Office of Proposal Development 10/21/2005 Vice President for Research, Texas A&M Vice Chancellor for Research, TAMUS 1 Presentation topics Overview of

Office of Proposal Development 10/21/2005

Vice President for Research, Texas A&M Vice Chancellor for Research, TAMUS

1

Presentation topics Overview of Office of Proposal Development Generic competitive proposal writing

strategies Identifying external funding Analyzing the funding agency Reading the proposal solicitation Understanding the review process Craft of Proposal Writing



2

Office of proposal development A unit of the Office of Vice President for

Research at Texas A&M University, partnered with: Office of Vice Chancellor for Research and

Federal Relations, Office of Vice Chancellor for Academic and

Student Affairs, and the Health Science Center



3

Office of proposal development Supports faculty in the development and writing of

large and small research grants to federal agencies and foundations.

Focuses on support of center-level initiatives, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research teams, research affinity groups, new and junior faculty research, diversity in the research enterprise, and long-term proposal planning.

Helps develop partnership initiatives at Texas A&M, across the A&M System universities, and HSC.

Supports proposal development activities and training programs to help new faculty write more competitive proposals.



4

Office of proposal development Jean Ann Bowman, Research Scientist

B.S., Journalism; B.S. and Ph.D., Hydrology and Physical Geography Focuses on proposals dealing with earth, ecological, and environmental

sciences, as well as those dealing with agriculture. Libby Childress, Administrative Assistant

Handles scheduling, resources, and project coordination. Mike Cronan, Director

B.S., Civil Engineering (Structures); B.A., Political Science; M.A., English; Registered Professional Engineer, Texas (063512) Helps develop partnerships. Leads center- and program-level proposals.

Establishes new initiatives and sets the direction of the office. Lucy Deckard, Associate Director

B.S. and M.S., Materials Science and Engineering Leads the new faculty initiatives. Focuses on proposals dealing with the

physical sciences, interdisciplinary materials group, and equipment and instrumentation. Also leads training seminars on graduate and postdoctoral fellowships, undergraduate research, and CAREER awards.



5

Office of proposal development Susan Maier, Research Development Officer

B.A., M.A., and Ph.D., Psychology Focuses on the Health Science Center’s NIH biomedical science

initiatives, as well as on the HSC’s University partnership initiatives. Leads training seminars on NIH.

Phyllis McBride, Assistant Director B.A., Journalism and English; M.A. and Ph.D., English Leads the one-day Craft of Grant Writing Seminars and the

fifteen-week Craft of Grant Writing Workshops. Focuses on DHS and NIH initiatives, and provides editing and rewriting.

Robyn Pearson, Research Development Officer B.A. and M.A., Anthropology Focuses on proposals dealing with the humanities, liberal arts,

and social and behavioral sciences, and education. Provides support for the development of interdisciplinary research groups and provides editing and rewriting.



6

Identifying external funding Self-directed searches of funding agency web sites

combined with the use of Google, Yahoo or other search tools are highly effective and efficient ways of identifying research and educational funding opportunities for the university researcher.

Individual researchers have the most substantive and nuanced understanding of their research interests, directions, and capacities, and therefore it is most productive if the searches for research opportunities are primarily filtered through their own perspectives.



7

Funding opportunities search criteria Define disciplinary domain of interest (e.g.,

science, social sciences, humanities, education, health and biomedical sciences, engineering);

Characterize the nature of the research (basic, applied, applications);

Identify a subset of funding agencies whose mission, strategic plan, and investment priorities are aligned with these specific research interests.



8

Refining the funding search Identify research opportunities with regular

grant cycles within a particular agency (e.g., NIH and NSF have regular grant cycles of specific research programs that remain open for many years;

Identify new research opportunities and investment directions at funding agencies;

Expand the base of potential research funding sources.



9

Google is your best friend! Google and Yahoo searches offer a robust

complement to known web sites containing funding opportunities information.

A modified question used as the search text string will identify sites helpful in the search for funding opportunities, help narrow the focus of the search, and in many cases identify funding sources perhaps unknown to the researcher.

The search text may be as simple as “funding undergraduate research”, “funding graduate fellowships”, or “research funding alerts.”



