Grant Writing : The Basics

1. Grant Writing :The Basics Dr. Kelly Stout Associate Director, Special Research Initiatives kpowellstout@gsu.edu / 404-413-5475 November 4, 2013

2. Brief introduction to the University Research Services Administration (URSA) Finding funding sources Guidelines to successful grant writing Brief overview of the “non-scholarly” pieces that are part of a grant application Objectives of Workshop

3. URSA is the central research support office of this university Under the Vice President for Research & Economic Development, Dr. James Weyhenmeyer Includes 4 major units (plus other smaller units) Office of Sponsored Proposals & Awards Office of Research Integrity Faculty Support Division of Animal Resources University Research Services & Administration (URSA)

4. Office of Sponsored Proposals & Awards (OSPA) Director, Ken Packman Proposal submission and non-financial aspects (pre-award) Financial aspects and reporting (post-award) Contact with agency officials on behalf of PI and university Address questions about award terms, budget and/or expenditures University Research Services & Administration (URSA)

5. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Associate Vice President for Research Integrity, Brenda Chapman Research Misconduct Research Compliance & Safety Human subjects Animal care and use Biosafety Environmental safety University Research Services & Administration (URSA)

6. Faculty Support Associate Vice President for Research, Monica Swahn Internal Grants Funding Resources Research Communications and Public Relations Research Training/workshops Special Initiatives (special research funding, assessment and evaluation, reports, etc.) University Research Services & Administration (URSA)

7. Familiarize yourself with our webpages: http://research.gsu.edu/centers-and-institutes/university-research-centers-administrative-office/

8. Finding Funding Opportunities

9. University Research Internal Grant Program Website: http://ursa.research.gsu.edu/ursa/funding/funding-opportunities/internal-grant-program/ Two major ongoing programs for tenured and tenure track faculty Dissertation grants for doctoral students Grants for travel to a sponsor and conference support at GSU (faculty) Other special funding initiatives Provost’s Special Awards – Support faculty professional development Funding Opportunities “Internal to GSU”

10. Student Technology Fee Webpage: http://solutions.technology.gsu.edu Supports technology to be used in teaching primarily, but can also be used in research secondarily Colleges/Schools, academic centersand departments may have funding mechanisms to support specific things (e.g. Language and Literacy seed grants, Brains & Behavior graduate fellowships, etc.) Funding Opportunities “Internal to GSU”

11. Biweekly funding email – Provides links to internal and external funding for research faculty, staff, graduate students. Subscribe at: http://ursa.research.gsu.edu/ursa/funding/funding-opportunities/join-funding-opps-listserv/ Federal Funding: www.grants.gov Most Federal agencies post funding announcements Some offer email funding alerts you can subscribe to receive “External” Funding Opportunities

12. See URSA’s External Funding webpages at: http://ursa.research.gsu.edu/ursa/funding/funding-opportunities/external-funding/ Community of Science (COS PIVOT) All-inclusive database that includes diverse sources of funding across disciplines Any GSU employee or student can receive email alerts of new funding opportunities in their defined field of work (FREE!) URSA conducts workshops on how to set up and use COS PIVOT “External” Funding Opportunities

13. COS Pivot Funding Overview • COS Funding is the most comprehensive source of Funding available on the Web • A global database, packed with 26,000 records of funding opportunities worth an estimated $33 billion • Multi-Disciplinary in scope • All categories of sponsors, public and private • Over 11,500 national and international sponsors including government agencies, private foundations, corporations, non-profit organizations etc… • Funding for many purposes: grants, fellowships, capital improvements, travel, visiting professors, training and more

14. Accessing COS Pivot • If you don’t have a current account, you can easily create one. From the URSA website at http://ursa.research.gsu.edu/ursa/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-databases/ click on Register for COS-PIVOT and complete the requested information to set up your account. • The URL for COS Pivot is http://pivot.cos.com

15. Preparing a Grant Proposal

16. Good Idea--where it starts Have a novel/innovative approach to research Identify sponsors who fund such ideas Find Funding Announcement: Read it carefully and follow diligently Develop a strong team of collaborators Compose a well-articulated proposal based on review criteria and supported by literature Key “Ingredients” for a Grant Proposal

17. The best idea come from knowing an area well Understanding the problems, issues, concerns Knowing what the most pressing unanswered questions are Knowing what’s been tried, what works and what does not Begin with developing the idea - What to do? Review previous research on the topic Review suggestions for future research in the literature Reviewing the field to determine the next steps, new methodologies, approaches, or populations Good Ideas-Where to start?

