FH Health Research FH Health Research Intelligence UnitIntelligence Unit

How to Write Successful How to Write Successful Proposals and GrantsProposals and Grants

How to Write Successful How to Write Successful Research Grant ApplicationsResearch Grant Applications

Rosa Haywood (604-587-4436), Research Ethics Coordinator, Research Ethics Board.

Susan Chunick (604-587-4681), Director, Research Administration and Development (RAD).

Michael Wasdell (604-587-4438), Epidemiologist

Magdalena Swanson (604-587-4637), Research and Grant Development Facilitator

Who we are:Who we are:

Camille Viray (604-587-4628), RAD Administrative Assistant.

RESEARCH ETHICS BOARD

STATUS REPORT 01 February 2009Total Studies 547

(From 2005 September 01 to Date)

ACTIVE STUDIES =209 PENDING APPROVAL = 26

42

026 10

69

0 20

10203040506070

Sponsor FH Grants Non-FHGrants

Grant-Aid Unfunded FHInternal

Other

Funding for ACTIVE StudiesType of Ethics Review for ACTIVE Studies

97

112F ull B o ardExpedited

Active Studies by Department AreaActive Studies by Department AreaAccess & UtilizationAccess & Utilization 22 EmergencyEmergency 44 NephrologyNephrology 44 PlanningPlanning 11

Acute ProgramsAcute Programs 22 Environmental HealthEnvironmental Health 22 NeurologyNeurology 11 Professional PracticeProfessional Practice 44

AdministrationAdministration 11 Family MedicineFamily Medicine 22 NursingNursing 88 PsychiatryPsychiatry 1717

Assisted LivingAssisted Living 11 Food & NutritionFood & Nutrition 33 ObstetricsObstetrics 66 Public Health PreventionPublic Health Prevention 11

Biomedical EngineeringBiomedical Engineering 11 Health ServicesHealth Services 55 OncologyOncology 77 Residency FacilityResidency Facility 22

CardiologyCardiology 3333 Infection ControlInfection Control 11 OrthopaedicsOrthopaedics 1717 RespiratoryRespiratory 22

Chronic CareChronic Care 11 Internal MedicineInternal Medicine 11 Palliative CarePalliative Care 33 Social WorkSocial Work 33

Critical Care (ICU)Critical Care (ICU) 77 LaboratoryLaboratory 11 PathologyPathology 11 SurgerySurgery 22

Decision Support ServicesDecision Support Services 11 Material ManagementMaterial Management 11 PediatricsPediatrics 66 Workplace HealthWorkplace Health 88

DentistryDentistry 11 MedicineMedicine 44 People ServicesPeople Services 11 Non FH ResearchNon FH Research 22

Diversity ServicesDiversity Services 11 Mental HealthMental Health 88 PharmacyPharmacy 1515

Elder ResearchElder Research 11 Multiple SclerosisMultiple Sclerosis 1010 PhysiotherapyPhysiotherapy 44

FH Health Research Intelligence Unit FH Health Research Intelligence Unit How can we help?How can we help?

EpidemiologistEpidemiologistSpecifying the research goal, Specifying the research goal, objectives and hypothesisobjectives and hypothesisIdentifying measurable outcomesIdentifying measurable outcomesSpecifying the variables for Specifying the variables for analysisanalysisIdentifying sources of dataIdentifying sources of dataDeveloping data collection tools Developing data collection tools for quantitative or qualitative for quantitative or qualitative studiesstudiesDeveloping the statistical analysis Developing the statistical analysis planplanAnalyzing the dataAnalyzing the dataUnderstanding how to use Understanding how to use statistical software, such as SPSSstatistical software, such as SPSS

Research and Grant Research and Grant Development FacilitatorDevelopment Facilitator

Conducting a search for funding Conducting a search for funding opportunitiesopportunitiesTargeted notification of new Targeted notification of new funding sources and deadlinesfunding sources and deadlinesIdentifying a research teamIdentifying a research teamPreparing letters of intentPreparing letters of intentIdentifying resources required for Identifying resources required for conducting researchconducting researchFormulating the research budgetFormulating the research budgetFacilitating proposal Facilitating proposal development in collaboration development in collaboration with researcherswith researchersUnderstanding FH and funding Understanding FH and funding agency requirements regarding agency requirements regarding preparation of specific preparation of specific documentsdocuments

The Great IdeaThe Great Idea

Putting your ideas for research down on paper will allow Putting your ideas for research down on paper will allow you to articulate clearly your ideas to othersyou to articulate clearly your ideas to othersCreate a program proposal to help present your idea to Create a program proposal to help present your idea to others. others.