10

Google is your best friend!

http://www.google.com/ http://www.yahoo.com/ Search for research opportunities Find funded programs, abstracts Find workshops, conferences, seminars Find reports, publications, project documents



11

Six major funders for TAMU-System

Funding Agency URL Hotlink to Funding Opportunities

National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov/funding/

Health & Human Services &NIH Grants & Funding

http://www.dhhs.gov/grants/index.shtmlhttp://grants2.nih.gov/grants/index.cfm

NASA Research Opportunities http://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/

Environmental Protection Agency

http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/open_awards.htm

Department of DefenseDARPAArmy Research OfficeNaval Research OfficeAir Force Research Office

http://www.darpa.mil/baa/http://www.aro.ncren.net/research/index.htmhttp://www.onr.navy.mil/default.asphttp://www.afosr.af.mil/oppts/afrfund.htm#Research

USDA/CSREES http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/research.html



12

Fedgrants.gov

One of the best portals to funding opportunities Tabular listing current funding opportunities and

URLs for 45 research funding agencies (see following slide)

FedGrants http://www.fedgrants.gov/Applicants/index.html

FedGrants Grants Synopsis Search http://www.fedgrants.gov/grants/servlet/SearchServlet/

FedGrants Notification Service http://www.fedgrants.gov/ApplicantRegistration.html



13

FedGrants



14

Federal Grants Notification Service



15



16

Grants.gov

Home page: http://www.grants.gov To receive automated funding alerts tailored to your

research interests, visit http://www.grants.gov/Find#receive.

Select one of four automated funding alert options: “Selected Notices Based on Funding Opportunity Number,” “Selected Agencies and Categories of Funding Activities,” “Selected Interest and Eligibility Groups,” or “All Grants Notices.”

Click on the link for the option that best suits your needs, enter the required information, and click on the “Submit to Mailing List” button.



17

Grants.gov



18

Electronic Funding Alert Services/ Email NSF, National Science Foundation

http://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/ MyNSF, formerly the Custom News Service,

allows you to receive notifications about new content posted on the NSF website.

Notification can be received via email or RSS.



19

MyNSF



20



21

Electronic Funding Alert Services/ Email NIH National Institutes of Health Listserv

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/listserv.htm Each week (usually on Friday afternoon), the NIH

transmits an e-mail with Table of Contents (TOC) information for that week's issue of the NIH Guide, via the NIH LISTSERV.

The TOC includes a link to the Current NIH Guide Weekly Publication as well as links to each NIH Guide RFA, PA and Notice published for that week.



22

NIH Guide LISTSERV



23



24

Electronic Funding Alert Services/ Email National Aeronautics and Space Administration

http://research.hq.nasa.gov/subs.cfm Once you are registered for this service you can receive

email notification of the release of research announcements pertaining to any or all of NASA offices.

National Center for Environmental Research, Environmental Protection Agency http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_list/elists/ Use this page to subscribe or unsubscribe to the NCER e-

mail mailing list. NCER periodically sends out emails to our subscribers announcing new grant and/or funding opportunities or highlight new documents in specific subject areas.



25

National Aeronautics and Space Administration



26

NCER E-mail Lists



27

Electronic Funding Alert Services/ Email U.S. Dept. of Education, EDINFO

http://listserv.ed.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind05&L=edinfo Information from & about the U.S. Department of Education

publications, funding opportunities & more. NEH Connect, National Endowment for the

Humanities http://www.neh.gov/news/nehconnect.html Stay connected to the humanities with NEH Connect! Each

month NEH Connect! delivers the latest news, projects, upcoming events, and grant deadlines from NEH.



28

EDInfo: Archives



29



30

NEH Connect!



31

Centers for Disease Control & Prevention The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC) allows users to subscribe to several mailing lists via the CDC World Wide Web site.

To subscribe, go to http://www.cdc.gov/subscribe.html and fill out the on-line form.



32

Subscribe to a CDC Mailing List



33

DOE Pulse & JUST INFO

Department of Energy. DOE Pulse, a bimonthy newsletter, highlights work being done at the Department of Energy's national laboratories. Each issue will include research highlights, updates on collaborations among laboratories, and profiles of individual researchers. To subscribe, go to http://www.ornl.gov/news/pulse/pulse_home.htm.

