April 6, 2006 1Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
TAMU-C Proposal Writing Workshop If you don’t write grants, you won’t get any Presented by Mike Cronan, PE, Director, Office of
Proposal Development, Texas A&M University Introductory Tips on Proposal Writing Social & Behavioral Sciences & Education Funding
Agencies (NSF, NIH, DoED, HHS) Developing Partnerships in Math, Science & Education Research Funding Advice & Strategies for Junior Faculty,
or Faculty Transitioning Research to New Areas 8:30 to 2:30 (lunch will be served) 2:30 to 4:30 Individual PI meetings with Mike
Cronan Mayo Room, 2rd floor, Memorial Student Center OPD WEB: http://opd.tamu.edu/
April 6, 2006 2Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Office of Proposal Development
Unit of Vice President for Research Office;
Supports faculty in the development and writing of research and educational proposals: center-level initiatives, multidisciplinary research teams, research affinity groups, junior faculty research, diversity in the research enterprise.
April 6, 2006 3Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Office of Proposal Development, OPD-WEB
OPD-WEB (http://opd.tamu.edu/) is an interactive tool and faculty resource for the development and writing of competitive research and educational proposals to federal agencies and foundations: Funding opportunities (http://opd.tamu.edu
/funding-opportunities)
Junior faculty support (http://opd.tamu.edu/resources-for-junior-faculty)
Proposal resources (http://opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources)
Grant writing seminars (http://opd.tamu.edu/seminar-materials)
Grant writing workbook (http://opd.tamu.edu/the-craft-of-writing-workbook)
PI Observations
April 6, 2006 4Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Members, Office of Proposal Development Jean Ann Bowman, ecological and environmental sciences/
agriculture-related proposals and centers, [email protected]; Libby Childress, Scheduling, resources, training workshop
management, project coordination, [email protected]; Mike Cronan, center-level proposals, A&M System partnerships,
new proposal and training initiatives, [email protected]; Lucy Deckard, New faculty initiative, fellowships, physical
science-related proposals, equipment and instrumentation, interdisciplinary materials group, OPD web management [email protected];
John Ivy (June 1), biomedical & health related initiatives, NIH Phyllis McBride, craft of proposal writing training, NIH and
related agency initiatives in the biomedical, social and behavioral sciences; editing and rewriting, [email protected];
Robyn Pearson, Education, social & behavioral sciences, and humanities-related proposals, interdisciplinary research groups, editing and rewriting, [email protected]
April 6, 2006 5Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Presenter Background Mike Cronan, P.E., has 15 years experience at Texas A&M
University in planning, developing, and writing successful center-level research and educational proposals.
Author of > $60 million in System-wide proposals funded by NSF: Texas AMP, Texas RSI, South Texas RSI, Texas Collaborative for Excellence in Teacher Preparation, CREST Environmental Research Center, Information Technology in Science, CLT.
Named Regents Fellow (2000-04) by the Board of Regents for his leadership role in developing and writing NSF funded research and educational partnerships across the A&M System.
B.S., Civil Engineering (Structures), University of Michigan, 1983
M.F.A., English, University of California, Irvine, 1972 B.A., Political Science, Michigan State University, 1968 Registered Professional Engineer (Texas 063512, inactive) http://opd.tamu.edu/people
April 6, 2006 6Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Open Forum, Q&A Format
Audience is encouraged to ask questions continuously;
Audience questions will help direct, guide, and focus the discussion on proposal topics.
April 6, 2006 7Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Generic Competitive Strategies
Understanding the mission, strategic plan, investment priorities, culture, and review criteria of a funding agency will enhance the competitiveness of a proposal.
Knowledge about a funding agency helps the applicant make good decisions throughout the entire proposal development and writing process.
April 6, 2006 8Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Analysis of the funding agency Know the audience (e.g., program
officers, reviewers) and the best way to address them.
Identify a fundable idea and characterized it within the context of the agency research investment priorities.
Communicate your passion, excitement, commitment, and capacity to perform the proposed research to review panels.
April 6, 2006 9Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Develop Agency Specific Knowledge Base
Electronic Funding Alert Services / Email Alerts
http://opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/electronic-funding-alert-services-email-alerts
Grants.gov http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/search/subscribeAll.do
MYNSF http://opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/electronic-funding-alert-services-
email-alerts
NIH National Institutes of Health Listserv http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/listserv.htm
U.S. Dept. of Education, EDINFO http://listserv.ed.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind05&L=edinfo
April 6, 2006 10Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Writing a competitive proposal
Preparing to write Developing hypothesis & research plan Preliminary data & background data Writing the proposal
April 6, 2006 11Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Preparing to write a competitive proposal
Develop a sound, testable hypothesis Ask other faculty to review proposal for competitiveness
of ideas and appropriateness to agency Understand the program guidelines (RFP) Relationship with program officers (e.g., NIH/NSF) Understand funding agency culture, language, mission,
strategic plan, research investment priorities (e.g. NIH Roadmap, NSF Strategic Plan)
Understand the agency review criteria, review process, & review panels (http://opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources/understanding-the-proposal-review-process-by-agency)
April 6, 2006 12Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Developing the hypothesis & research plan
Review research currently funded by an agency within your research domain (e.g., reports, abstracts)
Communicate your research passion and capacity to perform to reviewers
Know your audience (e.g., agency, program officers, reviewers)
Explain how your research fits the agency; Support claims of research uniqueness and innovation Build on your research expertise Do not present overly ambitious research plans
April 6, 2006 13Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Preliminary data & background data Present evidence of “research readiness” to show
the proposed work can be accomplished Present evidence of institutional support for the
research (e.g., facilities, equipment & instrumentation)
Know what counts as preliminary and background data and how much is sufficient
Map your research directions and interests to funding agency research priorities (e.g. NIH Roadmap)
April 6, 2006 14Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Writing the proposal
Tell a good story grounded in good science that excites the reviewers and program officers
Ensuring the proposal is competitive for funding— Proposal Form
Use program guidelines as a proposal templateUse program guidelines as a proposal template Good writing, clear arguments, reviewer friendly Good writing, clear arguments, reviewer friendly
text (text (don’t make reviewers workdon’t make reviewers work), organization, ), organization, figures, etc.figures, etc.
Proposal Content
April 6, 2006 15Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
If you don’t write grants, you won’t get any – Important to have your proposal targeted.
Look for the intersection of: where research dollars are available; your technical interests; and where you can write a competitive proposal
within the time you have available. Researchers have a lot of great ideas but if
not in scope of the agency it will not be funded;
For proposals that have RFPs, or others that are blue sky, unsolicited research, the key is to have a good idea that you are enough of an entrepreneur to sell someone else that it is a good idea and worthy of funding.