Create a program outline that will enable people who are not Create a program outline that will enable people who are not involved in the study to understand exactly what you plan to doinvolved in the study to understand exactly what you plan to do

Review the literature to ensure that your proposal is Review the literature to ensure that your proposal is uniqueuniqueObtain feedback from experts, colleagues and Obtain feedback from experts, colleagues and stakeholdersstakeholders

Develop a Project Management PlanDevelop a Project Management Plan

Prepare an up to date resume/curriculum vitae Prepare an up to date resume/curriculum vitae Identify appropriate sources of funding Identify appropriate sources of funding Select funding source Select funding source Develop a timeline for development of research proposal and Develop a timeline for development of research proposal and submission of letter of intent and application for funding submission of letter of intent and application for funding Identify the research collaborators Identify the research collaborators Prepare the budget Prepare the budget Prepare the grant application packagePrepare the grant application packageSubmit grant application to RAD office to obtain Submit grant application to RAD office to obtain signaturesignature of of authorizing Executive authorizing Executive Submit forSubmit for and obtain approval by and obtain approval by FH Research Ethics BoardFH Research Ethics Boardprior to or in tandem with application for funding.prior to or in tandem with application for funding.

How we can help How we can help -- HRIUHRIUFor assistance with any of the above steps, For assistance with any of the above steps, contact the FH Research and Grant contact the FH Research and Grant Development Facilitator, Development Facilitator, MMagdalena Swansonagdalena Swanson, , 604604--587587--46374637 who can: who can: Provide overall project management to ensure Provide overall project management to ensure that FH internal and agency requirements for that FH internal and agency requirements for funding applications are met funding applications are met CoCo--ordinate the development of the research ordinate the development of the research proposal with the FH Epidemiologist, proposal with the FH Epidemiologist, Michael Michael WasdellWasdell, 604, 604--587587--44384438Collaborate in the development of the grant Collaborate in the development of the grant proposal and other textproposal and other text

Planning for the Grant ApplicationPlanning for the Grant Application

Funding CyclesFunding CyclesUnique, Annual, SemiUnique, Annual, Semi--Annual, etc.Annual, etc.

Application ProcessApplication ProcessAnnouncement Announcement –– Request for Applications (RFA)Request for Applications (RFA)RegistrationRegistration

•• Often required by funding agencies before submission of LOI or fOften required by funding agencies before submission of LOI or full ull application, can take up to 2 weeks to processapplication, can take up to 2 weeks to process

Letter of intent Letter of intent -- LOILOI•• Signals to the agency that you will be submitting an applicationSignals to the agency that you will be submitting an application•• Some agencies may request a brief synopsis of the proposal to Some agencies may request a brief synopsis of the proposal to

screen out inappropriate applicantsscreen out inappropriate applicants•• Time between RFA and LOI may only be 1 or 2 monthsTime between RFA and LOI may only be 1 or 2 months

Full applicationFull application•• Time between letter of intent and full application is usually 1Time between letter of intent and full application is usually 1--3 months3 months

Award AnnouncementAward AnnouncementMay be up to 6 monthsMay be up to 6 months

Planning for the Grant ApplicationPlanning for the Grant Application

Having adequate time to prepare your Having adequate time to prepare your application is essentialapplication is essentialIt is best to have your research ideas developed, It is best to have your research ideas developed, team identified and proposal written in advance team identified and proposal written in advance of the RFAof the RFA

Unfortunately, this does not happen frequentlyUnfortunately, this does not happen frequently

Keep in mind that the time from RFA to funding Keep in mind that the time from RFA to funding decision can be up to one yeardecision can be up to one year

Tip Tip –– begin at least 6 months in advance of begin at least 6 months in advance of deadlinedeadline

Where to find fundingWhere to find funding

National and regional agencies for health National and regional agencies for health research (research (egeg., CIHR, MSFHR, BCMSF)., CIHR, MSFHR, BCMSF)Provincial branches and associations of Provincial branches and associations of health agencies (health agencies (egeg., Canadian Lung ., Canadian Lung Association, Canadian Cancer Society, Association, Canadian Cancer Society, Heart and Stroke Foundation)Heart and Stroke Foundation)Professional AssociationsProfessional AssociationsHealth/Disease based AssociationsHealth/Disease based Associations

http://www.fraserhealth.ca/Professionals/Research/Investigator/Documents/GrantFacilitationEpidemiologist.pdf

FH HRIU consultation request FH HRIU consultation request formform contains a listing of contains a listing of funding agencies.funding agencies.