Department of Justice. JUST INFO, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), is a biweekly e-mail newsletter that reports on a wide variety of criminal justice topics. To subscribe, send a message to [email protected] . In the body of the message, type: subscribe JUSTINFO <your full name>.



34

Here's What's New at the National Labs



35

National Institute for Standards and Technology NIST Update is a bimonthly report that

highlights research, activities and services at National Institute for Standards and Technology.

To begin receiving e-mail copies, sign up at http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/mailform.htm



36

National Institute of Standards & Technology



37

NCHRP

Transit Cooperative Research Program and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program

To register to receive e-mail notification that Requests for Proposals have been published on the NCHRP and TCRP Homepage, just complete the form on web at http://www4.nas.edu/trb/crpmail.nsf/registration.



38

National Cooperative Highway Research Program



39



40

Leveraging the internet in funding search VPR/Office of Proposal Development

VPR/OPD Funding Opportunities Table http://anthropology.tamu.edu/downloads/ResearchFunding.pdf

Monthly compilation of upcoming funding opportunities in all academic disciplines distributed System-wide by email

Subscribe: [email protected]



41

Leveraging the internet in funding search Duke University Funding Alert Newsletter

http://www.ors.duke.edu/index.html Arts & Humanities; Community Development;

Curriculum Development Environmental & Life Sciences; Funding News;

Graduate Funding Health Sciences; International Opportunities;

Multidisciplinary Physical Sciences & Engineering; Postdoctoral

Funding; Social Sciences



42

Duke University Research Support



43

Leveraging the internet in funding search University of Iowa, Funding Opportunities

http://research.uiowa.edu/grantTrack/grantbulletin.php Arts and Humanities; Biological Sciences; International;

Multidisciplinary; Physical & Mathematical Sciences; Social Sciences

Iowa State Opportunities by Due Date http://www.vpresearch.iastate.edu/OSP/FundingOpportunities.html

http://www.vpresearch.iastate.edu/OSP/Maillogs.html Michigan State U. Graduate Fellowship Listings

http://www.lib.msu.edu/harris23/grants/3gradinf.htm Michigan State University provides links to fellowship

funding lists in over 40 different academic disciplines.



44

University Iowa Grant Bulletin



45

Weekly Funding Opportunities



46

Leveraging the internet in funding search Townsend Center for the Humanities, UC Berkeley

http://townsendcenter.berkeley.edu/postdocs.shtml This is excellent listing of national Postdoctoral fellowships in the

humanities organized in a table of URLs.

The University of California at Berkeley http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/funding.html Links to table of programs, profiles, and URLs for

researchers seeking funding in the following areas: Faculty Individual Prizes and Awards, Equipment Grants, New and Young Faculty Grants, Travel Grants, Women and Minorities Grants, and Postdoctoral Funding in the Biosciences.



47

Leveraging the internet in funding search U. Massachusetts New Faculty Research Funding

This site offers an excellent, comprehensive compilation of federal agency and foundation research awards targeting tenure track faculty in the following areas: Agriculture & Food Science, Arts & Humanities, Cancer, Chemical Sciences, Computer & Information Science, Education, Engineering, Environmental Science, Health & Medical, History, Mathematics, Neuroscience, Nursing, Physical & Life Sciences, Religion, Social & Behavioral Sciences, Science Education

http://www.umass.edu/research/ogca/funding/newfacultydisc.html



48

Leveraging the internet in funding search Funding for New Faculty & Junior Investigators

http://www.umass.edu/research/ogca/funding/newfacultydisc.html http://www.physics.harvard.edu/grants.htm http://www.unh.edu/osr/funding/support/young_pi.pdf http://www.sfsu.edu/~ptf/docs/NewInvestigatorAwards.pdf http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/Fund/newfaculty.html http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/index.htm http://www.columbia.edu/cu/opg/fund/newinvest-1102.pdf

Above URLs at various universities offer a fairly exhaustive compilation of funding opportunities for new and junior faculty and career awards in most academic disciplines.



49

Analyzing the funding agency Analyzing the mission, strategic plan,

investment priorities, and culture of a funding agency provides information key to enhancing proposal competitiveness.