April 6, 2006 16Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
If you don’t write grants, you won’t get any
Get someone who writes well to read your proposal for coherence and “hook” and to review the writing,
Remember your reviewers are broader in scope than your one proposal and if you get too technical you get too many reviewers that don’t understand;
Some think if you submit your best idea it will be stolen but if you submit your second best idea it won’t be funded .
April 6, 2006 17Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal Relates to purposes & goals of the applicant
agency. Adheres to the content and format guidelines of
the applicant agency. Establish your major points succinctly &
repeatedly. Directed toward the appropriate audience--i.e.,
those who review the proposal. Write for technically diverse reviewers;
intelligent readers, not experts Avoid unnecessary complexity and technical
minutia
April 6, 2006 18Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal Addresses the review criteria of the funding
agency. Interesting to read; compelling ideas; conveys
excitement to reviewers. Uses a clear, concise, coherent writing style,
free of jargon, superfluous information, and undefined acronyms -- i.e., easy to read.
Organized in a logical manner that is easy to follow; use RFP as an organizational template.
Use of figures, graphs, charts, and other visuals.
Proofread so it is free of grammatical errors, misspellings, & typos.
April 6, 2006 19Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal Clear, concise, informative abstract that stands
alone and serves as roadmap to the narrative. Clearly stated goals and objectives not buried in
a morass of dense narrative densely formatted. Clearly documents the need to be met or
problems to be solved by the proposed project. Indicates that the project's hypotheses rest on
sufficient evidence and are conceptually sound. Clearly describes who will do the work (who),
the methods that will be employed (how), which facilities or location will be used (where), and a timetable of performance outcomes (when).
April 6, 2006 20Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal
Justifies the significance and/or contribution of the project on current scientific knowledge.
Includes appropriate and sufficient citations to prior work, ongoing studies, and related literature.
Establishes the competence and scholarship PI
Does not assume that reviewers "know what you mean."
April 6, 2006 21Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal Makes no unsupported assumptions. Discusses potential pitfalls & alternative
approaches. Plan for evaluating data or the success of
project. Is of reasonable scope; not overly ambitious. Work can be accomplished in the time allotted. Demonstrates that PIs and the organization
are qualified to perform the proposed project; Does not assume that the applicant agency
"knows all about you."
April 6, 2006 22Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal
Includes vitae which demonstrate the credentials required (e.g., do not use promotion and tenure vitae replete with institutional committee assignments for a research proposal.)
Documents facilities necessary for the success of the project.
Includes necessary letters of support and other supporting documentation.
Includes a bibliography of cited references.
April 6, 2006 23Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Elements of a Successful Proposal Budget Has a budget which corresponds to the
narrative: all major elements detailed in the budget are described in the narrative and vice versa.
Has a budget sufficient to perform the tasks described in the narrative.
Has a budget which corresponds to the applicant agency's guidelines with respect to content and detail, including a budget justification if required.
The forgoing list was collected from various sources, including Rebecca Claycamp, assistant chair, Department of Chemistry, University of Pittsburgh
April 6, 2006 24Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Social & Behavioral Sciences & Education Funding Agencies (NSF, NIH, HHS, DoED)
Gain a better understanding of each agency
Agency cultures Competitive strategies Comparisons among and between
agencies Review processes Strategies for developing
multidisciplinary proposals
April 6, 2006 25Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Types of Research Agencies & Research
Basic research agencies (NIH, NSF);
Mission-focused agencies (DoED);
Hypothesis-driven research; Need- or applications driven
research at agencies. http://opd.tamu.edu/the-craft-of-grant-writing-workbook/m
anual/the-craft-of-grant-writing-workbook/analyzing-funding-agencies
April 6, 2006 26Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
National Institutes of Health It is interesting to get the "other side of the story"
especially with respect to funding priorities and how they can change very quickly given specific research findings (not that the funding is immediately available for new projects, but more like decisions are made quickly about how to re-prioritize).
Funding is definitely tight at NIH right now and will
be for the next few years. Applications have to be exemplary and very much tied to the current strategic plan of each institute and center. I guess that's what you guys have been preaching for some time....it just seems particularly relevant now. Susan E. Maier, Ph.D., Office of Scientific Affairs, NIH/NIAAA (prior
OPD)
April 6, 2006 27Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH Reference Toolkit All About NIH Grants, Writing the R01
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm Annotated R01 Grant Application and Summary
Statement http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/app/default.htm
How to Write a NIH Grant Application http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/write/write_pf.htm
Advice for New Investigators: Who is a New Investigator?
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/plan/plan_i1.htm http://www.training.nih.gov/careers/careercenter/grants.html
Develop a Strong Hypothesis http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/plan/plan_c1.htm
Research Plan Section a. Specific Aims http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/write/write_j1.htm
Proposal Writing: The Business of Science (NIH) http://www.whitaker.org/sanders.html
NIH Grant Writing Handbook, Univ. Pennsylvania http://www.med.upenn.edu/rpd/documents/gwm.pdf
April 6, 2006 28Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Social Work Links: HHS, NIH & others HHS Funding (http://www.hhs.gov/grants/index.shtml
) HHS Funding for Women’s Health (
http://www.4woman.gov/fund/) HHS Funding Opportunities, ACF (
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/grant/fundingopportunities/fundopport.htm) HHS Office of Community Services Funding (
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_ocs.html) Research on Social Work Practice and Concepts
in Health (R01) (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-081.html)
Research on Social Work Practice and Concepts in Health (R03) (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-082.html)
GWB School of Social Work, Washington Univ. (http://gwbweb.wustl.edu/library/websites.html)
A Guide to Internet Resources in Social Work (http://www.abacon.com/internetguides/social/weblinks.html);
April 6, 2006 29Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Social Work Links: HHS & others Social Work Internet Resources (http://
www.hshsl.umaryland.edu/resources/socialwork.html)
Institute for Advancement of Social Work Research (http://www.charityadvantage.com/iaswr/TechnicalResources.asp)
Ball State Social Funding (http://www.bsu.edu/oarsp/pubs/htmlnewsltr/dec2003/social.htm)
LSU Health Science Center Funding (http://nursing.lsuhsc.edu/ResearchAndEvaluation/Research/FundingOpportunities.html)
CNDC Funding (http://www.cndc2.org/funding_opportunities.htm#recent)
April 6, 2006 30Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Selected Slides for NIH
April 6, 2006 31Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 32Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 33Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 34Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 35Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 36Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH: Don't Propose Too Much Sharpen the focus of your application.
Novice applicants often overshoot their mark, proposing too much.
Make sure the scale of your hypothesis and aims fits your request of time and resources.
