CHE 594 Lecture 17

1. CHE 594 Lecture 17 The Specific Objectives

2. Review: Keys To Building A Successful Proposal Create Excitement Describe The Work Well Solid Research Plan Qualified Investigator Good Research Idea Lect 12, 13 Lect 2,3 Lect 4, 5, 7

3. My Typical Outline • Introduction • One page giving an overview of the work, describe how it advances the literature and make a case for funding • Figure that gives a picture of the work I am proposing • Literature review (NSF, DOE, NIH not DARPA, DHS) • 1-2 pages giving the main themes in the literature • Proposed work • Specific Objectives • Paragraph outlining the entire scope of work & its major challenges • Work plan • Subsections organized around each major question (paper) I wish to address • Variables I will vary • Techniques I will use • Sometimes data analysis if that is significant • Description of preliminary data • Summary • Highlight the significance - Lect 6,7 12 Lect 13-16 Lect 17 Lect 18

4. Today: The Specific Objectives • The specific objectives are a 1-2 page summary of what you are going to do and its impact • It is like the case statement but • greatly shorten the discussion of your work and where it fits • Explain you hypothesis and why you believe it is plausible given the previous literature • Explain your specific objectives in more detail. Explain how you will accomplish them. • Include a discussion of data analysis so you can say how you specific objectives will allow you to test your hypothesis

5. Questions you need to answer • What is your hypothesis? • Explain why the hypothesis is reasonable based on previous literature • This may be a repeat but remember that not every reviewer will read every section of your proposal • How you are going to go about resolving the issue identified above? • What are your specific technical objectives and what are their roles in proving of feasibility? • How are you going to go about accomplishing these objectives? • How will you analyze your data? Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

6. Research Plan Starts By Defining The Technical Objectives/Hypothesis • Specify what questions you will answer • Important to have a clear connection between the questions you raised and the experiments you will do • Reaching your objectives should mean you have proven the feasibility or solving the problem or realizing the opportunity Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

7. SBA Gives The Following Hints • Your technical objectives should be plausible; Do not promise more than you can do with the available staff, facilities and budget. • In presenting your objectives, begin by specifying those objectives which are most clearly related to the solicitation topic and agency concerns. • Next proceed to objectives relating to "spin-off" benefits. Make sure that "spin-off" related objectives are clearly secondary to topic related objectives. Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

8. Next Summarize The Approach • Second paragraph of a research plan should describe what approach(es) are being taken to address the problem or answer the question(s). How does the approach(es) answer the questions, i.e. what is the hypothesis being investigated and how is the hypothesis being proved or disproved (supported or refuted)? • Usually a 1 paragraph summary of exactly what you are planning to do

9. My Usual Outline The long term goal … So far we have seen Technical objectives, hypothesis … Explain why this hypothesis is plausable based on the literature, preliminary data Specific objective 1 – one sentence description Several sentences describing the rational for the objective, saying why this goal is important and describing how it will be accomplished Specific objective 2 – one sentence description Several sentences describing the rational for the objective, saying why this goal is important and describing how it will be accomplished Data analysis

10. Example From My Work My longterm objective is to develop a better model for water transport in PEM fuel cells. So far we have demonstrated that we can observe water motion for the first time using MRI and microCt imaging. We have found that water is mainly transported by a slip and stick mechanism not slug or mist flow as previously supposed. In this proposal we will develop and equation for slip and stick motion.

11. Specific objectives • Specific objective 1 measure the rate of water motion as a function of key wall properties • Specific objective 2: determine the key mechanism for motion: tank treading, wave collapse, other • Specific objective 3: use the results to develop an equation for the motion.

12. The Book Proposes a different outline for NIH The long term goal … So far we have seen Specifically I propose examining the following hypotheses Hypothesis 1 – one sentence description Hypothesis 2 – one sentence description Specific experiment 1 Specific experiment 2 Rationale

13. Good Science and Good Proposals Not The Same • Good science uses inductive and deductive reasoning Deductive Inductive • NIH encourages hypothesis based (deductive) proposals Adapted From William M.K. Trochim Cornell

14. Example from Ogden and Goldberg A number of clinical diseases have been associated with disorders of retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) transport and barrier function. The long-term goal of this research is to fully characterize these properties of human RPE to facilitate treatment and perhaps prevention of these diseases. During the last period we also developed and standardized a new method by which fluid fluxes can be measured directly rather than calculated from isotope fluxes, which are subject to cumulative experimental errors.