Competitiveness depends on a series of well-informed decision points made throughout the writing of a proposal related to arguing the merit of the research and culminating in a well-integrated document that convinces the reviewers to recommend funding.



50

Analyzing the funding agency mission Funding agencies have a clearly defined agenda

and mission. Funded grants are those that best meet that agenda

and advance the mission of the funding agency. If a proposal does not meet an agency's mission, it will not be funded. This is perhaps the most difficult adjustment to be made in proposal development and writing.

Having a "good idea" by itself is not enough. Good ideas have to be clearly connected and integrated with a funding agency’s mission and agenda.

The proposal must fit the mission and strategic plans of the funding agency.



51

Analyzing the funding agency mission Funding agencies are not passive funders of

programs, but see themselves as leaders in a national dialogue on scientific issues, and as part of the community defining the national agenda.

A strong proposal allows the funding agency to form a partnership with the submitting institution that will carry out the agency's vision and mission.

The applicant must understand the nature of this partnership and the expectations of the funding agency, both during proposal development and throughout a funded project.



52

Analyzing the funding agency

Knowledge about a funding agency helps the applicant make good decisions throughout the entire proposal development and writing process by better understanding the relationship of the research to the broader context of the funding agency’s mission, strategic plan, and research investment priorities.



53


Who is the audience (e.g., agency, program officers, and reviewers) and what is the best way to address them?

What is a fundable idea and how is it best characterized within the context of the agency research investment priorities?

How are claims of research uniqueness and innovation best supported in the proposal text and reflective of agency strategic research plans?

How does the applicant best communicate his or her passion, excitement, commitment, and capacity to perform the proposed research to review panels?



54


Mission Culture Language Investment priorities Strategic plan Organizational chart Management Program officers Reports, publications

Leadership speeches Public testimony Review criteria Review process Review panels Project abstracts Current funded projects Funded researchers



55


It is important to differentiate between and among various funding agencies by mission, strategic plan, investment priorities, culture, etc.

For example, researchers in the social and behavioral sciences and the physical, computational, and biological sciences may have relevant research opportunities at two or more agencies, e.g., NIH, NSF, DOD, EPA, but these agencies are very dissimilar in many ways—see following slide:



56


Research focus within disciplines

Research that is basic, applied, or applications driven

Research scope and performance time horizon

Exploratory, open-ended research, or targeted to technology development

Multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary

Classified, non-classified Proprietary, non-proprietary Independent research, or

dependent linkages to the agency mission, e.g., health care, education, economic development, defense



57

Analyzing the funding agency It is important for the applicant to differentiate

between basic research agencies (e.g., NSF, NIH) and mission-focused agencies (e.g. DOD, NASA, USDA), as well as to differentiate between hypothesis-driven research and need- or applications driven research at the agencies.

Agencies funding basic research would likely share the following characteristics:



58


Independent agency and management

Independent research vision, mission, and objectives

Award criteria based on intellectual and scientific excellence

Peer panel reviewed, ranked, and awarded by merit

Focus on fundamental or basic research at the “frontiers of science,” innovation, and creation of new knowledge

Open ended, exploratory, long investment horizon

Non-classified, non-proprietary



59


Alternatively, an analysis of mission-oriented agencies (e.g., DOD, DOE, ED, USDA) would show characteristics related to research and development that will serve the agency’s immediate goals and objectives, as seen on following slide:



60

Analyzing the funding agency Scope of work tightly defines research

tasks/deliverables Predominately applied research for meeting near-

term objectives, technology development and transfer, policy goals

Predominately internal review by program officers Awards based on merit, but also on geographic

distribution, political distribution, long term relationship with agency, Legislative, and Executive branch policies

Classified and non-classified research



61

Analyzing the funding agency Learn to echo the language and usage of the funding

agency is another factor that may enhance the overall competitiveness of a proposal.

Funding agencies, like most institutions, often develop a unique phraseology to define and describe common, recurrent components of their mission and research agenda, e.g., “broader impacts” or “research and education integration” at NSF.

Learning the language of the funding agency is important for writing the narrative section of a proposal, and helps in framing arguments more clearly and in better communicating them to program managers and reviewers.