Reviewers will quickly pick up on how well matched these elements are.
Your hypothesis should be provable and aims doable with the resources you are requesting.
April 6, 2006 37Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH: Develop a Solid Hypothesis Many top-notch NIH grant applications are
driven by strong hypotheses rather than advances in technology (NSF, DoD counterpoint).
Think of your hypothesis as the foundation of your application -- the conceptual underpinning on which the entire structure rests.
Generally applications should ask questions that prove or disprove a hypothesis rather than use a method to search for a problem or simply collect information.
April 6, 2006 38Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH: Develop a Solid Hypothesis Choose an important, testable, focused
hypothesis that increases understanding of biologic processes, diseases, treatments, or preventions.
It should be based on previous research. State your hypothesis in both the specific aims section of the research plan and the abstract.
Avoid a fishing expedition. Reviewers see many grants that did not have a hypothesis; rather, the investigator was obviously hoping that something interesting would pop up in the course of his or her investigation. That sort of approach is not appealing to a study section.
April 6, 2006 39Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH: Applications Driven Research
A new trend is pushing NIH toward more applied research.
Especially in key areas, such as studies of organisms used for bioterrorism, NIH is turning more to applications seeking to discover basic biology or develop or use a new technology.
If your application is not hypothesis-based, state this in your cover letter and give the reasons why the work is important.
April 6, 2006 40Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Section a. Specific Aims Your specific aims are the objectives of your research
project, what you want to accomplish, and your project milestones.
Write this section for audiences, primary reviewers and other reviewers, since they'll all read it.
Choose aims reviewers can easily assess. Your aims are the accomplishments by which the success
of your project is measured. Recommended length of this section is one page. A common mistake new applicants make is being too
ambitious. You should probably limit your proposal to three to four specific aims.
Design your specific aims and experiments so they answer the question posed by the hypothesis. Organize and define your aims so you can relate them directly to your research methods.
April 6, 2006 41Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH: Investigator-initiated review criteria
Significance Does the study address an important problem?
Approach Are the design and methods appropriate to the address
the aims? Innovation
Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches, methods?
Investigator Is the investigator appropriately trained to carry out
the study? Environment
Will the scientific environment contribute to the probability of success?
April 6, 2006 42Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Developing Partnerships in Mathematics, Science & Education
There are three general categories of grants made to universities by federal agencies that include educational partnership components: research grants, integrated research and education grants, and
education grants.
April 6, 2006 43Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Key Partnership Infrastructures
Developing educational partnerships or partnerships to address agency specific educational and outreach components to research proposals, include: institutional commitment to the effort resources available on campus, effective models, evaluation and assessment capacities, defining long term objectives and
outcomes.
April 6, 2006 44Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Required Educational Partnerships Increasingly, principal investigators are
required by federal research agencies, most notably the National Science Foundation, to address educational or related activities in research proposals.
At NSF, this requirement derives from two agency-wide priorities: 1) the agency strategy for the integration of research and education and 2) the broader impacts review criterion (http://opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources/broaderimpacts/main.html).
However, many researchers struggle with the boarder impacts requirement, and often seek help in developing this section of the proposal and implementing and evaluating it if funded.
April 6, 2006 45Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Educational Partnership Topics
Topics will include: Developing and writing educational
components to research grants, Developing and writing any required
evaluation and assessment components; Linking to successful broader impacts
models, Linking to other groups on campus that
can implement the required broader impacts or educational components to research grants
April 6, 2006 46Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Define Community of Interest
Researchers Providers of educational components Providers of educational component
models Providers of evaluation and
assessment Writers of educational components
of research grants
April 6, 2006 47Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Define Educational Components by Agency National Science Foundation
Broader Impacts criterion Research-education integration core strategy Societal impacts
National Institutions of Health Educational objectives mostly separate
programs NASA Education and Public Outreach
http://science.hq.nasa.gov/research/epo.htm http://ssibroker.colorado.edu/Broker/Eval_criteria/
Guide/Default.htm
Energy, NOAA, Others
April 6, 2006 48Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NSF Broader Impacts
The advance of discovery and understanding;
Improvement of the participation of underrepresented groups;
Enhancement of the education/research infrastructure;
Broad dissemination of results; and Benefits of the activity to society at large. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf032/
bicexamples.pdf
April 6, 2006 49Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
1. Tips on Developing Partnerships
Fully committed PI with institutional support Beware “good idea” that lacks
institutional advocate Analysis of the RFP Assemble proposal development team Partnerships/collaboratives are often
more competitive Ensure team members "brings
something to the table"
April 6, 2006 50Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
2. Tips on Developing Partnerships
Clearly define reasons for and nature of partnership
State concise benefits of the partnership
Review each team member's relevance to the RFP
Develop major concepts specific to each RFP item
April 6, 2006 51Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
3. Tips on Developing Partnerships
Develop strong arguments specific to each RFP item or objective
Integrate specific objectives into overarching vision or strategic plan
Integrate evaluation and assessment (http://opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources/online-project-evaluation-assessment-resources-for-principal-investigators)
April 6, 2006 52Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
4. Tips on Developing Partnerships
Initial teaming process and brainstorming will not be linear
Distill concepts and arguments into linear presentation
Converge drafts and interactions to final text
April 6, 2006 53Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Research Funding Advice & Strategies for Junior Faculty & Other Researchers
How to be successful in winning funding early in your research career;
Special challenges and opportunities available to new faculty as they work to establish their research program and to compete for federal research funding;
NSF, NIH and related Young Faculty CAREER awards
April 6, 2006 54Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
1. How to be successful in winning funding Critical to gain as much informal insight
into funding situation as possible; Each agency has its own culture, its own
track. Your research should be what you love – not just what is popular;
Make yourself known in the scientific community and to reviewers. Give talks at meetings, seminars – know how
to be politically savvy and engaged with peer community;
Make your scientific enterprise work for you; Publish
April 6, 2006 55Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
2. How to be successful in winning funding Experience working with large
interdisciplinary teams. Different agencies have a different view of research.
Choose your opportunities carefully – it’s easy to see your own research interests in many different solicitations, but you have to do your homework and review the agency, the solicitations, and look for related workshops and primary documents that have led to the solicitations.
Particularly at NSF, know your program manager. Don’t hesitate to call.
April 6, 2006 56Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
3. How to be successful in winning funding
As junior faculty, if you have start-up funds, you want to spend some of that to develop preliminary data to develop your track record. Use it as a foundation to move forward.
The role of mentors is critical. Some junior faculty just need the support. Learning how to write, learning about the agency. What does the RFP really mean?
April 6, 2006 57Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
4. How to be successful in winning funding It is crucial to read the RFP very carefully.
Write to the RFP. You have to respond to every item.
