DARPA hints

Work with people who already know the DARPA world– DARPA generally funds multi-PI projects

and/or “consortia” of contract/subcontract groups

• Form strategic alliances with better known researchers

• Team with corporate research groups that have DARPA experience

Specific DARPA Hints

BEFORE a BAA is written, the DARPA PMs often sponsor a workshop on the topic to help them put together a credible scientific program– Invite only, usually only to senior researchers

• great if you can get an invite

– Notes from these workshops are made available on the Web and elsewhere

• PMs and participants will steer you towards them

– After a BAA comes out, search for those notes!• Can provide valuable hints as to what aspects of the technology are

seen as most important

DARPA Note

Once a BAA is announced, the PM is legally constrained NOT to provide information to potential bidders UNLESS the discussion is shared with all potential bidders– A web site usually is created with an address for sending

questions and a FAQ of those that are legally answerable

– The site may also include pointers to lists of potential bidders who have expressed interest in partners

• Don’t hesitate to contact them

Grant Tips from the “Pros”

TIPS From the “Pros”

I asked a number of program managers, senior scientists, well-funded researchers, and participants in funding review panels to join me in providing tips based on our experiences

The Number 1 Tip

Respond to the BAA/RFP– Provide EVERYTHING that is requested– Make sure your description matches the program

needs!

This may sound simple, but virtually all of us have encountered proposals that were about good research, but not responsive to the BAA or which omitted key points!– They were not funded

Good Grants

A good grant “tells a story”– What is the problem to be solved?– Why is wrong with current approaches?– Why is your new idea?– What is your technical approach to this idea?– Why are you (your team) the one(s) to do it?– How are you going to show that it works?

More general grant tips

Back up what you propose to do with what you’ve already done– A funded proposal must describe work that

doesn’t yet exist, but at the same time, the reviewer must be convinced you can do it.

Show enthusiasm for your work– if you don’t love it, neither will the reviewers

Know your audience

It is critical to consider who will be reviewing your grant– NSF: (Academic) scientists in AI &/or CS

– ONR,OSR,ARO: military lab scientists

– DARPA: military scientists, operational military

Rule of Thumb: Someone on the panel must think yours is THE BEST

Readability is important

A typical reviewer (on a panel) is reading a lot of similar grants in a short amount of time– Make his/her life easier!

• Highlight key points• Repeat things you want them to be sure of

– tell em what you’re going to say, say it, tell em what you said

• Use figures/graphs where they can help make an obscure point understandable

– space is limited, but this is worth it!

Budgets A smaller grant is ALWAYS easier to get than

larger– example: There is a myth that DARPA budgets

should be large -- this is false (and a bad strategy)• remember selectable funded!

Don’t ask for more than you can realistically spend– A key new issue: expenditure rates!

• Years don’t have to be equal– example: if you can’t hire all students immediately, ask for less

year one

One last tip…BE VISIBLE

Too many young scientists avoid “time wasting” things like program committees, ed boards, workshop/symposium organization, outside talks, etc.

Save some of your time for these!– name recognition is important– a reputation as someone who “gets things done”

looks great on a review form

SUMMARY

There is no magic to writing a good grant, it is a skill that can learned– Learn from mentors– Learn from your mistakes– Learn from good examples

The PMs are crucial – Get to know them– Get them to know you

Http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler