Grand Challenges Explorations:

Agenda• Overview of the Foundation & the GCE Program• Specific Topics for this Round• How Proposals are Reviewed• Preparing a Competitive Proposal• Is Michigan Finding Success in GCE competition?• Next Steps

Gates FoundationGuided by the belief that every life has equal value, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives. In developing countries, it focuses on improving people’s health and giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty.

1200 Employees

$40.2 Billion Endowment

$28.3 Billion in Grants since its Inception

$3.4 Billion in Grants in 2012 alone

Priority Areas in Global Health• The Global Health Program harnesses advances in science and

technology to save lives in poor countries

• Global Health Program is focused on developing ways to fight and prevent Infectious Diseases with particular focus on

• Discovery and Translational Science• Enetric and Diarrheal Diseases• HIV/AIDS• Malaria• Pneumonia• Tuberculosis• Neglected Infectious Disease

Priority Areas in Global Development

• Many of the foundation’s Global Development Priorities in developing countries directly engage health.

• Agricultural Development• Emergency Response• Family Planning• Financial Services for the Poor• Global Libraries• Maternal, Neonatal and Child Health• Nutrition• Polio• Vaccine Delivery• Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

Gates DataUniversity of Michigan

$6.3 Million – U-M’s largest grant10 – Number of Grand Challenges grants at U-M6th – U-M’s rank among by number of Grand Challenges awards$27.2 Million – Total Gates funding at U-M

Global Funding

$892 Million – Global Health funding portfolio in 2012$1.6 Billion – Global Development funding portfolio in 2012

Other Universities – (Just a small sampling)

$28 Million – Duke University for HIV vaccine research (2011)$25 Million – University of Washington to build evidence for support for aid campaigns (2013)$25 Million – University of Illinois for work on crop yields in developing countries (2012)$24 Million – Johns Hopkins for work in family planning (2012)$23 Million – Notre Dame for bug spray (2013)

Harv

ard

Uni

vers

ity*

John

s Hop

kins

Uni

vers

ity

Stan

ford

Uni

vers

ity

U-C

, San

Fra

ncisc

o

Yale

Uni

vers

ity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Mich

igan

U-C

, Los

Ang

eles

Corn

ell U

nive

rsity

U-C

, Dav

is

Uni

v. o

f Que

ensla

nd, B

risba

ne...

Uni

vers

ity o

f WA,

Sea

ttle

Harv

ard

Uni

vers

ity

Mas

s. G

ener

al

Arizo

na S

tate

Uni

vers

ity, T

empe

Emor

y U

niv.

Sch

. of M

edici

ne

Intl

Ctr f

or D

iarr

heal

Dise

ase

Rs...

Uni

vers

ity C

olle

ge Lo

ndon

U-C

, San

Die

go

Impe

rial C

olle

ge Lo

ndon

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Stat

e, R

alei

gh

Texa

s A&

M H

ealth

Sci.

Ctr

, Col

le...

U-C

, Ber

kele

y

Uni

vers

ity o

f WI,

Mad

ison

Geor

gia

Tech

Uni

vers

ity

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

Round 1

Round 2

Round 3

Round 4

Round 5

Round 6

Round 7

Round 8

Round 9

Round 10

Round 11

Strategic Analysis

Explorations Grants from Gates

Looking for creative ideas that can potentially transform global health

• Competition is run every 6 months• Topics can change every round • Fit the goals and disease priorities of the Grand Challenges in

Global Health.• Where new thinking is needed to overcome today’s roadblocks • Can be phased

• Must envision impact on Gates priorities and strategies• Note: Global Health ≠ USA. Needs to be explicit

The Foundation’s focus remains on identifying

transformational solutions that make a difference for

health in the developing world. Projects must be oriented

in practical ways to solving health problems for a set of core

diseases of great interest to the Gates Foundation for people

who live in extreme poverty.

ApplicationsApplication Information

DEADLINE: May 6, 2014 at 11:30 AM Pacific Time

For Proposal Support: martinms@umich.edu – Maureen Martin, Executive Director, Foundation Relationslartigue@umich.edu – Donna Lartigue, Associate Director, Foundation Relationssutkowi@umich.edu – Joseph Sutkowi, Assistant Director, Foundation Relations

Visit: foundations.umich.edu

Round 13 Topics

1. Explore New Ways to Measure Fetal and Infant Brain Development (new)

2. New Ways of Working Together: Integrating Community-Based Interventions (new)

3. Inciting Healthy Behaviors: nudge disrupt, leapfrog, reach

4. New Enabling Tools and Models Supporting Development of Interventions for Enetric Dysfunction

5. Innovations in Feedback & Accountability Systems for Agricultural Development

Topic: New Ways of Working Together: Integrating Community-Based Interventions Aims to leverage existing community-wide mass drug administration (MDA) platforms for one or more of the five Neglected Tropical Disease (NTD) drug distribution efforts and integrate it with another community-valued or needed health intervention or agricultural service with a goal of increasing efficiency or impact.

Diseases: Lymphatic Filiariasis, Onchocerciasis, Trachoma, Schistosomiasis, and Soil Transmitted Helminthes

Priorities: • Integrate MDA NTD with Intensive Disease Management (five diseases)• Integrate MDA NTDs with another NTD• Integrate MDA NTDs with another community-valued or needed health

intervention• Bring MDA to a new population• Integrate NTD MDA with malaria eradication efforts

Link to RFP

Topic: Explore New Ways to Measure Fetal and Infant Brain Development

Seeks new approaches for measuring brain function and development, with a focus on tests that are simple, reliable, non-invasive, objective, universally applicable, and include those appropriate for fetal life, newborns, and early infancy.

Purposes of Tests:• Monitor existing and new health interventions• Establish standard curves of brain function-for-age• Enable early detection of deviation from healthy development

Also seeking new approaches for accurately measuring gestational age, focusing on simple, reliable, non-invasive, universally applicable tests that can be applied either to pregnant women or to the newborn or infant.

Successful proposals will:• Build on the rapidly growing knowledge of early development, brain development, and measurement

tools such as imaging technologies• Are “off the beaten track” and daring in promise, that clearly differentiate from current approaches• Have a testable hypothesis, include an evaluation plan, and yield interpretable and unambiguous data

Link to RFP

Topic: Inciting Healthy Behaviors: nudge, disrupt, leapfrog, reach

• Solutions may include but are not limited to: education, campaigns, behavioral

‘nudges’, new support and incentive systems for access to care and treatment,

and models and tools to understand health-seeking behaviors, constraints, and

drivers. We seek solutions that are interactive, contextual, scale-able, and

relevant to health systems strengthening.

• We’re specifically interested in work targeting: reproductive health, maternal,

neonatal, and child health, nutrition, HIV, TB, polio, and vaccine delivery.

• Priority will be given to projects that address current inequities in health

seeking behaviors, and prioritize marginalized populations.

Link to RFP Awarded Grants

Topic: Novel Enabling Tools and Models Supporting Development of Interventions for Enteric DysfunctionGiven the broad impact of acute secretory diarrhea (ASD) and environmental enteric dysfunction (ESD) on nutrition, growth, cognition, immune response, and overall health, particularly in children under five years of age, Gates is interested in developing therapeutic interventions to improve child health in the developing world by identifying agents to restore normal gut function in the target population.

Host-directed therapies rather than agents that would kill the pathogen. Preclinical assays, methods, tools, and models by which potential therapeutic interventions can be identified, developed, compared, and prioritized – particularly methods which can de-risk the approach as it transitions from in vitro and/or in vivo assays into human clinical trials.

Novel and innovative ideas for tools, approaches, and models to support preclinical development of new agents for ASD and EED. We particularly seek approaches which recapitulate the pathophysiology of impaired gut function as it occurs in our target population.

Link to RFP Awarded Grants

Topic: Innovations in Feedback & Accountability Systems for Agricultural Development

To build effective feedback and accountability in agricultural development programs that enable farmer’s voices to be heard.

• New practices/systems to be used throughout all project phases to increase constituent feedback and/or enable communities to hold programs accountable;

• Systems to evaluate existing feedback practices used by your organization. This evaluation should provide evidence of how your organization learns from constituent feedback and shares these practices with others;

• Systems that enhance your existing feedback practices, e.g. new practices to make publicly available constituent feedback at regular intervals and in transparent and easily accessible ways; and

Link to RFP Awarded Grants

“One bold idea. That’s all it takes.”

The Small Print:“That can stand out above 3,000 other applications, and capture

the attention of at least one ‘champion’…”

Grant Opportunity• The foundation awards 80-100 proposals per round with a

Phase I $100,000 grant• 40,000 proposals have been submitted, 850 selected

• Successful Phase I projects can be invited to apply for a $1,000,000 Phase II grant

• 51 Phase II grants have been awarded

• The program has totaled roughly $136 Million

The Review Process

The Review Process

• Gates receives approximately 3,000 applications each round and funds 80-100. Of those funded 50% had submitted before (idea is refined).

• Each reviewer reads approximately 300 proposals. • Reviewers read through each proposal at most 10 minutes –

you have to capture their attention early on to get on their short list.

• It can only take one of several readers championing your proposal to achieve funding.

Reviewer instructions• Topic Responsiveness – • Does the proposal address the problems described in the topic?

(types of research and topics not to be funded are listed in each topic description)

• Innovative Approach – • Does the idea offer an unconventional or creative approach to

the problem outlined in the topic? • Does it demonstrate application of a new or pioneering

approach? • Does the proposal describe how the project varies from current

approaches, offers new premises or hypotheses to test, and • Does it provide a rational basis for expecting success?