Community of Science Community of Science Funding Opportunities Funding Opportunities DatabaseDatabase..•• web basedweb based•• 400,000 listings400,000 listings

Contact Magdalena SwansonContact Magdalena Swanson

FH Funding Identification ResourcesFH Funding Identification Resources

FH NewsFH News has monthly updates has monthly updates of new funding opportunitiesof new funding opportunities

Grant MatchmakingGrant Matchmaking

Your research matches the objectives of Your research matches the objectives of the funderthe funderThey have made previous awards in your They have made previous awards in your area of researcharea of researchThey make awards to your institutionThey make awards to your institutionYou meet basic investigator eligibilityYou meet basic investigator eligibilityThey have sufficient funds They have sufficient funds The application deadline is achievableThe application deadline is achievable

Request for ApplicationsRequest for Applications

Understanding the funding formatsUnderstanding the funding formatsOperating grantsOperating grantsTeam grantsTeam grantsSeed/development grantsSeed/development grantsRandomized controlled trialsRandomized controlled trialsResearch synthesisResearch synthesisEnvironmental scansEnvironmental scansWorkshops / MeetingsWorkshops / MeetingsSpecial initiatives and priority announcementsSpecial initiatives and priority announcements

StrategyStrategyConsider all the funding formats with respect to your Consider all the funding formats with respect to your proposalproposalSelect several funding programs to increase your Select several funding programs to increase your chanceschancesThink of ways to build a program of researchThink of ways to build a program of researchScenarioScenario

Apply for funding for an environmental scan. This helps you to Apply for funding for an environmental scan. This helps you to identify a poorly researched area.identify a poorly researched area.With this knowledge, you apply for a team planning grant to brinWith this knowledge, you apply for a team planning grant to bring g together key stakeholders and researchers with similar interest together key stakeholders and researchers with similar interest to identify a program of researchto identify a program of researchThe team submits for a seed grant to obtain pilot data and The team submits for a seed grant to obtain pilot data and demonstrate the feasibility of the research and the likelihood odemonstrate the feasibility of the research and the likelihood of f successsuccessWith a solid team, rationale and foundational data, you apply foWith a solid team, rationale and foundational data, you apply for r an operating grantan operating grant

Eligibility RequirementsEligibility RequirementsPrincipal Investigator and/or CoPrincipal Investigator and/or Co--InvestigatorsInvestigators

Role Role -- academic, clinical or decision making positionacademic, clinical or decision making positionDegree and professionDegree and professionExperienceExperience

•• Previous awardsPrevious awards•• PublicationsPublications•• Evidence of completed researchEvidence of completed research•• Years of research experienceYears of research experience

TipsTips•• For national funding agencies, partner with an experienced For national funding agencies, partner with an experienced

researcherresearcher•• Consider participating as a coConsider participating as a co--investigator to establish track recordinvestigator to establish track record•• Contact funding agency to review qualifications Contact funding agency to review qualifications –– exceptions may exceptions may

be madebe made

Eligibility RequirementsEligibility RequirementsInstitutionInstitution

Academic Academic Health servicesHealth servicesGovernment or government agencyGovernment or government agencyCommunity agencyCommunity agency

Institutional role Institutional role -- SponsorSponsorAdminister and account for grant fundsAdminister and account for grant fundsResearch ethics reviewResearch ethics reviewAcademic oversightAcademic oversightFacility and staff supportFacility and staff supportAppropriate research environmentAppropriate research environment

Eligibility RequirementsEligibility Requirements

Type of researchType of researchSome agencies may request specific research Some agencies may request specific research formats and exclude othersformats and exclude others

•• Biomedical, Clinical, Health Services, PopulationBiomedical, Clinical, Health Services, Population•• Conclusion Oriented, Decision OrientedConclusion Oriented, Decision Oriented

OtherOtherGeographic locationGeographic locationCountry of citizenshipCountry of citizenshipResidencyResidencyCoCo--SponsorshipSponsorshipPartnershipPartnership

General TipsGeneral TipsReview funding agency guidelinesReview funding agency guidelinesMake sure your proposal fits within the Make sure your proposal fits within the guidelinesguidelinesLook at funding allotment of past competitions to Look at funding allotment of past competitions to ensure that your financial request is reasonableensure that your financial request is reasonableCheck with agency to obtain updates on Check with agency to obtain updates on changes to guidelines and deadlineschanges to guidelines and deadlinesFollow all the rules and requests specified in the Follow all the rules and requests specified in the application guidelinesapplication guidelinesIs the proposal ethical?Is the proposal ethical?

Preparing the ProposalPreparing the Proposal

AbstractAbstract Introduction Introduction (including statement (including statement of problem, goals, objectives and of problem, goals, objectives and significance of research)significance of research) BackgroundBackground or literature reviewor literature review Method Method Knowledge DisseminationKnowledge Dissemination List of ReferencesList of References PersonnelPersonnel BudgetBudget

Typical parts of a research proposal includeTypical parts of a research proposal include

AbstractAbstract

Short paragraph that is a clear, logical Short paragraph that is a clear, logical summary of your proposalsummary of your proposalUsually does not exceed 250 wordsUsually does not exceed 250 wordsSometimes a Sometimes a ‘‘laylay’’ summary is requiredsummary is required

IntroductionIntroductionShould begin with a capsule statement of what is being Should begin with a capsule statement of what is being proposed and then should proceed to introduce the subject proposed and then should proceed to introduce the subject to a stranger.to a stranger.

