Writing Successful Grant Applications

Dr. Monica Swahn Associate Vice President for Research

mswahn@gsu.edu / 404-413-1148

March 8, 2012

Objectives of WorkshopLearn about funding sourcesHallmarks of successful grant writing IdeasGrant application

Brief overview of non-scholarly parts

Funding Opportunities “Internal to GSU”

University Research Internal Grant Program http://www.gsu.edu/research/funding_opportunities.html Tenured and tenure track faculty Dissertation Award for doctoral students 10 different programs (see URSA Funding Opportunities) Support for salaries, supplies, and GRAs

Student Technology Feehttp://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwstf/Technology must be used in teaching but can also be used in research

College and department may have funding

Funding Opportunities Databaseswww.grants.gov

Most Federal agencies post announcements and gives faculty immediate advantage

Community of Science (COS)All inclusive database that includes a diverse source of fundingFaculty can set up email alertsWebsite info: http://www.gsu.edu/research/funding_opportunities.html

URSA conducts workshops for COS

External Funding Opportunities:How do I find what’s out there?

Personal contacts: importance of mentorsAcknowledgements in published papersGSU’s news sources for others at GSU who have received funding in your area (Research Update, Web)Professional organizations (conferences and newsletters)Attend Sponsors’ workshops (e.g, NIH regional conference in spring)

Basics

CompetitiveProposal

Ability to Read

& FollowInstructions

Key IngredientsGood Idea--where it startsRFP-(RFA, FO) follow it diligentlyArguments--well articulated and based on review criteriaNovel approachStrong teamKnow your Reviewers

Good Ideas--Where do they come from?

Begin with the idea and look for the Funding Opportunities or Funding SourceFind a Funding Opportunity to do the work you want to do

The Best Ideas Come from Knowing an Area Well

Understanding the problems, issues, concernsKnowing what the most pressing unanswered questions areKnowing what’s been tried as solutionsBeing able to articulate the issues

A Good (Great) IdeaNo matter how well you write or package your grant/proposal, the key to success is a good (great) idea

HOWEVER, a good idea that is embedded in a poorly written/packaged grant/ proposal will not be funded and regardless of how good the idea!

How to get started? Start thinking of interesting projects Discuss your ideas with othersTalk to a mentor (others who have been funded in your field)Complete as much of your current, related work as possible, write and submit it for publication Look for possible funding Read the guidelines for Funding OpportunitiesFind out what has been fundedConsult program staff

RFP Request for Proposals (grants)RFA Request for Applications (contracts)PA Program Announcements (grants)FO Funding Opportunities GOAL/MISSION/PURPOSE OF FUNDING

OPPORTUNITY:Who is soliciting (what agency)Who is eligible to applyHow to apply (procedures)Structure of applicationReview criteriaBudget ceiling (or award range or specific award amount)

FO--It’s Your BibleRead it carefully:

MissionReview criteriaRead the fine print---when it’s due (receipt date or mail out

date)-who’s eligible to write-what they’re looking forFollow headings as carefully as possible

How Do I Know It Is A Good Match? Read mission of agency/foundation/program announcementLook at past funded projects (NIH RePORT; NEH lists awards on website; NSF Data base)DON’T write a proposal for something the Sponsor has never funded before without assurances that it “fits” missionProgram staff

Example of Mission StatementsNational Institutes of Health

Related to human disease?Related to significant deficit in our knowledge of important biological process?Will the results of experiments lead to improvement of human condition?

Example of Mission StatementsInstitute of Education Sciences

Will my results help improve educational practice?Is research design consistent with “scientific methods”?

National Endowment for the HumanitiesDoes it strengthen teaching and learning in the humanities in schools and colleges? Does it advance knowledge of the founding principles of the United States in their full historical and institutional context?

Program OfficersGet to know program officers at agency:

Mentioned in FOMeet at conferencesAsk mentors about agency politicsCan be your best friend

Program OfficersLook in FO first (don’t bother with questions answered in material)Concept relevant?

If not, recommendmodification?another source?

Common strengths, weaknesses?Who reviews?*What criteria?*Willing to give feedback on draft?