Proposals take a lot of effort. Don’t lose because of some overlooked requirement.
Get help from others who have read the RFP or who have funding already.
Your summary or abstract is critical. That can be what sells your proposal – makes reviewers want to keep reading. It should include all the critical points of your proposal.
April 6, 2006 58Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
5. How to be successful in winning funding At NSF, it is very important to know the
program officers. They have power. They keep up with trends in their field. They need to know your name. They’ll work with you.
However, just because you know the PD doesn’t guarantee funding. There are checks and balances at NSF. There’s still a peer review process. It is a professional relationship, and it’s objective. Just getting along with the program officer won’t turn bad science into good science.
April 6, 2006 59Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
6. How to be successful in winning funding
Consider writing a white paper first, particularly for unsolicited proposals to NSF, defense agencies or others.
Call the program manager – often there is money set aside. They’re looking for new ideas, but won’t just fund a cold proposal. Send the white paper and ask if they’re interested or if they know someone who might be.
This saves you time and gives you a reasonable chance of getting funded.
A white paper is a broad-brushed outline – what you will gain and why it will be successful and how you’ll do it, and rough costs.
April 6, 2006 60Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
7. How to be successful in winning funding It is informative to look at what has been
funded before, especially if you’re having trouble finding out what the RFP means.
Also, you can see workshop documents, etc. You can prepare by going to workshops – get to know the research community and the program directors.
If you’re involved in the planning of future directions, you’re in a better position for future funding. Might be difficult for a young faculty, but certainly should do this as your career develops.
April 6, 2006 61Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
8. How to be successful in winning funding A common mistake among young investigators is
to combine 3 projects into what should be only one. Focus is the key term – write a blue sky section at the end, if you like, talking about what your plans are for the future.
It doesn’t matter how good your idea is; if it is not well presented, it won’t get funded. The opposite is also true; no matter how well written a proposal is, if the science isn’t there, it won’t get funded. You have to have both form and content.
If your proposal has grammatical errors or is hard to follow, it can indicate sloppy research to reviewers.
April 6, 2006 62Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Twelve Steps To A Winning Research Proposal by George A. Hazelrigg, NSF
I have been an NSF program director for 18 years. During this time, I have personally administered the review of some 3,000 proposals and been involved in the review of perhaps another 10,000. Through this experience, I have come to see that often there are real differences between winning proposals and losing proposals. The differences are clear. Largely, they are not subjective differences or differences of quality; to a large extent, losing proposals are just plain missing elements that are found in winning proposals.
April 6, 2006 63Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
1. Know yourself: (Back) Know your area of expertise, what are your
strengths and what are your weaknesses. Play to your strengths, not to your weaknesses. Do not assume that, because you do not understand an area, no one understands it or that there has been no previous research conducted in the area.
If you want to get into a new area of research, learn something about the area before you write a proposal. Research previous work. Be a scholar.
April 6, 2006 64Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
2. Know program from which you seek support: You are responsible for finding the appropriate
program for support of your research. Don’t leave this task up to someone else. If you are not absolutely certain which program is appropriate, call the program officer to find out.
Never submit a proposal to a program if you are not certain that it is the correct program to support your area of research.
Proposals submitted inappropriately to programs may be returned without review, transferred to other programs where they are likely to be declined, or simply trashed in the program to which you submit. In any case, you have wasted your time writing a proposal that has no chance of success from the get-go.
April 6, 2006 65Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
3. Read the program announcement: Programs and special activities have
specific goals and specific requirements. If you don’t meet those goals and requirements, you have thrown out your chance of success.
Read the announcement for what it says, not for what you want it to say.
If your research does not fit easily within the scope of the topic areas outlined, your chance of success is nil.
April 6, 2006 66Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
4. Formulate an appropriate research objective:
A research proposal is a proposal to conduct research, not to conduct development or design or some other activity. Research is a methodical process of building upon previous knowledge to derive or discover new knowledge, that is, something that isn’t known before the research is conducted.
In formulating a research objective, be sure that it hasn’t been proven impossible (for example, “My research objective is to find a geometric construction to trisect an angle”), that it is doable within a reasonable budget and in a reasonable time, that you can do it, and that it is research, not development.
April 6, 2006 67Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
5. Develop a viable research plan: A viable research plan is a plan to accomplish your
research objective that has a non-zero probability of success. The focus of the plan must be to accomplish the research objective. In some cases, it is appropriate to validate your results. In such cases, a valid validation plan should be part of your research plan.
If there are potential difficulties lurking in your plan, do not hide from them, but make them clear and, if possible, suggest alternative approaches to achieving your objective.
A good research plan lays out step-by-step the approach to accomplishment of the research objective. It does not gloss over difficult areas with statements like, “We will use computers to accomplish this solution.”
April 6, 2006 68Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
6. State research objective clearly in proposal: A good research proposal includes a clear
statement of the research objective. Early in the proposal is better than later in the proposal. The first sentence of the proposal is a good place. A good first sentence might be, “The research objective of this proposal is...” Do not use the word “develop” in the statement of your research objective. It is, after all, supposed to be a research objective, not a development objective.
Many proposals include no statement of the research objective whatsoever. The vast majority of these are not funded. Remember that a research proposal is not a research paper.
Do not spend the first 10 pages building up suspense over what is the research objective.
April 6, 2006 69Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
7. Frame project around the work of others: Remember that research builds on the extant
knowledge base, that is, upon the work of others. Be sure to frame your project appropriately, acknowledging the current limits of knowledge and making clear your contribution to the extension of these limits.
Be sure that you include references to the extant work of others. Proposals that include references only to the work of the principal investigator stand a negligible probability of success.
Also frame your project in terms of its broader impact to the field and to society. Describe the benefit to society if your project is successful. A good statement is, “If successful, the benefits of this research will be...”
April 6, 2006 70Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
8. Grammar and spelling count: Proposals are not graded on grammar. But if the
grammar is not perfect, the result is ambiguities left to the reviewer to resolve.
Ambiguities make the proposal difficult to read and often impossible to understand, and often result in low ratings. Be sure your grammar is perfect.
Also be sure every word is correctly spelled. If the word you want to use is not in the spell checker, consider carefully its use. Not in the spell checker usually means that most people won’t understand it. With only very special exceptions, it is not advisable to use words that are not in the spell checker. Reviewers used to say, “He’s just an engineer. Don’t mind the fact that he can’t spell.” Now they say, “He’s proposing to do complex computer modeling, but he doesn’t know how to use the spell checker...”