Should not assume that your reader is familiar with your Should not assume that your reader is familiar with your subject. subject. Should be comprehensible to an informed lay reader. It Should be comprehensible to an informed lay reader. It should give enough background to enable the reader to should give enough background to enable the reader to place your particular research problem in a context of place your particular research problem in a context of common knowledge and should show how its solution will common knowledge and should show how its solution will advance the field or be important for some other work. advance the field or be important for some other work. In introducing the research problem, it is sometimes helpful In introducing the research problem, it is sometimes helpful to say what it is not, especially if it could easily be confusedto say what it is not, especially if it could easily be confusedwith related work. with related work. You may also need to explain the underlying assumption of You may also need to explain the underlying assumption of your research or the hypotheses you will be using.your research or the hypotheses you will be using.

BackgroundBackgroundLiterature reviews should be selective and critical.Literature reviews should be selective and critical.Reviewers do not want to read through a voluminous Reviewers do not want to read through a voluminous working bibliography; they want to know the especially working bibliography; they want to know the especially pertinent works and your evaluation of them. pertinent works and your evaluation of them. Reviewers want to feel confident that you are Reviewers want to feel confident that you are knowledgeable in the current state of the field.knowledgeable in the current state of the field.Discussions of work done by others should therefore Discussions of work done by others should therefore lead the reader to a clear impression of how you will be lead the reader to a clear impression of how you will be building upon what has already been done and how your building upon what has already been done and how your work differs from theirs. work differs from theirs. It is important to establish what is original in your It is important to establish what is original in your approach, what circumstances have changed since approach, what circumstances have changed since related work was done, or what is unique about the time related work was done, or what is unique about the time and place of the proposed research.and place of the proposed research.

MethodMethodThe heart of the proposal and is the primary concern of The heart of the proposal and is the primary concern of the technical reviewers the technical reviewers Be as detailed as possible about the schedule of the Be as detailed as possible about the schedule of the proposed work. proposed work. Objectives/Research Questions/HypothesisObjectives/Research Questions/HypothesisMethods, study designMethods, study designSample Selection/Sample SizeSample Selection/Sample SizeData MeasurementData MeasurementData CollectionData CollectionData AnalysisData AnalysisBe specific about the means of evaluating the data or the Be specific about the means of evaluating the data or the conclusions. conclusions. Be certain that the connection between the research Be certain that the connection between the research objectives and the research method is evident. objectives and the research method is evident.

Knowledge Dissemination PlanKnowledge Dissemination Plan

Knowledge DisseminationKnowledge Dissemination

Very important stepVery important stepWhat will you do with your new found What will you do with your new found knowledge?knowledge?How will you share this knowledge?How will you share this knowledge?Who will benefit from this knowledge sharing?Who will benefit from this knowledge sharing?““Applications must include a clear, explicit, and Applications must include a clear, explicit, and manageable knowledge translation plan, which specifies manageable knowledge translation plan, which specifies the intended the intended audience(saudience(s), the means of involvement and ), the means of involvement and communication, and the intended postcommunication, and the intended post--grant followgrant follow--upup””. . CIHR (2006)CIHR (2006)

ReferencesReferences

Placed at the end of the text Placed at the end of the text Lists text and information included in Lists text and information included in proposal from other authors/sourcesproposal from other authors/sourcesThe grant guidelines will specify the format The grant guidelines will specify the format of inof in--text citations and reference listtext citations and reference list

BiographiesBiographiesThis section usually consists of two parts: an This section usually consists of two parts: an explanation of the proposed personnel explanation of the proposed personnel arrangements and the biographical information arrangements and the biographical information for cofor co--investigators. investigators. The explanation should specify how many The explanation should specify how many persons at what percentage of time and in what persons at what percentage of time and in what professional/academic categories will be professional/academic categories will be participating in the project. If the program is participating in the project. If the program is complex and involves people from other complex and involves people from other departments or institutions, the organization of departments or institutions, the organization of the staff and the lines of responsibility should be the staff and the lines of responsibility should be made clear. made clear.

Description of activity Timing Responsibility

PI

Co-

PI

Col

l.

