CRB Basics

1. CRB Basics

2. CRB Supports • Basic Life Sciences • Clinical Sciences • Natural Sciences and Engineering • Social Sciences Grants are for up to $15,000 for one year. AAH supported by OVCR-AAH

3. Types of Support • Pilot studies to obtain preliminary results needed for external grants • Support for researchers entering a new research track • Modest equipment or instrument purchase. • Short term help to revise grant application or to bring project to closure that will lead to external awards

4. Workshop Topics • Eligibility and general guidelines • Forms • Budgeting • Writing for reviewer • Review Criteria • Tips to improve your proposal

5. Workshop Objectives • Demystify the process • Make the process work for you. • Encourage you

6. Eligible • Full time tenure and non-tenure track JUNIOR faculty • Full time =at least .80 appointment • Assistant Professors, Research Assistant Professors, Clinical Assistant Professors. • Instructors, Lecturers within ten years of PH.D. • Westside V.A. – case by case.

7. Ineligible • Post docs, retired faculty, and Visiting faculty • Associate Professors and Professors • If you have an active CRB grant on March 18 • If you have active non-CRB grant that overlaps with the proposed CRB research • Past recipients who have not yet submitted a proposal for external support based on CRB funded research.

8. Notice of Intent • Due 2/25 • Non Binding • Helps us find appropriate reviewers

9. What to include in NOI • Proposed research title • 5 keywords describing research • One paragraph summary • Subcommittee to review proposal

10. Submission and Format • Due March 18 – 3:00 p.m. 1737 W. Polk, Room 310 • Late applications not accepted • 1 original and 14 copies • NEW!! One (1) electronic copy of the 1 page summary emailed to ahalford@uic.edu

11. Submission and Format • 12 point font on narrative. No smaller! • Standard 1” top, bottom, right and left margins • Double check copying and collating

12. Proposal Order • Funding Request Application Form • Cover letter (for resubmissions only) • Proposed Budget Form • Budget Justification Form • Funding History Form • 1 to 1.5 page summary statement • 6 pages of narrative • PI and other collaborator CVs • Letters of collaboration • Appendices

13. Resubmission Letter • Address every review comment from prior application • Identify past reviews (e.g. Spring 02) • If you don’t understand a comment, say so. • If you agree, note how you addressed issue in the revised proposal. • If you disagree, do so with facts. Be courteous, dispassionate, professional. • Have letter reviewed by a colleague.

14. Summary Statement(1 page) • Its significance in your field. • How the results will be leveraged into external applications • Time line for submission to external funding source • Plan for expanding your research – next steps

15. Non Tenure Track Faculty - extra 1/2 page • Identify whether or not you are working with a senior researcher or are in a mentored research relationship. • If so, clarify how this research project is independent. Project can be connected, but must be independent.

16. Tenure track faculty – extra ½ page • If you have a successful research track and are well funded, please justify the request for CRB funds. • Explain why CRB funding is essential to your research program at this time. • You can add up to ½ extra page to summary to discuss this.

17. Project Description (6 pages) • Objectives and hypothesis • Background and rationale • Methods

18. Project Description • Objectives and Hypothesis • In outline form • Objectives stated for the period of this project only

19. Project Description • Background and Rationale • A brief, critical review of the context of this proposal to the current knowledge in the field. • The bibliography should cite only most relevant references. • An interdisciplinary committee including people outside your area of expertise should be able to understand why this research is important.

20. Project Description Methods • Procedures, experimental design, methods of data reduction and analysis. • Familiarity • Appropriateness • Conciseness

21. If its not applicable, N.A. Checking resubmission box helps YOU. If you have more than 5 collaborators, list two per line. Note correct subcommittee. Keywords used for review assignments Identify source of equipment match Application signed Cover

22. All projects funded, pending, or not funded the past 5 years. List most recent first. Include internal support Note total percent of effort. Accurate titles Description should allow reviewer to determine whether there is overlap with CRB application. If this is your first grant application, note “none”. Funding History Form

23. CVs and support letters • PI, Co-PIs, and Collaborators • One page CV • One page of recent publications • Can use NIH Form • Co-PIs and collaborators: • Include a brief, signed letter indicating the nature of their involvement in the project.

24. Appendices: Do • Survey instruments, tables, diagrams, or photographs required to evaluate the proposal • Documentation of commitments from others without which the research would be difficult to achieve • Examples: Letters regarding access to critical resources, laboratories, equipment, materials

25. Appendices: Do Not • Include lengthy articles • Take limits with appendices to circumvent page length limitations

26. Appendices: You May If appendix is too expensive to reproduce, you may limit to 6, rather than 14 copies. Please note this, keeping the 6 complete applications separate so they can be sent to the assigned reviewers.