April 6, 2006 71Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
9. Format and brevity are important:
Do not feel that your proposal is rated based on its weight. Do not do your best to be as verbose as possible, to cover
every conceivable detail, to use the smallest permissible fonts, and to get the absolute most out of each sheet of paper.
Reviewers hate being challenged to read densely prepared text or to read obtusely prepared matter. Use 12 point fonts, use easily legible fonts, use generous margins. Take pity on the reviewers. Make your proposal a pleasant reading experience that puts important concepts up front and makes them clear. Use figures appropriately to make and clarify points, but not as filler.
Remember, you are writing this proposal to the reviewers, not to yourself. Remember that exceeding page limits or other format criteria, even marginally, can disqualify your proposal from consideration.
April 6, 2006 72Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
10. Know the review process: Know how your proposal will be reviewed before you write
it. Proposals that are reviewed by panels must be written to a broader audience than proposals that will be reviewed by mail. Mail review can seek out reviewers with very specific expertise in very narrow disciplines. This is not possible in panels. Know approximately how many proposals will be reviewed with yours and plan not to overburden the reviewers with minutia. Keep in mind that, the more proposals a panel considers, the more difficult it will be for panelists to remember specific details of your proposal.
Remember, the main objective here is to write your proposal to get it through the review process successfully. It is not the objective of your proposal to brag about yourself or your research, nor is it the objective to seek to publish your proposal.
Again, your proposal is a proposal, it is not a research paper.
April 6, 2006 73Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
11. Proof read your proposal before it is sent:
Many proposals are sent out with idiotic mistakes, omissions, and errors of all sorts.
NSF program managers have seen proposals come in with research schedules pasted in from other proposals unchanged, with dates referring to the stone age and irrelevant research tasks. Proposals have been submitted with the list of references omitted and with the references not referred to. Proposals have been submitted to the wrong program. Proposals have been submitted with misspellings in the title.
These proposals were not successful. Stupid things like this kill a proposal. It is easy to catch them with a simple, but careful, proof reading. Don’t spend six or eight weeks writing a proposal just to kill it with stupid mistakes that are easily prevented.
April 6, 2006 74Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
12. Submit your proposal on time:
Duh? Why work for two months on a proposal just to have it disqualified for being late? Remember, fairness dictates that proposal submission rules must apply to everyone. It is not up to the discretion of the program officer to grant you dispensation on deadlines. That would be unfair to everyone else, and it could invalidate the entire competition. Equipment failures, power outages, hurricanes and tornadoes, and even internal problems at your institution are not valid excuses. As adults, you are responsible for getting your proposal in on time. If misfortune befalls you, it’s tough luck. Don’t take chances. Get your proposal in two or three days before the deadline.
April 6, 2006 75Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Improve your prospects for success as an academic researcher (by George A. Hazelrigg, NSF)
There are two more things that you can do to vastly improve your prospects for success as an academic researcher.
First, you have to know yourself as well as you can. Who are you? Where are you going? Where do you want to go? I strongly urge people, especially young faculty just starting their careers, to write a strategic plan for their life. Where are you today? Where do you want to be in five years, ten years, twenty years?
Then create a roadmap of how to get from where you are to where you want to be in the future. The focus of this roadmap should be the things over which you have control, and it should acknowledge the things over which you have no control. If you can’t write such a plan, then your goals for the future are not realistic. You can revise the plan as often as you wish. But the fact that the plan exists will influence your proposal in a very positive way, as it will place the research project you propose into the broad context of your life plan.
April 6, 2006 76Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Resources for Junior Faculty
Resources for Junior Faculty http://opd.tamu.edu/resources-for-junior-faculty
Funding for Junior Faculty http://opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/funding-
opportunities-by-category/programs-for-junior-faculty.html
April 6, 2006 77Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Early Career Programs for Faculty (Back) NSF CAREER DoD
Young Investigator (ONR, ARL) Congressionally Mandated Directed Medical
Research Programs Young Investigator NASA New Investigator Program in Earth-
Sun Systems NIH
Scientist Development Award for New Minority Faculty
Career Development Awards (K-awards) Esp. Career Transition (K22) AwardEsp. Career Transition (K22) Award
NIAMS Small Grants Program for New Investigators
April 6, 2006 78Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Early Career Programs for Faculty Foundations
Burroughs Wellcome Fund PhRMA Foundation Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Early Career Fellowship
in Economic Studies Kellogg Forum Rising Stars, etc.
Professional organization “early career” or “young investigator” programs American Philosophical Society – Franklin Research
Grants Listing of Programs
http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/Fund/newfaculty.html
April 6, 2006 79Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NSF CAREER Program Duration: 5 years Funding level: “minimum” $400K total (except min.
$500K total for BIO directorate) Eligibility:
Have a PhD Untenured, holding tenure-track Asst. Prof. position or
equivalent Have not competed in CAREER more than two times
previously Have not won a CAREER award
Due: July 19 – 21 depending on directorate Typical 10 – 20% success rate Solicitation: http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?
ods_key=nsf05579
April 6, 2006 80Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Key Points for CAREER
Career Development Plan to “build a firm foundation for a lifetime of integrated contributions to research and education” Where is your field going over the next 20
years? What will help you become established at
national level? Establish that you have the experience and
resources to accomplish what you propose
April 6, 2006 81Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Key Points (cont’d) Integrated Education Plan
Along with Broader Impacts, often the discriminator among many technically good proposals
Looking for innovative approaches to integrating education and research
Use strategic approach; don’t overburden yourself with unreasonable education workload
Do what interests you, makes sense for your project
Be sure to address diversity issues
April 6, 2006 82Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Key Points (cont’d)
Outreach and Broader Impacts Broaden participation of under-rep. groups Dissemination Societal benefits Improve infrastructure for research Discuss throughout proposal AND in
separate section in both Project Summary and Description
Connect to existing programs (ITS Center, Research Experiences for Teachers, Research Experiences for Undergraduates, Rural Systemic Initiatives, etc. - more later)
April 6, 2006 83Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Review Criteria
Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts equally weighted
Must show you have the skills to carry out the project Collaboration helpful, especially if
moving into new area; need letter saying you are collaborating (no co-PIs)
If moving into new area explain why this area should be investigated
Data from your prior work good idea Publications in area greatly improves
competitiveness
April 6, 2006 84Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Review Criteria
Support from your department is critical Highlight benefits of your project to the
department (does it add important capabilities, fit in with department’s strategic plan, bring in new infrastructure?)