2nd c

oll

3rd c

oll

June July Aug Sept Oct No. of days

1) Research Program Preparation a) purchase equipment b) hire students c) visiting partners

2) Training Delivery 6 x 5day workshops 3) Follow up reporting 4) Administration

2 5 4 10 5 5

4 10 15

4 5

2 5

2 5

Total Days 31 29 9 7 7

CommunicationCommunicationKnow your audienceKnow your audience

Review panels are often composed of content experts as well as Review panels are often composed of content experts as well as generalistsgeneralistsConsider bias, myths and other unfounded opinionsConsider bias, myths and other unfounded opinions

Put your readers firstPut your readers firstReviewers are usually volunteers so try to make reading your Reviewers are usually volunteers so try to make reading your application pleasantapplication pleasantReviewers may have limited time to review your proposal Reviewers may have limited time to review your proposal –– an easy an easy read is very appreciatedread is very appreciatedYour proposal may be one of 20 that the reviewer must evaluate Your proposal may be one of 20 that the reviewer must evaluate ––make it stand outmake it stand outCompare your proposal to the RFA to ensure that it contains all Compare your proposal to the RFA to ensure that it contains all the the required elementsrequired elementsBolding of relevant information can help the reviewer make Bolding of relevant information can help the reviewer make connections to key evaluation categoriesconnections to key evaluation categoriesUse tables and figures if they are informative and help to reducUse tables and figures if they are informative and help to reduce texte text

Writing TipsWriting TipsCreate an outlineCreate an outlineOrganize the content for logical flow of ideasOrganize the content for logical flow of ideasUse Use ‘‘leadlead’’ statements as an opening to any sectionstatements as an opening to any section

state briefly the most important concept and then provide state briefly the most important concept and then provide background/contextbackground/context

Check grammar and tenseCheck grammar and tenseCut wordinessCut wordinessEliminate jargonEliminate jargonAvoid or limit acronymsAvoid or limit acronymsObtain feedback from peersObtain feedback from peers

This will prevent your proposal from looking likeThis will prevent your proposal from looking like………………

The BudgetThe BudgetPrepare budget in consultation with:FH Human Resources if it is intended to hire grant staff and contractors before finalizing budgets. Note that benefits and future salary increases may have to be accounted for in the budget. FH Departments/Areas, such as Decision Support, Health Records, Laboratory/Pathology, Medical Imaging, Operating Room, Patient Care and Pharmacy if any of these will be asked to provide research-related services. For information on the process for obtaining Departmental Agreement for Providing Research-related Services (DAR), see the DAR webpage.

http://www.fraserhealth.ca/Professionals/Research/Pages/Department%20Agreement.aspx

Budget PlanningBudget Planning

PersonnelPersonnelSalaries and wagesSalaries and wages

•• Primary research staffPrimary research staff•• CoCo--op or workop or work--study studentsstudy students•• Principal Investigator and CoPrincipal Investigator and Co--Investigators not usually Investigators not usually

coveredcovered

Estimated merit increasesEstimated merit increasesAnticipated increases in minimum wageAnticipated increases in minimum wageBenefitsBenefits

•• Excluded staffExcluded staff•• Bargaining unitsBargaining units

Budget PlanningBudget Planning

Facility ExpensesFacility ExpensesTelecommunicationsTelecommunications

•• Phone, fax, internetPhone, fax, internet•• Installation expensesInstallation expenses

FurnishingsFurnishingsMaintenance and CleaningMaintenance and CleaningOverhead*Overhead*

•• Utilities: gas, electricity, waterUtilities: gas, electricity, water

*overhead not usually covered by Canadian agencies*overhead not usually covered by Canadian agencies

Budget PlanningBudget Planning

Computers and other specialty equipment*Computers and other specialty equipment*Cost of equipmentCost of equipmentInstallation expensesInstallation expensesLease, warranty and maintenance contractsLease, warranty and maintenance contractsRepairRepair

* In most cases, equipment purchased through * In most cases, equipment purchased through a grant becomes the property of the sponsor a grant becomes the property of the sponsor institutioninstitution

Budget PlanningBudget Planning

Office SuppliesOffice SuppliesPaperPaperPhotocopyingPhotocopyingBindersBindersStorage Storage –– file cabinetsfile cabinets

Medical SuppliesMedical SuppliesSpecimen vialsSpecimen vialsClinical assessment Clinical assessment suppliessupplies

Budget PlanningBudget PlanningConsultantsConsultantsDues, memberships, subscriptionsDues, memberships, subscriptionsStaff mileage and parkingStaff mileage and parkingPatient expensesPatient expensesPostagePostageCourierCourierTraining sessionsTraining sessionsMediaMediaTravel, meeting and conference expensesTravel, meeting and conference expenses

Budget JustificationBudget Justification

Explains how the money Explains how the money will be spent and justifies will be spent and justifies the need for the requested the need for the requested amountamountWithout a good budget Without a good budget justification, a funder may justification, a funder may reduce the amount of the reduce the amount of the award, potentially limiting award, potentially limiting the feasibility of the projectthe feasibility of the project