62

Reading the proposal solicitation The Request for Proposals (RFP) – also

called the Program Announcement (PA), Request for Applications (RFA), or Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) – is one common starting point of the proposal writing process.

Other starting points to the proposal process include investigator-initiated (unsolicited) proposals, or white papers and quad charts common to the defense agencies.



63

Reading the proposal solicitation The generic program solicitation or RFP

represents an invitation by a funding agency for applicants to submit requests for funding in research areas of interest to the agency.

It is used continuously throughout proposal development and writing as a reference point to ensure that an evolving proposal narrative fully addresses and accurately reflects the goals and objectives of the funding agency, including review criteria listed in the document.



64

Reading the proposal solicitation The RFP contains most of the essential information

the researcher needs in order to develop and write a competitive proposal that is fully responsive to the agency’s funding objectives and review criteria.

The RFP is not a menu or smorgasbord offering the applicant a choice of addressing some research topics but not others, depending on interest, or some review criteria but not others.

The RFP is a non-negotiable listing of performance expectations reflecting the stated goals, objectives, and desired outcomes of the agency.



65

Identifying the Contents of the RFP Agency research goals, objectives, and performance

expectations Statement and scope of work Proposal topics to be addressed by the applicant Deliverables or other outcomes Review criteria and process Research plan Key personnel, evaluation, & management Eligibility, due dates, available funding, funding limits,

anticipated number of awards, performance period, proposal formatting requirements, budget and other process requirements, and reference documents.



66

Reviewing the RFP The RFP is not a document to skim quickly, read

lightly, or read only once. The RFP defines a very detailed set of research

expectations the applicant must meet in order to be competitive for funding.

It needs to be read and re-read and fully understood, both in very discrete detail and as an integrated whole.

The RFP sets the direction and defines the performance parameters of every aspect of proposal development and writing.

Read it word by word; sentence by sentence; paragraph by paragraph; and page by page.



67

Reviewing the RFP Clarify any ambiguity by repeated readings of

the RFP. If these ambiguities cannot be resolved, call

the funding agency and ask for clarification from a program officer.

As much as possible, all ambiguity needs to be resolved prior to the proposal writing process so that ideas and arguments are clearly and tightly aligned with the scope and intent of the funding agency.



68

Reviewing the RFP A well-written RFP clearly states the funding agency’s

research objectives in a concise and comprehensive fashion, devoid of wordiness, repetition, and vaguely contradictory re-phasing of program requirements.

However, not all RFPs are clearly written. In some cases, the funding agency itself is unclear about specific research objectives, particularly in more cutting-edge or exploratory research areas.

Therefore, never be timid about calling a program officer for clarification. Timidity is never rewarded in the competitive grant process.

Where there is ambiguity, keep asking questions in order to converge on clarity.



69

Role of the RFP in Proposal Organization In addition to presenting information about an

agency’s research agenda and culture, the RFP provides key instructions regarding the presentation and organizational structure of a proposal.

The RFP can be used to develop the structure of the proposal narrative and as a template for developing the sequence and required detail of each section.

Using the RFP as a proposal template during initial proposal outlining helps ensure that every RFP item is fully addressed.



70

Role of the RFP in Proposal Organization Major section headings within an RFP often have very

detailed descriptive text defining the objectives of the program (goals, objectives, performance timeline, outcomes, research management, evaluation, etc.) that must be addressed in the proposal narrative.

The detail in each section of the RFP, including the review criteria, can be selectively copied and pasted into the first draft of the proposal itself.

This process provides initial section and subsection headings under which the applicant drafts out preliminary written responses to every requested item in the guidelines, thereby ensuring that the first draft of the proposal fully mirrors the program solicitation requirements in every way.



71

Role of the RFP in Proposal Organization Reviewers will expect to see the text in the same

general order as the RFP and the review criteria since that ordering conforms to instructions given to reviewers by the program officers.

Using the RFP as a guide to create a proposal outline also has the advantage of making it easier for reviewers to compare the proposal to the program guidelines and review criteria, without having to search around in a long narrative to find out if each required topic has been addressed.



72

Addressing the Review Criteria in the RFP The description of review criteria is an

especially important part of the RFP. A competitive proposal must clearly address

each review criterion, and the proposal should be structured so that these discussions are easy for reviewers to find.