Discuss any connections to NSF priority areas, even if peripheral
State benefits of your research clearly Why is it important? How will it advance knowledge in field? Societal benefits
Be sure to emphasize integration of education and research
April 6, 2006 85Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
“Strengths of Successful Proposals
Novel or high-impact research focus Innovative research plan Education plan is well-developed,
integrated with research and includes some consideration of evaluating its success
Education plan goes beyond routine course development expected of all assistant professors”
Quoted from J. Tornow presentation at QEM Workshop
http://qemnetwork.qem.org:16080/tornow_presentation/Joanne.htm
April 6, 2006 86Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
“Weaknesses of Unsuccessful CAREER Proposals
Research is either too ambitious or too narrowly focused
Proposed methods do not address the stated research goals
Educational component is either limited to routine courses or is unrealistically overambitious
Integration of research and education is weak or uninspired”
Quoted from J. Tornow presentation at QEM Workshophttp://qemnetwork.qem.org:16080/tornow_presentation/
Joanne.htm
April 6, 2006 87Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Typical CAREER Review Process
Program director identifies 3 to 6 reviewers with expertise in technical area Note: PI can suggest reviewers Advantage if reviewers are familiar with PI or PI’s
advisor Proposal mailed to reviewers, who focus on
technical merit Does research address an important question in the
field? Is research innovative and exciting? Is it likely that the researcher will be successful in
reaching her/his goals Are researcher’s goals and methods clear? May evaluate education, broader impacts but not main
focus
April 6, 2006 88Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Typical Review Process After mail reviews, proposal reviewed by
panel at NSF How well does proposed work integrate education
with research? Is education plan innovative and does it make sense
for project? What are broader impacts? How well does project promote diversity? Balance of topics of funded projects (i.e., won’t fund
10 projects in same area) Process varies by directorate
For example, Physics directorate does not have mail reviews
April 6, 2006 89Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Coming up with a Research Idea What do you want to do? Does it address important questions in your
field? Is it novel and cutting-edge
Not incremental improvement or refinement of established research
Where is your field going in the next 20 years?
Do you have the background and resources to accomplish your goals? If you are moving into a new but related area, be sure you
discuss collaborations with researchers who will fill any gaps
Will it contribute to your career goals? Will it contribute to your department’s goals?
Important: Talk to your department head and research departmental goals!
April 6, 2006 90Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Next Step – Strategic Info Gathering
Determine which NSF program to submit your proposal to.
Extremely important! Submitting to wrong program can doom good proposal.
Do this by e-mailing or calling program director. Have a paragraph summary of your proposed
research prepared. Use NSF web site
Search awarded CAREER projects in directorate Check program goals
Talk to senior researchers in the area: where are they funded?
April 6, 2006 91Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
General Writing Advice Follow directions! (See solicitation, Grant
Proposal Guide)
Make it easy to read and understand Reviewer may be scanning your
proposal on an airplane Use bullets, tables, graphs, illustrations
as much as possible – this is what they will look at first
Watch your font; the Grant Proposal Guide gives rules on minimum font size. Best to stay at 12 pt for readability
April 6, 2006 92Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
General Writing Advice (cont’d)
Make the main points easy to find Put them at the beginning of the
paragraph Use underline, bold, white space, etc.
Specifically state all benefits of your project Even if it’s obvious to you, may not be
obvious to reviewer outside your area
Communicate your excitement!
April 6, 2006 93Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Summary (1 page)
Clearly address intellectual merit and broader impacts separately (and label them) – if you don’t , your proposal will be returned without review!
This is a sales document and may be the only thing the reviewer will read Must pique the reviewer’s interest State up front the advantages of your project
(technical, societal, diversity, etc.) – don’t be shy!
Summary should be clear and easy to read; spend a lot of time on this!
April 6, 2006 94Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description (15 pages)
Description of proposed research project Description of proposed educational
activities Description of how research and
educational activites are integrated Results of Prior NSF support, if applicable
(5 pgs max) Last 5 years Report on only one program (most
closely related)
April 6, 2006 95Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description
Objectives and Significance Relation of research to current state of
knowledge Outline of Plan of Work including
evaluation of education activities Relation of plan to career goals and
responsibilities Relation of plan to department goals Prior Research and Education
Accomplishments
April 6, 2006 96Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description Objectives and Significance of Plan
State your objectives clearly and at the beginning; include education goals
Describe briefly how your plan will advance knowledge in the field, improve education, provide societal benefits, etc.
Background – relationship of research to current state of knowledge in the field Provide enough background to bring non-expert in field up to
speed and demonstrate your knowledge Give plenty of references, particularly of experts in field (who
may be reviewing your proposal) Do not be dismissive of previous workDo not be dismissive of previous work
Relationship of education activities to research on effective teaching and learning in your field
April 6, 2006 97Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description (cont’d)
Your Prior Work Describe what you have done to date in
area Cite publications Present any data you have generated Establish your expertise in the area (or in
related area) Use graphs, figures, etc. where possible
Avoid too dense textAvoid too dense text Describe any directly related education
experience
April 6, 2006 98Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description
Plan of Work Measurable goals and objectives
(research, education, diversity, outreach, etc.)
Methods and Procedures (include education evaluation methods)
Be sure to discuss broader impact, Be sure to discuss broader impact, diversity, outreach, etc. diversity, outreach, etc.
Include activity and milestone chart by year (both research and education included in each year)
April 6, 2006 99Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Project Description Examples of Education Components
Go more than would be expected as part of your job
Develop a course related to your research Must be innovative (e.g., active learning approach, Must be innovative (e.g., active learning approach,
technology assisted learning, interdisciplinary outlook, technology assisted learning, interdisciplinary outlook, connection with industry, communication, ethics or connection with industry, communication, ethics or sociology component, etc.; refer to NSF-funded sociology component, etc.; refer to NSF-funded Foundation Coalition)Foundation Coalition)
Involve undergraduates in research What is your goal? What is your goal?
Encourage them to continue to grad school? Then include Encourage them to continue to grad school? Then include mentoring, info on application processmentoring, info on application process
Prepare them for industry? Then connect them with Prepare them for industry? Then connect them with industrial representatives, potential internshipsindustrial representatives, potential internships
Innovative graduate student education Interdisciplinary focus, international component, etc.Interdisciplinary focus, international component, etc.
April 6, 2006 100Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Treat Education as a Scholarly Enterprise
Cite research and publications on best education practices, suggested reforms
1999 National Research Council report; How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School
NRC report: Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment.
NSF report: SHAPING THE FUTURE: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology
The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, REINVENTING UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION: A Blueprint for America's Research Universities
Discipline-specific pubs: e.g., BIO 2010: Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists (2003), Committee on Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Research Scientists for the 21st Century, National Research Council of the National Academies, The National Academies Press.