____________* IF NOT IN FO or website

Who is soliciting (what agency)

GrantsmanshipWriting for your audience

Know your Reviewers and the review process

Good communication is importantMarketingGrant writing is different from writing for publication

Reading and understanding directions

Read a Funded ApplicationFederal agencies have databases of past funded grantsURSA can search our database for funded Principal InvestigatorsLook for inspiration! Carefully read grant applications:

Why did this get funded? How can I model my project after it?

GrantsmanshipRule #1

DO NOT write an application for yourself unless you are going to fund it yourselfWrite for your ReviewersYou must convince the entire Review Committee and the Funding Agency

Writing for ReviewersOrganize the Application (What, Why, and How’s)1) What do you want to do?2) Why do you want to do it?3) How are you going to do it?4) What is the expected outcome?5) Why is it a good thing?

Writing for the Reviewers

Address the review criteria. Answer the questionsDO NOT make the Reviewers work to find the answersUse headers and be organized to make it easyDO NOT assume the Reviewers will figure it out themselvesReviewers want to be led by the handReviewers are NOT experts

Reviewers like Proposals that

Strong Research TeamPI is well-trained and productive

Publish, publish, publishHave collaborators that “together” can do proposed workAre well-written

Reviewers like Proposals that…Easy to readEasy to understandBrief and to the point (focused)

This is not the place to impress Reviewers with everything you know

Focus, focus, focus

OrganizationGuide the Reviewer through the whole grant/proposal:

Feed them all they need to know but do it slowly!Research/scholarly plan is like a high-level sales planDon’t let the Reviewer’s mind wanderDon’t overwhelm the readers with facts“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” – New Law of ThermodynamicsElliot Postow

The Anatomy of a Common Grant/Proposal

Abstract is an overall summary:Could be last thing you writeCritical for grabbing Reviewer’s attentionMay be only thing most people on review panel readShould be consistent with rest of proposal But do not just cut and past from proposal

Introduction (Significance)Not just a literature review…more like a lawyer’s opening statementMust be clear about why this is an important question or projectHow this project will significantly advance what we know, what we can doIn first paragraph, make whole project clear

IntroductionContext part

What is the problem, why is it important? What gaps in knowledge exist and why is it important to fill them? What techniques and methods are you going to use, what will it tell you and what are the limitations?

This section established depth of PI’s thinking and knowledge, but don’t waste valuable space with broad picture.

Why Introduction Sections are so Important

You either grab the reader (or lose him) in the first few pages with the significance of the issueCompelling statistics (even current headlines) are influentialThe writing must be clear or the reader will lose patience

SignificanceGo right for the jugular

Deliver your message fastBy first paragraph, reader knows what project is about (no long “V”)

So what if: They give you money and you do the work. What is their return?

Innovation statement is here:What is new, novel, a breakthrough?

BackgroundGet the reader up to speed

An average college-educated adult with a relevant background, should be able to understand:

Only you have the means of obtaining that information (because of your approach/innovation)**Your ultimate goal is to convince them that if they don’t fund you, then progress in this field will slow or stop!

Make sure you include research directly tied to your study not just generally related

BackgroundExplain in some detail why the combination of your portion of the big picture problem, model, and methods will yield information that is unique and how other approaches will not work, or at least not as well as yoursDo not overly criticize other approachesPerson may be your Reviewer!

Specific Aims, Hypotheses & QuestionsProject must address question that is clearly linked to gap in knowledgeNIH/NSF requires specific aimThe most difficult section to write Needs to be compellingNeeds to be clearly Hypothesis driven that are testable Can’t be a fishing expedition

Design and MethodsThis is where you turn your good idea into good science/scholarshipThis is the heart and soul of the grant/proposalDesign starts with the first Specific Aim, question and then describes each task, experiment, or component associated with the specific aim

Robust MethodsUsually most importantShould be as clear as possibleUsually not enough space to be thoroughBe creative about tables and figuresHave a good match between research questions, constructs, and measures

Design and MethodsCaveats about the methods used, variables measured, and the general design of study

Outmaneuver the Reviewer to the punch line: be self-critical, but not to the point that confidence in what you are proposing is lost

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 methodDepends on sophistication of review panel

Progress Report & Preliminary Studies

New grants/proposalYou present your preliminary data, studies, or work here

Reviewers, regularly, question feasibility and whether the PI is qualified to conduct the work are answered here

Get FeedbackEstablish mentors early

Pick winners in the grant/proposal worldProvide clear instructions

What you want them to do When you want them to do it

Take no for an answerRemind gentlyShow appreciation

Feedback is HIGHLY CRITICAL!

Revision and RefinementSet the grant/proposal aside for 3-4 days (at least) to gain some perspectiveRefine, refine, refine. Make it shorter, more lucid and simpler

Less is moreThe logic and the design should be 'tight'There should be NO typographical, spelling or grammar errors

A sloppily written proposal suggests that your science/scholarship also might be sloppy

Review ProcessKnow the review criteria

Not necessarily the same as “sections in application”

Make sure address all and make it clearHeadings/sections

Know the review processKnow who the Reviewers are

Cite work in proposalAim writing for level of expertise

NIH Federal Scientific ReviewKnow who the potential Reviewers are and do what you can to “control” the selection process (refer to the web), if necessarySelf Referral Letter – request specific study sectionResearch the background of the Review Committee

NIH DatabaseRosters of Committees

Letter to SRA recommending types of Reviewers“TYPES” OF REVIEWERS NOT NAMES OF REVIEWERS

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

Continued – Common Assumptions About Review Process

All Reviewers either have, or will make time to read your proposal in detail

Some Reviewers will read it in detail (Primary and Secondary Reviewers), others won’t (Discussants)

The Reviewers will be fair and impartial in assessing the merits of your proposal

Fairness and impartialness will be the goal, but if you are a known ‘bad guy’ you might not be given the benefit of the doubt

Reasons for No Support Unoriginal ideasDiffuse, superficialLack of knowledgeLack of detailUncritical

Poor reasoningInadequate rationaleUnrealistic workloadUncertain future directions

Proposal is Hard to Follow

Headings should follow prescribed order orHeadings should follow Reviewers’ Criteria orYou should provide guide for Reviewers showing page numbers of where Reviewers will find key sections

Not Following Directions in the FOBe sure you go over each sentence and follow it carefullyCheck “carefully” whenever the FO says “must”Read FO again and again (at least 3 times: once “before”, “during”, and then “after”)

Preparing the Resubmission and Rebuttal

Write the nasty reply you would really like to send and then destroy itNEVER 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!

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)

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

Final Recommendation

Five Important Hints for Writing Proposals Allow yourself to walk in Reviewers’ sandals Learn your topic well so you know the right

questions to ask Offer up a good argument Have the best science/scholarship Always follow directions!

The “Non-Scholarly” PartsFormsBudgetProcedures for processing

In the Beginning…Read Program Guidelines to determine:

Eligibility (Higher Education Institution or individual)What needs to be done Who is going to do itFormatTiming (order of tasks)Electronic or paper submissionAgency-specific requirements

Georgia State University & Its Foundations

Georgia State University (GSU) is State regulated/funded UniversityGeorgia State University Research Foundation (also known as GSURF)

A private foundation associated with GSU which technically is the applicant in almost all external grants & contracts

Georgia State University Foundation (GSUF) administered through Development Office and processes gifts

Who is the Applicant?Georgia State University Research Foundation

NOT Faculty Member, Student, or GSUExceptions to this: Fellowships that are awarded to individuals rather than institutionsTherefore and thereby, proposal/award must be handled through University

Proposal Development: FormsSponsored Agency Forms need to be completed (either paper or online)Fact sheet contains useful information on URSA’s website:

www.gsu.edu/research/proposal_development.html

Applicant: GSURF (Not Principal Investigator)Authorized Institutional Official

Associate Director Marca Gurulé or AVPs

Continue – Proposal Development: Forms

Only “authorized” individuals able to commit resources and enter into legal contracts on behalf of GSURF PI can’t sign a contract or submit a grant for the institution EXCEPT for individual fellowship programs (must review eligibility)

Electronic Submission Application

Grants.gov: Many agencies are submitting applications through grants.gov. MUST download electronic application from siteNIH: Grants.gov & eRA CommonsNSF: Fastlane (web-base application)Some require PI’s registration (e.g. NIH, NSF…)