27. Supplies Costs associated with animals and their maintenance Costs associated with human subject use Equipment Student salaries Technician and post doc salaries Fringe Benefits Unusual computer time requirements Budget: Supported Expenses

28. Not allowed: PI, Co-PI compensation Tuition remission Rarely allowed: Travel; Book publication subventions for non-refereed or commercial press. Rarely or never supported expenses

29. Equipment Matching • Up to $2,000 without match • Over $2,000 1:1 match • $3,000 equipment • $3,000 – $2,000 CRB = $1,000. • ½ of $1,000 = $500 • CRB Budget request = $2,500 • Match is $500 • Direct Research Application

30. Totals should match on cover sheet, budget page, and justification. No cents. Insert vendor quotes after justification page. Don’t pad to cover unforeseen expenses. Don’t skimp to be competitive. No “miscellaneous” line item. Request the minimum amount necessary to do the research. Check math. Budgeting Tips

31. Things to consider • Inflation and COLA (cost of living adjustment) increases • Not in stone • A poorly constructed budget will reflect negatively on your overall project

32. Budget Questions • Can the job be accomplished with this budget? • Are costs reasonable for the market - or too high or low? • Is the budget consistent with proposed activities? • Is there sufficient budget detail and explanation? • Put yourself in reviewer’s shoes!

33. A Budget Justification should • Explain the items in the budget • Demonstrate your thinking • Rationalize why you need the money • Aid the reviewer in identifying with your project and that you have thought about the costs • Assure the reviewer that you will have the resources needed to complete the project successfully • NOT just say “because”

34. Sound Justifications • Graduate Student - This line item will cover the salary of one graduate assistant for 20 hours a week for 20 weeks at a rate of $xxx./hour, plus fringes calculated at xxx%. Continuous, Visa. Total: $xxxx. • Lap Top Computer - This line item is for a Dell Lap top computer to be used while doing field surveys. Per XYZ vendor recommendations, this model is most appropriate for running the analysis outlined in the proposal – vendor letter attached. Purchase falls within ACCC purchasing guidelines for computers. Matching source and amount, if any, is listed. Total: $xxxx • Both totals match the budget page

35. Weak Justifications • Graduate Student, but may also be a post doc or undergraduate, to be determined. Approximately 10 – 20 hours a week for 3-6 months. Total: The high end of scale. • Lap top computer. I don’t have one. Total: Maximum I can request for equipment without having to provide match.

36. Weak Justifications • Totals listed in justification don’t match the budget page or cover page – guess which total we’ll use if you’re funded? • Budgets with poorly justified line items are more likely to be cut if the project is funded.

37. Writing for Reviewers Have your eyes examined

40. What reviewers hate • Small Font, crammed margins, mislabeled figures • Speling and gremmatical errers • U.A. • Undefined acronyms • Sloppy cut and paste jobs jobs jobs jobs • 2+2=5, Because • Lack of poof weeding

41. What reviewers hate • FoRmaTTiNG thatstoohard • To follow • Too much of a good thing – even you • More than 6 pages • Sneaky figures • SUV sized appendices • __________ • Unanswered questions, blank fields, etc.

42. Reviewers Appreciate • Being able to focus on the science. • Proposals that can be reasonably understood by a multidisciplinary CRB Review Subcommittee. • That you know your audience

43. Reviewers Appreciate • Formats that follow the CRB Guidelines. • Up to date literature reviews. • Compelling, succinct, and logically organized text. • Positive, professional, academic tone. • Minimal jargon. • Unusual terms defined

44. Evaluation criteria Questions to help you frame your narrative

45. Evaluation Criteria • Significance • Will the information be relevant to the field, represent novel research or have apparent applications? • Will the results allow the investigator to be more competitive in generating extramural research funding?

46. Evaluation Criteria • Approach • Is the rationale easily understood, ideas easy to follow? • Are the hypothesis, objectives and experimental approach concise and logical? • Are design, methods, and analyses properly developed, well integrated, and appropriate to project?

47. Evaluation Criteria • Feasibility – Can this work be accomplished by investigator given: • Documented experience and expertise? • Past progress? • Preliminary data? • Requested and available resources? • Institutional commitment? • Documented access to special reagents, or technologies? • Adequacy of plans for recruitment and retention of subjects? • Is the time frame realistic?

48. Evaluation Criteria • Submission • Is there a plan for submission to specific external funding agency and expected submission date? • Budget – • Is request within CRB guidelines? • Is the budget adequate for the scope of work? • Has the budget been soundly justified?

49. Evaluation Criteria • Presentation • Is the overall proposal complete and well presented? • Has applicant provided all requested information? • Is information easy to find? • Overall • What can applicant do to improve the quality of the proposal?

50. Review and Scoring Process • Application assignments based on compatibility with reviewers research interests • Reviewers don’t review or score proposals from their own department. • Each proposal has a primary and secondary reviewer who provide written reviews of your proposal • All subcommittee member read your proposal • All proposals discussed at the meeting • After subcommittee discussion each member individually scores your proposal.