Pilot Study to Establish the Nature and Impact of Effective Undergraduate Research Experiences on Learning, Attitude, and Career Choice, Research on Learning and Education (ROLE), David E. Lopatto, Principal Investigator, Grinnell
April 6, 2006 101Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Education Component Goals should be specific and measurable
Evaluation should measure how well your approach is working
E.g., percentage of undergrads mentored continuing to E.g., percentage of undergrads mentored continuing to grad school, improvement in test scores, etc.grad school, improvement in test scores, etc.
See NSF Handbook on Evaluation at http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf02057
Plans should include details to make them “real” E.g., Number of students served, need being
addressed with statistics Check with your College for statistics on
enrollment, etc.
April 6, 2006 102Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Broader Impacts and Outreach Address diversity issues! Examples (choose what interests you
and make sense for your project) Work with K-12 teachers
Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) supplement supplement
Connect with PEER ProgramConnect with PEER Program Work with pre-service teachersWork with pre-service teachers
Work with undergrads from other schools (e.g., minority serving)
Research Experiences for Undergraduates Research Experiences for Undergraduates supplement (is there an REU site in your supplement (is there an REU site in your department?)department?)
April 6, 2006 103Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Broader Impacts – More Examples
Work with high school students on Science Fair projects
Work with Community College teachers Collaborate with faculty from smaller
and/or minority serving institutions Give them summer access to your facilitiesGive them summer access to your facilities
Connect to student chapters of minority professional organizations (e.g., Society of Women Engineers, Society of Mexican American Engineers and Scientists) – look for natural connections
April 6, 2006 104Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Career goals
Relation of PI’s Career goals to goals of department/organization Talk to your Department Head! Check planning documents for
department and reference Reference Vision 2020 and how you will
contribute to these goals http://www.tamu.edu/vision2020/ http://www.tamu.edu/vision2020/
April 6, 2006 105Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Departmental Endorsement(load under Supplementary Docs)
Letter from Dept Head Must be signed by Head with name, title, date
printed below signature Proposed activities supported by and
integrated into goals of department and department will support the development of the PI Mentoring, Facilities, Summer salary (can list
components from your start-up package), etc. Description of:
Relationship between project, PIs career goals and responsibilities and department goals
Ways in which DH will ensure mentoring of PI Verification PI is eligible
April 6, 2006 106Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Other Documents (cont’d) Supplementary Documents
PI self-certification of eligibility (on Fastlane) Letters of commitment from collaborators No reference letters allowed
2-page bio see Grant Proposal Guide for format and follow it
(some directorates very picky!) Current and Pending
Lists currently funded project (from any source, not just NSF) and any pending proposal for external funding
See Grant Proposal Guide Facilities
April 6, 2006 107Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Budget and Budget Justification
No support of other Senior Personnel (faculty, etc.)
Be sure to fund your educational activities also
Budget Justification Another way to sell your ideas Make sure it’s easy to follow and
supports the stated work plan
April 6, 2006 108Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Resubmissions
Read and address reviews from last submission Reviewers will have access to your last
submission Call your program officer for input
Best soon after receiving reviews But if you have questions about some
reviews, call him/her now
April 6, 2006 109Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
ONR Young Investigator Program (Office of Naval Research)
$100,000 per year for three years FY 05 proposal was due 12 January 2006. FY07 announcement usually posted in
Septemberhttp://www.onr.navy.mil/sci_tech/archive_to_dvd/
industrial/363/docs/baa_06_002.doc U.S. citizens, nationals, and permanent
residents earned PhD within last 5 years Approx. 24 awards
April 6, 2006 110Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
ONR Young Investigator
“The objectives of this program are to attract outstanding faculty members of Institutions of Higher Education (hereafter also called "universities") to the Department of the Navy's research program, to support their research, and to encourage their teaching and research careers.”
“Proposals falling within the broad scope of naval research interests will be considered.”
April 6, 2006 111Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
ONR Areas of Research Interesthttp://www.onr.navy.mil/
Information, Electronics & Surveillance (Code 31) Electronics; Math, Computer and Information Sciences;
Surveillance, Communications, and Electronic Combat Ocean, Atmosphere & Space (Code 32)
Sensing and Systems; Processes and Prediction Engineering, Materials & Physical Science (Code 33)
Physical Sciences; Materials; Mechanics and Energy Conversion; Ship Hull, Mechanical & Electrical Systems; Navy S&T Ship Office
Human Systems (Code 34) Medical and Biological Division; Cognitive, Neural and Social
Division Naval Expeditionary Warfare (Code 35)
Strike Technology; Expeditionary Warfare Operations
April 6, 2006 112Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Army Research Lab Young Investigator
Up to $50K per year for 3 years Eligibility
U.S. citizens holding tenure-track positions at U.S. universities and colleges
have held their graduate degrees (Ph.D. or equivalent) for fewer than five years at the time of application.
Broad Agency Announcement at http://www.arl.army.mil/main/main/DownloadedInternetPages/CurrentPages/DoingBusinesswithARL/research/arobaa06a.pdf
Research Areas “Proposals are invited for research in areas described in PART I,
Research Areas 1-8 only of this BAA. Proposals may be submitted at any time. As is the case for the regular research programs, we strongly encourage informal discussions with the cognizant ARO technical program manager before submission of a formal proposal. “
April 6, 2006 113Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH K programs for New Faculty Series of very targeted programs
See NIH “K Kiosk” web site at http://grants.nih.gov/training/careerdevelopmentawards.htm
Directed at retraining, professional development
Check CRISP data base on NIH web site for info on funded projects http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/crisp/crisp_query.generate_screen
OPD K-programs Seminar April 21, 2006 from 9 am – noon See http://opd.tamu.edu/ , “upcoming
seminars”
April 6, 2006 114Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Other Programs NSF Research Initiation Grants and Career
Advancement Awards to Broaden Participation in the Biological Sciences Due July 12, 2006 and Jan. 12, 2007 $150K over 2 years for underrepresented scientists http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2005/nsf05581/nsf05581.htm
NASA New Investigator Program in Earth and Sun System Science
http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/solicitations/summary.do?method=init&solId={8EF416B1-14FF-1C41-42CD-514C32F6A495}&stack=push
Last due August 31, 2005 Carl Sagan Fellowship for Early Career Research
Varying submission times depending on topic http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/solicitations/summary.do?
method=init&solId={8C5AB22A-061D-3D19-00B8-B37C7FBB7529}&stack=push
April 6, 2006 115Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Other programs Foundations
Check their annual reports for goals, culture Burroughs Wellcome Fund PhRMA Foundation Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Early Career Fellowship in
Economic Studies Kellogg Forum Rising Stars, etc.