Budget: Program GuidelinesIdentify limits or target (ceiling) total costs or total direct costsSet a start date and/or period of performance (can be specified by agency)Identify limits on F&A or Indirect CostsIdentify budget categories and limitations (e.g., NSF only summer salary)Identify any Cost Share requirements

Project Budget

Budget Period 1

Budget Period 4

Budget Period 2

Budget Period 3

Budget Period 5

Project Period

NOTE: Budget periods are usually one year, but can vary in length

Types of Costs in a Budget

Direct Costs• Salaries and wages• Fringe benefits• Equipment• Travel• Materials and supplies• Other direct costs

Facilities and Administrative Costs• Building depreciation• Building interest• Equipment depreciation• Operations and maintenance• Library• General administration• Department administration• Sponsored projects administration• Student services

Cost sharing• Direct costs• F&A costs

Direct Costs

F&A Costs

CostSharing

TotalBudget+ + =

Direct CostsDirect Costs can be distinctly identified as costs directly related to the project and are reasonable and necessaryDivided into budget categories. May be Sponsor specific but some are standard categoriesDownload spreadsheet and budget category explanation from URSA’s website under Proposal Development

Facilities and Administrative Costs (F&A)Indirect Costs

GSU’s policy applies the Federally approved negotiated Indirect Costs Rate (F&A Rate) to all externally Sponsored projects

These Indirect Costs support research such as building depreciation, libraries, operation and maintenance, general departmental administration and support for conducting research

F&A RatePercentage (%) of Costs are negotiated with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) based on data collected on record of our costs

New Update: New F&A Rates have been successfully negotiated for a new two year F&A “Indirect Cost" Rate Agreement, dated Feb. 13, 2012. Reference at http://www.gsu.edu/research/58350.html

Rates are different for research, instruction, and serviceRates are different for On-campus versus Off-campus activitiesModified Total Direct Costs (excludes participant costs, equipment, and subcontract above $25,000)

**Approved as of February 13, 2012

“Fully Loaded or Fully Recovered”Means you use the correct Indirect Cost Rate for your projectMust do UNLESS:

Agencies limit Indirect Cost Rate ORObtain approval from Dr. Jim Weyhenmeyer, Vice President for Research and Economic Development, and this must be justified

Cost ShareCost sharing is when PIs commit University/Department resources to pay for some of the costs associated with a Sponsored Project PLEASE LIMIT commitment to only when cost sharing is required by Sponsor Even if it is true, don’t officially commit to it Committing to Cost Share that is not required must be approved by Dr. Weyhenmeyer

Proposal Routing

Chair and Dean’s Offices Reviews Budgetand Signs Form

OSP Officer Reviews and forwards

to Authorizing Institutional Official for

Approval andNotifies PI

Principal Investigator First completes

Proposal Approval Form and accompanying

documentation

Proposal SubmissionProposal Approval Form (routing form)Get signatures from chair and departmentNeed to start process at least 6 days aheadGet “everything” to OSP 5 days ahead“Everything” does not include research narrative but does include electronic application Use OSP Quick Reference to see what needs to be included

Proposal Submission: CertificationsProposal Approval FormCompliance approvals can be pendingPI certifies to adherence of GSU’s

Conflict of Interest PolicyIntellectual Property PolicyTerms and Conditions of Award

Proposal SubmissionOnce the proposal is reviewed by OSP and the Proposal Approval Form is signed by the Authorized Official

It is, then, returned to the PIPaper Copy

It is the responsibility of the PI to mail the completed original to the Sponsor along with the correct number of copies

Electronic CopyIt is dependent on Agency

Electronic SubmissionsEach Agency is differentGrants.gov workshopWebsite has step-by-step instructions Role of PI and Authorizing Official differs by Agency/submission Must have completed application two (2) days before submission deadline

Notice of AwardHow do I know if I was awarded/funded?

Some funding agencies have electronic system (e.g., eRA Commons)Email or Mail of award letter to you and/or notifying Authorized Official (Associate Director Marca Gurulé)

If you are the only one receiving the notice, you must send it to your OSP Officer to officially accept the award

Questions