Budget TipsBudget TipsMore detail is better than lessMore detail is better than lessPrepare both a linePrepare both a line--item budget as well as a budget narrative item budget as well as a budget narrative describing each linedescribing each line--item cost in detailitem cost in detailDonDon’’t round out.t round out.Provide bids and estimates for consultants, equipment, supplies Provide bids and estimates for consultants, equipment, supplies etc.etc.DonDon’’t pad or economize the budget t pad or economize the budget –– good reviewers know the good reviewers know the cost of goods and servicescost of goods and servicesInclude sources of inInclude sources of in--kind contributionskind contributions

Volunteer timeVolunteer timeDonated spaceDonated spaceBorrowed equipmentBorrowed equipmentDonated suppliesDonated supplies

Budget GuidelinesBudget Guidelines

Budget guidelines are usually found in the Budget guidelines are usually found in the application guideapplication guideList allowable costsList allowable costsList excluded costsList excluded costsSpecify matching funding if necessary Specify matching funding if necessary ((egeg., co., co--sponsored funding)sponsored funding)Provide instructions on how to justify the Provide instructions on how to justify the costs. costs.

Important AttachmentsImportant Attachments

Curriculum VitaeCurriculum Vitae

ComponentsComponentsAcademic preparationAcademic preparationPositions/AppointmentsPositions/AppointmentsAwards/ScholarshipsAwards/ScholarshipsSupervision of traineesSupervision of traineesGrantsGrantsCollaborationCollaborationPublicationsPublicationsPresentationsPresentations

Canadian Common CVCanadian Common CVhttp://http://www.commoncv.netwww.commoncv.net//

Letters of Support & CollaborationLetters of Support & Collaboration•Department and/or sponsor institution•Collaborating institutions•Community partners•Collaborating researchers

•Statement of support•Relevance of proposal to writer/department/institution•Summary of involvement•How the research results will be used

Quotes to Support BudgetQuotes to Support Budget

Include quotes for:Include quotes for:Consultants*Consultants*ServicesServicesEquipmentEquipmentSuppliesSupplies

*Fee for service consultation for grant funded projects *Fee for service consultation for grant funded projects is provided by the Fraser Health Epidemiologistis provided by the Fraser Health Epidemiologist

Research Ethics Board ApprovalResearch Ethics Board Approval

Some funding Some funding agencies require agencies require notice of REB notice of REB approvalapprovalSome will request Some will request approval before approval before funding is awardedfunding is awardedSome will request Some will request approval before funds approval before funds are releasedare released

http://www.fraserhealth.ca/Professionals/Research/Ethics/Pages/default.aspx

All done?All done?Proof read all documentsProof read all documentsHave someone else proof readHave someone else proof read

Grant facilitator Grant facilitator ColleagueColleagueLay personLay person

Check that all components have been assembledCheck that all components have been assembledObtain signaturesObtain signatures

Department HeadDepartment HeadFraser Health Signatory Fraser Health Signatory –– Geoff Geoff CramptonCrampton (3 days)(3 days)CoCo--applicant institutionapplicant institution

Make necessary number of copiesMake necessary number of copiesCourier or email application (retain routing slips/tracking Courier or email application (retain routing slips/tracking history)history)

Now you can take a breakNow you can take a break…………

….before the next grant deadline

The Review ProcessThe Review Process

FUNDING

The ReviewThe Review

Review of the ProposalReview of the ProposalSignificance and relevance to health Significance and relevance to health Knowledge of the field (cited literature)Knowledge of the field (cited literature)Clear, testable hypothesis or central research Clear, testable hypothesis or central research problem, appropriate methodsproblem, appropriate methodsOriginality and innovation in concept or Originality and innovation in concept or approachapproachFeasibility of work planFeasibility of work plan

The ReviewThe Review

Review of the ApplicantsReview of the ApplicantsQualifications and experienceQualifications and experienceTrack recordTrack record

Past grantsPast grantsPublicationsPublications

Supportive environmentSupportive environment

Example Example –– Reviewer ChecklistReviewer ChecklistRATIONALE, RELEVANCE, ORIGINALITYRATIONALE, RELEVANCE, ORIGINALITY

Does the proposal explain why this project should be Does the proposal explain why this project should be undertaken? (5 points)undertaken? (5 points)Does the preamble reflect an adequate review of the Does the preamble reflect an adequate review of the literature? (10 points)literature? (10 points)Is the project relevant to the funding program? (5 points)Is the project relevant to the funding program? (5 points)Is the proposed project original or unique in any respect Is the proposed project original or unique in any respect (is it a new problem or question? Does the research (is it a new problem or question? Does the research apply a new or unique study method or evaluation apply a new or unique study method or evaluation technique?) (5 points)technique?) (5 points)