Professional Organizations Check our website at
http://opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/funding-opportunities-by-category/junior-faculty-programs.html
Search on Google: “early career”, “young investigator”, junior faculty”
April 6, 2006 116Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Young Investigator Programs Do your homework
Mission and culture of funding agency Talk to program director Find out what has been funded in the past Talk to successful prior winners if possible
Follow the directions and read the solicitation carefully
Clearly describe your goals, your work plan and the benefits of your work
Don’t give up! Learn from reviews Talk to program officer about how you might address short
comings Apply again as long as you are eligible!
April 6, 2006 117Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Scientific MethodStephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Four essential elements of the scientific method are iterations and recursions of the following four steps: Observation Hypothesis—theoretical, hypothetical
explanation Prediction—logical deduction from
hypothesis Experiment, Test
Your proposal is one iteration of the steps above… Your proposal is one iteration of the steps above…
April 6, 2006 118Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
What is a Hypothesis?Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Hypothesis—is a proposed explanation of a phenomenon
A provisional idea whose merit is to be A provisional idea whose merit is to be evaluated…evaluated…
In the hypothetico-deductive method a In the hypothetico-deductive method a hypothesis should be falsifiable, possible to be hypothesis should be falsifiable, possible to be shown to be false by observation…shown to be false by observation…
A hypothesis is not a question—a major misconception among many people…
Several hypotheses should be proposed as explanations of a phenomenon…
April 6, 2006 119Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
What is a Hypothesis?Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Hypotheses require more work by the researcher in order to either confirm or disprove them… Note: if confirmed, a hypothesis is not necessarily
proven but remains provisional... An example: A person enters a new country and
observes only white sheep. A hypothesis might be that all sheep in that country are white…
This is falsifiable by observing a single black sheep, provided that the observer did not mistake a goat for a sheep or correctly interpreted the hypothesis (exclude rams?)…
April 6, 2006 120Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
What is a Hypothesis?Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Hypotheses should provide generally a causal explanation or propose some correlation…
Hypotheses are based a pattern in observations or suggested by preexisting data…
There are no definitive guidelines for the production of new hypotheses…
Some work, like testing rates, refining techniques or ages, and exploring new areas, is harder to frame as hypotheses… Here, many refer these to problems or questions to
be answered… It is best, however, to put these types of research
into hypotheses as well…
April 6, 2006 121Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Predictions… Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Useful hypotheses enable predictions to be made by deductive reasoning that can be assessed experimentally…
If results contradictory to the predictions are found, that hypothesis under test is incorrect or incomplete—requires abandonment or revision…
If results confirming a hypothesis are found, the hypothesis might be correct but is always subject to further test…
Thus, the reason for multiple hypotheses to be tested is to leave you with alternatives…
April 6, 2006 122Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Experiment…Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Once the prediction is made, an experiment is designed to test it…
The experiment may seek either confirmation or falsification of one or more hypotheses…
In the geosciences, experiment equates also to well planned testing in the laboratory or field and data analysis…
Integrity may be augmented by introduction of a control… Two identical experiments are run, in which only
the factor being tested is varied… This serves to further isolate causal phenomena…
April 6, 2006 123Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Evaluation and iteration… Stephen T. Hasiotis, Robert H. Goldstein, & Roger L. Kaesler, University of Kansas
Testing & improvements—based on outcomes there may be need for revisions of hypotheses, experiments, or methods; the scientific process is iterative…
Verification—research or work will become accepted only if they can be verified…
Reevaluation—all scientific knowledge is in a state of flux because new evidence can be produced that contradicts a long held hypothesis…
Evidence and assumptions—evidence comes in different forms and quality, due mostly to underlying assumptions… Objects heavier than air fall to the ground when dropped… Aliens abduct humans… Most extraordinary claims also do not survive Occam’s
razor…
April 6, 2006 124Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NSF Merit Review Process
External review by “mail only”, “panel only”, or “mail-plus-panel”
Site visits may be used “Panel only” is most common (50%)-CISE,
EHR, ENG, and MPS 32% receive “Mail-plus-panel”-BIO, GEO, and
SBE. Only 14% receive “mail only”-OPP Each proposal must receive at least 3 external
reviews Program officers make funding
recommendations to NSF senior management (division directors)
http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/docs/meritrevtampa.pdf
April 6, 2006 125Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
What is the intellectual merit of theproposed activity? Potential Considerations:
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields?
How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.)
To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts?
How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?
Is there sufficient access to resources?
April 6, 2006 126Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
What are the broader impacts ofthe proposed activity?
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning?
How well does the activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)?
To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships?
April 6, 2006 127Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Num ber of FY 2002 Proposals -- 24,758 Declines, 10,406 Awards
Text Figure 10Distribution of Average Reviewer Ratings
59 4 90
2,278
3,924
2,922
1,129
76
1,198
3,154
595255
7,299 12,181
05 00
1 ,0 001 ,5 002 ,0 002 ,5 003 ,0 003 ,5 004 ,0 004 ,5 005 ,0 005 ,5 006 ,0 006 ,5 00
Reviewed,No Score
Poor to Fair Fair to Good Good toVery Good
Very Goodto Excellent
Excellent NotReviewed
Awards Declines
April 6, 2006 128Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
NIH Review Process
What Happens to Your Grant Application, A Primer for New Applicants http://cms.csr.nih.gov/AboutCSR/OverviewofPeerReviewPro
cess.htm
Center for Scientific Review http://cms.csr.nih.gov/
April 6, 2006 129Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 130Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
April 6, 2006 131Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Department of Education Review Process
Program offices recruit expert readers to review and score a sub-set of proposals
Grant team conducts internal review of scored proposals
They may use a computer program to normalize scores
The grant team generates a rank order list for funding consideration
April 6, 2006 132Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
USDA Review Process
Two part process: compliance screen and review panel technical evaluation
Experts from the system usually administer competitive review (NPLs and PMs)
Panel members - diverse and expert Some panels use ad-hocs (mail review) Proposal review may vary depending on
the specific program – contact your PM Return to you: reviews, panel summary,
relative ranking
April 6, 2006 133Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Department of Defense Review Process Varies among entities within the department
- ARL, ACE, AFRL, ONR, DARPA Varies among programs within a given entity
- YIP vs. BAA Usually requires contact with an agency
staff member or TPOC ARL - initial review by TPOC to determine
merit, fit, and fund availability. Then peer review is conducted to evaluate merit and military relevance
April 6, 2006 134Office of Proposal Development Texas A&M University
Components of an Effective Summary“The summary should not be an
abstract of the proposal, but rather a self-contained description of the activity that would result if the proposal were funded…. It should include a statement of objectives, methods to be employed, and the significance of the proposed activity…. Insofar as possible, it should be understandable to a scientifically or technically literate lay reader.”
--The NSF