15. Example cont We plan to incorporate this method into our proposed studies, to test the following hypotheses: Cultured fetal human RPE, under normal conditions, transports fluid from is apical side to it basal side utilizing a Na+, K+, Cl- cotransport system as well as a Na+, HCO3 – cotransport system. The activities of these transport systems are modulated by intracellular cAMP concentrations. Cultured fetal human RPE mediated transepithelial fluid movement is modulated by beta adrenergic agonists, histamine, prostaglandin E1, and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) that alter intracellular cAMP concentration. In addition, agents that alter intracellular cAMP metabolism, such as the phosphodiesterase inhibitor isobutylmethylxanthine (IBMX), also alter human RPE mediated transepithelial fluid movement

16. Example cont To test these hypotheses, we propose studies with the following specific aims: To characterize cultured fetal human RPE transepithelial transport by extending Ussing chamber studies using pharmacologic probes, ion manipulation, and isotope flux studies. To determine how cultured fetal human RPE transepithelial transport is modulated by intracellular cAMP. To determine the degree to which cultured fetal human RPE transepithelial transport may be regulated by extracellular receptors (such as those to beta adrenergic agents) and to determine the degree to which cultured fetal human RPE transepithelial transport is affected by agents (such as IBMX that alter intracellular cAMP metabolism

17. Key Hints • All work needs to be completed in 2-3 years • No more than three hypotheses and specific aims • Use action verbs “to determine, to examine, to identify, to verify, to calculate” • Avoid non-action verbs “to study, to appreciate, to understand”

18. Key Pitfalls • Do not propose too much • Only propose what you can realistically do in two years

19. Recall The Hourglass Picture Of Research Start with an important big question Focus to solvable question Need to convince reviewers it is solvable Observe Analyze data Limits problems to ones the reviewers think they can solve Reach conclusions Generalize back to big problem Adapted From William M.K. Trochim Cornell

20. Four Most Common Mistakes • Writing too ambitious a proposal • Proposing too much • Unfocused technical objectives • Talking about the large problem instead of a narrower idea that you can really do • Proposal hard for reviewers to navigate • No clear sections (i.e. introduction, literature review, technical objectives) that the reviewers can jump to • Hoping that the reviewers will get the idea instead of telling them directly • Unclear/unfocused writing

21. Other Common Errors In The Work Plan • Proposing things that are insufficiently novel • Proposals that propose to use a well established technique on a small variation of a problem that has already been solved • Exception if the variation is of great importance • Failure to consider important variables • Makes reviewer doubt your qualifications • OK to say that we will control these variables and only consider variations in these variables • Unfounded claims • Important new conclusions from preliminary data without strong evidence

22. Items To Improve Your Odds Of Success • Pretty pictures showing your expected molecules, devices • Table outlining your research plan • Diagram outlining and complex procedures • Table outlining your risk mitigation strategy Remember that most reviewers will not read every word in your proposal so it is important to make it easy for them. The saying “A Picture is worth 1000 words” is doubly true in proposals

23. Other Important Points On Writing • Read the instructions • NSF requires you to discuss the broad impacts of your work http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsf07046/nsf07046.jsp • NIH requires risk mitigation • Be sure to give the review panel what they want to hear • NSF – 50+ references, some theory • NIH – Lots of preliminary data, real application to human health, all details of procedures, supporting letters

24. Writing Style Is Important! • You need to write in a plain style and spell everything out clearly • No jargon • Most reviewers will be outside of your sub-field. The proposal needs to be clear to them • No mystery novels • Keep everything clear and in the right section • If the reviewer cannot quickly find something important where he expects to find it, he will assume that you have not included it and recommend someone else’s proposal for funding

25. Read Chapter 9 In Johnson-Sheehan • Chapter 9 in the Johnson-Sheehan has a good discussion of style. • Simplify your sentences • Keep the subject the same in all of the sentences in a paragraph • Keep the sentence length a “breathable length” • Be sure to carry ideas from one sentence to the next

26. Questions?