Example Example –– Reviewer ChecklistReviewer ChecklistSIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCHSIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

a) A project scope of major tangible benefit to patient care (e.a) A project scope of major tangible benefit to patient care (e.g. g. potential impact on patient morbidity, mortality, an innovative potential impact on patient morbidity, mortality, an innovative program that advances direct patient care) (10points)program that advances direct patient care) (10points)b) A project scope of perceptible tangible benefit to patient cab) A project scope of perceptible tangible benefit to patient care re (e.g. retrospective reviews, compatibility studies, surveys) (5 (e.g. retrospective reviews, compatibility studies, surveys) (5 points)points)c) A project scope of limited impact on patient care. (1 point)c) A project scope of limited impact on patient care. (1 point)

(Select the one statement that you believe best describes the (Select the one statement that you believe best describes the significance of the proposed research) Please assign a score significance of the proposed research) Please assign a score between 1 and 10. (Examples below) between 1 and 10. (Examples below)

Example Example –– Reviewer ChecklistReviewer ChecklistRESEARCH HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVESRESEARCH HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVES

Are the objectives for the project clearly stated in terms of thAre the objectives for the project clearly stated in terms of the e end points or outcomes? (5 points)end points or outcomes? (5 points)

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGYDoes the proposal describe in sufficient clarity/detail the studDoes the proposal describe in sufficient clarity/detail the study y method to be used (8 points)method to be used (8 points)Is the described method valid for the stated objectives? (8 Is the described method valid for the stated objectives? (8 points)points)Are the sample population, sampling technique and sample Are the sample population, sampling technique and sample size valid and clearly described? (8 points)size valid and clearly described? (8 points)Is the proposed data analysis appropriate for the nature of the Is the proposed data analysis appropriate for the nature of the data collected (including statistical tests if appropriate) (8 data collected (including statistical tests if appropriate) (8 points)points)Is the study ethical, in so far as the potential risks and benefIs the study ethical, in so far as the potential risks and benefits its to the patients and/or society?(8 points)to the patients and/or society?(8 points)

Example Example –– Reviewer ChecklistReviewer ChecklistPERSONNEL AND FACILITIESPERSONNEL AND FACILITIES

Are the professional competencies and experiences of the Are the professional competencies and experiences of the principal principal investigator(sinvestigator(s) appropriate to carry out the work ) appropriate to carry out the work required? (5 points)required? (5 points)

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY, PROJECT SCOPE AND TIMETABLEECONOMIC EFFICIENCY, PROJECT SCOPE AND TIMETABLEAre all the necessary budget inputs defined and Are all the necessary budget inputs defined and costedcosted (e.g. (e.g. personnel, supplies, equipment)? (4 points)personnel, supplies, equipment)? (4 points)Do the amounts allocated to the various components of the Do the amounts allocated to the various components of the budget appear to be appropriate? (4 points)budget appear to be appropriate? (4 points)Has a proposed work plan been established identifying Has a proposed work plan been established identifying activities, activities, centrescentres of responsibility and target completion dates? of responsibility and target completion dates? (4 points)(4 points)Given the proposed work plan, does it appear reasonable that Given the proposed work plan, does it appear reasonable that the project can be completed within the stated timeframe? (3 the project can be completed within the stated timeframe? (3 points)points)

RangeRange DescriptorsDescriptors4.5 4.5 -- 4.94.9 outstandingoutstanding4.0 4.0 -- 4.4 4.4 excellentexcellent3.5 3.5 -- 3.93.9 very goodvery good3.0 3.0 -- 3.43.4 solid/significantsolid/significant2.5 2.5 -- 2.92.9 needs revisionneeds revision2.0 2.0 -- 2.42.4 needs major revisionneeds major revision1.0 1.0 -- 1.91.9 seriously flawedseriously flawed0 0 not acceptablenot acceptable

usually funded

may be fundedseldom funded

not fundable

CIHR Rating ScaleCIHR Rating Scale

CIHR StandardsCIHR StandardsALL GRANTS ARE RATED on a scale from 0 to 4.9, within descriptivALL GRANTS ARE RATED on a scale from 0 to 4.9, within descriptive e categories ranging from "seriously flawed" to "outstanding." Onlcategories ranging from "seriously flawed" to "outstanding." Only y applications rated 3.5 or higher are normally eligible for CIHR applications rated 3.5 or higher are normally eligible for CIHR funding.funding.Applications rated below 3.0 are flawed in some way, so that thApplications rated below 3.0 are flawed in some way, so that they do not ey do not