18. Developing the Idea and Project Further • Start thinking of interesting projects • Discuss your ideas with others • Talk to people who have been funded in this field • Complete as much of your current, related work as possible, write and submit for publication • Look for possible funding • Find out what has been funded • Consult sponsor agency program staff

19. Matching the Project Idea with a Funding Opportunity

20. “Alphabet Soup” of Funding Opportunities RFP = Request for Proposals (grants) RFA = Request for Applications (contracts) PA = Program Announcements (grants) FA = Funding Announcements FO = Funding Opportunities

21. Finding a Funding Match: First steps • Goal/mission/purpose of funding opportunity: • Who is soliciting (what agency)? • What are the priorities outlined? • Who is eligible to apply? • How to apply (procedures)? • What is the structure of the application? • What are the review criteria? • Is there a budget ceiling (or range or set amount)? • When is the sponsor’s deadline for submission? • How is the application submitted?

22. Review the strategic priorities of the agency/foundation and the priorities listed in the funding opportunity Look at past funded projects (URSA website lists databases for awards made for many agencies at: http://ursa.research.gsu.edu/ursa/funding/funding-opportunities/external-funding/databases-for-awards-made/ ) Discuss ideas with sponsor staff/program officers DON’T write a proposal for something the sponsor has never funded before without assurances that it “fits” their mission How Do I Know It’s a Good Match?

23. Developing and Preparing the Proposal

24. Basic Grantsmanship • Know your topic • Be very knowledgeable of the current literature in that area • If you are starting down a new path, get some experience in that area (internal grants are great to seed new scholarly directions) • Write for your audience • Know your reviewers and the review process • Write and express ideas clearly - good communication is important • Market your idea as important to the field and even to the world • Read and follow directions- Reviewers are looking for any reasons not to review proposals

25. Read a Funded Application • If you know another investigator who has received funding from the same sponsor, ask if they will let you read their funded proposal • URSA can search our database for funded Principal Investigators at GSU • If you can get a copy of a funded proposals, carefully read it and ask: • Why did it get funded? • Can it serve as a model for your proposal?

26. Approach to Writing: Make it Easy for the Reviewers • ENGAGE THE READER! It should be interesting and easy to read or they won’t go beyond the abstract • Identify and address the criteria or questions on which the proposal will be reviewed and scored • DO NOT make the Reviewers work to find the answers. Use headers, be organized, and methodical to make it easy • DO NOT assume the Reviewers already know it or will figure it out themselves • Reviewers want to be walked through the project • Reviewers are NOT (always) experts

27. “The more energy and time a Reviewer has to devote to figuring out your application, the less energy a reviewer has to actually review your application” Elliot Postow

28. Four Key Questions to Answer Organizing the Application (Why, Who, What and How) • Why is this important to the field and to the world? • Why should you be the one to do this? • What is the expected outcome? • How are you going to do it?

29. Abstract Introduction/Significance* Background Innovation Methods/Approach* *Analyses of the NIH portfolio of applications indicate that the reviewer scores on the significance and approach are most strongly associated with getting funded. The Anatomy of a “Typical” Grant Proposal

30. The abstract should describe succinctly the major aspects of the proposed project Provides first impression- Grab the reader’s attention immediately Should be the last thing you write May be only thing most people on the review panel will actually read Should be consistent with rest of proposal (butdo not just cut and paste from proposal) Abstract

31. The main goal of this section is to ENGAGE THE READER! Give them a compelling reason to pay attention and read on The project or problem must not just be good, but you must address a problem people care about. Explain why the project is important to the field and even to the world Project should be linked to the priorities of funding agency or how it fits with the funding announcement Don’t just review the literature, build a case for your project Introduction (Significance)

32. Should provide a “mini-story” about your proposal that gives the reader the key details (don’t be too superficial or too technical) including: Why is the work important? Why should it be done right now? What problem does it solve? Why are you qualified to solve it? How are you going to do it? How will it move the field forward? Introduction (Significance)

33. Get the reader up to speed on the topic and highlight the important contribution you are planning to make with the project An average, educated adult with a relevant background, should be able to understand Most reviewers will have some background in your field so don’t write as if they need to know every little detail, but don’t get too detailed Make sure you include research directly tied to your project, not just generally related (build a case for your project) Background