Writing your proposal

All proposals must • have a testable hypothesis, • include an associated plan for how the idea would be

tested or validated, and • yield interpretable and unambiguous data in Phase I, in

order to be considered for Phase II funding.

Successful proposals are• "off the beaten track" • daring in premise• clearly differentiated from approaches currently being

developed or employed.

Writing your Proposal

Technologies or approaches should• enhance uptake, acceptability and/or provide for

sustained use (e.g. culture, affordability, illiteracy) • enable or provide for low-cost solutions (scalable) • promote effective delivery and administration of

new solutions and • ensure or enhance safety.

The “Dos”DO Summarize your idea in 2 sentences at the top. You have to capture the reviewers’ interest quickly.

DO Read through the category descriptions thoroughly.

DO State succinctly and clearly: What is innovative? How this is different? How is this a game changer? What is your deliverable?

DO Respond directly to the Exploration topic of interest.

DO Use a title that grabs attention.DO Try again. Many have won on their second shot.

The “Don’ts”

Don’t propose the next iterative step.Don’t use domain-specific terminology.Don’t spend space writing how great your lab is (identifying information isn’t allowed).Don’t ramble. Be strategic and direct. Don’t propose an idea they specifically list as “off topic”

What we’ve seen work – 5 tips

1. Stressing practicality and adoptability• Demonstrating an understanding of the situation in

which the product/discovery/method will be employed: “low-cost”“culturally-appropriate”

What we’ve seen work – 5 tips

2. Very clearly differentiating work from current directions in the field

• “The work here turns this conventional view on its head by proposing that specific interactions with specific ….”

• “Instead of detecting the spectrum of molecular vibrations, … we extend our expertise to focus on…, a novel technique that has not been investigated before …”

• “Existing initiatives have not been sufficient to revolutionize vaccine development …”

• “Most existing antivirals…” “Current approaches…” “Conventional diagnosis of malaria…”

What we’ve seen work – 5 tips

3. Bold statements about project aims • “To truly realize revolutionary advances in vaccines that

protect developing world populations…”• “My unconventional idea of training international leaders in

infectious disease… could prove a wise investment in the scientific enterprise by building capacity in human capital, and by complementing conventional approaches to global health challenges”

What we’ve seen work – 5 tips

4. Scientific language without letting the reader get lost in the details• “We propose a mutable DNA vaccine that will

trigger immune responses directed against antigenic variants”• “two proteins can be combined to produce a Tat-

RevM10 fusion protein that will be taken up by cells and activate HIV expression, but not produce infectious virus.”

What we’ve seen work – 5 tips

5. Why this PI/team (you) is the right one to do this work• “A major advantage of this study proposal is the

expertise of the IB study team with respect to vaccine development and financing issues”• “the PI is an expert in medical device design for resource-

limited settings” • “This multidisciplinary effort combines the experience of

two investigators providing expertise in both the immunology of HIV during latency and the development of new anti-HIV treatments.”

Can I be successful?

Absolutely!

Hosagrahar Jagadish, EECS/CSE – Aligning Data Across Incompatible Geographical UnitsGabriel Nuñez, Pathology – Targeting Intimin for Removal of Enteropathogenic E.ColiErdogan Gulari, Chemical Engineering – Antimicrobial Peptides against Mycobacteria Craig Harris, Environmental Health Sciences – Models of Embryonic Histiotrophic Nutrition in

Organogenesis Steven King, Internal Medicine – Turning HIV Proteins to Cure InfectionKathy Sienko, Mechanical Engineering – Circumcision Tool For Traditional Ceremonies In AfricaWei Lu, Mechanical Engineering – Spectrum-Based Low-Cost DiagnosticsAlice Telesnitsky, Microbiology and Immunology – A Lexicon of HIV-RNA InteractionsMatthew Davis, Pediatrics-Ambulatory Care Program – Innovation Bridge: Linking Biotech

Breakthroughs to Emerging Vaccine ManufacturersMarilia Cascalho, General Surgery – A Mutable Vaccine for HIV

Next Steps

1. Review the Grand Challenges Explorations site2. Review the Application instructions3. Get feedback from colleagues and Foundation Relations Staff

(optional, but recommended)martinms@umich.edu – Maureen Martin, Executive Director, Foundation Relationslartigue@umich.edu – Donna Lartigue, Associate Director, Foundation Relations (Joint appointment with SPH)sutkowi@umich.edu – Joseph Sutkowi, Assistant Director, Foundation Relationsmoburns@umich.edu – Maureen Burns, Assistant Director, Foundation and Government Relations, College of Engineering

4. Apply (do connect with ORSP)