represent a good investment of public funds. represent a good investment of public funds. The range 3.0 to 3.5 is used for applications which, while technThe range 3.0 to 3.5 is used for applications which, while technically and ically and conceptually acceptable, are not considered to be a high prioritconceptually acceptable, are not considered to be a high priority for CIHR y for CIHR funding, perhaps because the topic is not considered relevant tofunding, perhaps because the topic is not considered relevant to an an important health issue, or because the work proposed seems unlikimportant health issue, or because the work proposed seems unlikely to ely to yield major advances in knowledge, or because the approach is noyield major advances in knowledge, or because the approach is not t particularly innovative. particularly innovative. Nevertheless, a proposal rated less than 3.0 may ultimately be fNevertheless, a proposal rated less than 3.0 may ultimately be fundable, undable, may even be approved for funding in a resubmission, if the may even be approved for funding in a resubmission, if the applicant(sapplicant(s) ) adequately addresses the reviewers' concerns. Scientific Officeradequately addresses the reviewers' concerns. Scientific Officers are asked s are asked to encourage applicants to resubmit these proposals if this is tto encourage applicants to resubmit these proposals if this is the case. he case. Conversely, some proposals, though initially rated highly, may bConversely, some proposals, though initially rated highly, may be limited in e limited in their originality, potential impact, and so on, that their ratintheir originality, potential impact, and so on, that their rating is unlikely to be g is unlikely to be increased above the competition cutincreased above the competition cut--off upon resubmission, even if the off upon resubmission, even if the applicant(sapplicant(s) address the reviewers' comments. ) address the reviewers' comments.

Common reviewer complaintsCommon reviewer complaintsForms are not complete or completed Forms are not complete or completed incorrectlyincorrectlyText is small, dense and difficult to read Text is small, dense and difficult to read ––does not conform with formatting guidelines does not conform with formatting guidelines Improper citations, pagination, table Improper citations, pagination, table references and other forms of poor references and other forms of poor organization organization Too much narrative with unnecessary or Too much narrative with unnecessary or irrelevant information. irrelevant information. Too much jargonToo much jargon

Why Proposals are RejectedWhy Proposals are Rejected

73%

55%

16%

58%

ApproachInvestigatorOtherProblem

University of Michigan Proposal Writer's Guide by Don Thackrey

http://www.research.umich.edu/proposals/PWG/pwgrejected.html?print

Approach (73 percent)Approach (73 percent)

The proposed tests, or methods, or scientific procedures are unsuited to the stated objective. (34.7) The description of the approach is too nebulous, diffuse, and lacking in clarity to permit adequate evaluation. (28.8) The overall design of the study has not been carefully thought out. (14.7) The statistical aspects of the approach have not been given sufficient consideration. (8.1) The approach lacks scientific imagination. (7.4) Controls are either inadequately conceived or inadequately described. (6.8) The material the investigator proposes to use is unsuited to theobjective of the study or is difficult to obtain. (3.8) The number of observations is unsuitable. (2.5) The equipment contemplated is outmoded or otherwise unsuitable. (1.0)

Why Proposals are RejectedWhy Proposals are Rejected

Why Proposals are RejectedWhy Proposals are RejectedProblem (58 percent)Problem (58 percent)

The problem is not of sufficient importance or is unlikely to produce any new or useful information. (33.1) The proposed research is based on a hypothesis that rests on insufficient evidence, is doubtful, or is unsound. (8.9) The problem is more complex than the investigator appears to realize. (8.1) The problem has only local significance, or is one of production or control, or otherwise fails to fall sufficiently clearly within the general field of health-related research. (4.8) The problem is scientifically premature and warrants, at most, only a pilot study. (3.1) The research as proposed is overly involved, with too many elements under simultaneous investigation. (3.0) The description of the nature of the research and of its significance leaves the proposal nebulous and diffuse and without a clear research aim. (2.6)

Investigator (55 percent)Investigator (55 percent)

The investigator does not have adequate experience or training for this research. (32.6) The investigator appears to be unfamiliar with recent pertinent literature or methods. (13.7) The investigator's previously published work in this field does not inspire confidence. (12.6) The investigator proposes to rely too heavily on insufficiently experienced associates. (5.0) The investigator is spreading himself too thin; he will be more productive if he concentrates on fewer projects. (3.8) The investigator needs more liaison with colleagues in this field or in collateral fields. (1.7)

Why Proposals are RejectedWhy Proposals are Rejected

Other (16 percent)Other (16 percent)

The requirements for equipment or personnel are unrealistic. (10.1) It appears that other responsibilities would prevent devotion ofsufficient time and attention to this research. (3.0) The institutional setting is unfavorable. (2.3) Research grants to the investigator, now in force, are adequate in scope and amount to cover the proposed research. (1.5)

Why Proposals are RejectedWhy Proposals are Rejected

The Rejected ProposalThe Rejected Proposal

Review commentsReview commentsIdentify areas for improvementIdentify areas for improvementMake changesMake changesResubmit to the same or another funding Resubmit to the same or another funding agencyagency

You might have a better chance of You might have a better chance of obtaining an award with subsequent obtaining an award with subsequent submissions, butsubmissions, but……....

…………you have to be in the game to win!you have to be in the game to win!

Practical ExercisePractical Exercise