34. This is where you describe what is new and different about proposed project Innovation is not always clearly defined so you have to point it out: Methods (maybe you propose to use new or different tools, maybe you are only expert using methods proposed) Population (perhaps you propose studying a different population that has never been studied) Approach (asking the question in a different way than it has been asked before) Innovation

35. Turning your good idea into a plan of action Should be as clear as possible; take a step-by-step approach Usually not enough space to be very detailed so be choosy about what you include Be creative about tables and figures to replace lengthy text if possible Measures you use should be able to directly answer the question(s) or the hypothesis posed Approach: Design and Methods

36. Be sure to identify obvious weaknesses in methods or measures and discusshow you will address these Beat the Reviewer to the punch line: be self-critical, but not to the point that they lose confidence in what you are proposing Offer alternative methods for measuring whatever you are interested in (if they exist) and state why and when you would give up on your current method and try the alternative method Approach: Design and Methods

37. Stress that you have the means and experience to conduct this project (resources, knowledge, no one else is doing this, etc.) Your ultimate goal is to convince them that if they don’t fund you, then progress in this field will be hindered! Approach: Design and Methods

38. Find and approach mentors early Pick “winners” in the grant/proposal world Provide clear instructions about how they can help? What do you want them to do When do you want them to do it Take no for an answer Remind gently when you need their feedback Show appreciation Feedback is CRITICAL! Get Feedback on Proposal

39. Set the grant/proposal aside for 3-4 days during the writing to gain some perspective Refine, refine, refine. Make it shorter, clearer and simpler. There is always room for improvement There should be NO typographical, spelling or grammar errors Revision and Refinement

40. Know the review criteria Not necessarily the same as “sections in application” Make sure proposal addresses all criteria clearly and directly Use sub-headings/sub-sections if that helps Know the review process (usually described in the funding announcement) Know your Reviewers (in general) Cite their work in proposal if possible Aim your writing for their level of expertise Review Process

41. *NIH Federal Scientific Review NIH: Center for Scientific Review – www.csr.nih.gov NIH allows you to see who is in various Study Sections to help you choose the best one for your proposal Include cover letter with application and request specific Study Section and indicate the types of reviewers best for your proposal (expertise) FAX the Scientific Review Officer if you see a problem with review assignment and want to request a change (can’t guarantee they will make change)

42. Common Assumptions About Review Process • The Reviewers share your interest in and enthusiasm for your proposal • You must make them interested and enthusiastic • The Reviewers have expertise relevant to the subject of your proposal • You must write the grant as if they do not have extensive expertise because they likely don’t, but not as if they are totally clueless about your topic

43. Common Assumptions About Review Process • All reviewers either have, or will make time to read your proposal in detail • In reality, some reviewers will read it in detail (Primary and Secondary Reviewers), others probably won’t read more than the Abstract (Discussants) • The Reviewers will be fair and impartial in assessing the merits of your proposal • Fairness will be the goal, but if you are a known ‘bad guy’ you might not be given the benefit of the doubt

44. Lack of organization Unoriginal ideas Too vague Lack of knowledge on the topic Work not deemed important to field Poor reasoning Inadequate rationale for project Unrealistic workload Uncertain future directions Did not follow directions Reasons for Rejected Proposals

45. If you feel angry about initial rejection, write the reply you would really like to send and then destroy it NEVER PUT INTO A RESUBMISSION ANYTHING “NEW” THAT WAS NOT ASKED FOR BY THE REVIEWERS! When rebutting the reviewers, be sensitive to the 'tone' of your writing If you are argumentative and defensive, then you will not be funded! Have someone else read it before sending if you are concerned about tone You should indicate the major changes in your revised proposal by changing the type font, or style, but not by underlining (its too difficult to read that way) Preparing the Resubmission

46. Final Recommendation Don’t give up!!!!! Revise, re-submit, find other funding sources, team up with other successful grantees, and learn from feedback. Persistence Required……..

47. Think like a reviewer Learn your topic well so you know the right questions to ask Offer up a good argument/justification for the project Provide strong science/scholarship and team Always follow directions! Final Suggestions for Writing Proposals

48. The “Other” Parts of the Proposal

49. “Forms” Biosketches/CVs Summaries/Abstracts Human Subjects/Animals Budget Procedures for internal review and processing The “Non-Scholarly” Parts of an Application

50. Read FundingGuidelines to determine: Eligibility (Higher Education Institution or individual) Submission deadlines Electronic or paper submission Agency-specific requirements “Limited Submission” Make a list of tasks and a timeline What needs to be done Who is going to do it When does it need to be done In the Beginning…