Subject headings, graphics, bullets, and bolded statements using language similar to that used in the RFP can all be used to make the reviewers’ jobs easier as they assess how well the proposal meets review criteria.



73

Reading Material Referenced in the RFP If the RFP refers to any publications, reports,

or workshops, it is important to read those materials, analyze how that work has influenced the agency’s vision of the program, and cite those publications in the proposal in a way that illustrates that the applicant has read and absorbed the ideas behind those publications.



74

A stepwise process for developing a competitive research proposal

Preparing to write Developing the hypothesis & research plan Preliminary data & research readiness Writing the proposal Post review process Competitive resubmissions Multidisciplinary research & collaborations



75

Preparing to write the competitive proposal

Understanding the program guidelines in planning, developing, and writing a competitive proposal.

What should be your relationship with program officers? Developing a sound, testable hypothesis. Asking senior faculty to review, advise & assess

competitiveness of ideas and research, particularly appropriateness to agency research agenda.

What do you need to know about funding agency culture (& sub-cultures), language, mission, strategic plan, & research investment priorities?

What do you need to know about agency review criteria, review process, & review panels?



76

Developing the hypothesis & research plan Who is your audience (e.g., agency, program officers and

reviewers) and how do you best address them? What is a fundable idea and how is it best characterized? How are claims of research uniqueness and innovation best

supported in the proposal text? Can research plans be overly ambitious? What are important distinctions to note between mission

focused agencies (NASA, USDA) and basic research agencies (NSF, NIH) in proposing research plans?

Differentiating between hypothesis driven research & application driven at basic research and mission agencies?

How do you best communicate your passion, excitement, commitment, and capacity to perform your research to review panels?



77

Preliminary data & research readiness

What evidence needs to be presented to show that the proposed work can be accomplished?

What evidence of institutional support for the research, e.g., facilities, equipment & instrumentation, etc., is important to demonstrate and address in the proposal?

What counts as preliminary data and how much is sufficient?

How do you best map your research directions and interests to funding agency research priorities?

What do you need to know about research currently funded by a particular agency within your research domain, e.g., through reports, publications, journals?



78

Writing the proposal Who do you need to impress with your research? How do you tell a good story grounded in good science that excites

the reviewers and program officers? The successful proposal represents an accumulation of marginal

advantage accrued at decision points over a period of weeks or months to ensure the proposal is competitive for funding— What are key decisions points in proposal development? How do you best plan and schedule proposal writing? How do you use program guidelines as a proposal template? Importance of good writing, clear arguments, and reviewer

friendly text, structure, and organization in proposals What are other core competitive characteristics of a successful

proposal needed to complement research merit?



79

Post review process

Respecting views of peers Response to reviewer comments Discussion of reviews with program officers Discussion of reviews with senior faculty Reviewing the reviews How do you make an assessment of reviews as a

reliable guide for the next funding cycle?



80

Competitive resubmissions

How do you best plan and position for a competitive resubmission?

How do you conduct a reassessment of the intellectual merit and excellence of your research based on reviews?

How to you assess if a research direction should be abandoned, or the research submitted to another agency?

What are strategies for identifying more appropriate research directions and funding opportunities?



81

Multidisciplinary & Collaborative Research Initiatives & Faculty Interdisciplinary Groups

Role of centers and institutes in advancing faculty research careers and proposal success;

Role of interdisciplinary faculty research groups in advancing faculty research careers and proposal success;

How do you identify your best opportunities for research advancement along the continuum from single PI, multiple PI, multidisciplinary collaboratives, and center level research funding initiatives?



82

Understanding the review process When evaluating a grant application, reviewers will

not only consider the quality of the ideas, but also the extent to which the application addresses the funding agency’s review criteria.

Therefore, it is important to identify these review criteria, understand exactly how the agency defines them, and determine the relative weight (if any) that the agency assigns to each of them.

This information can then be used to develop an application that clearly addresses these criteria and that is therefore much more competitive.



83

Identify the review criteria

Most agencies publish their standard review criteria on their web pages and/or in their proposal preparation guides.

Some agency programs will have additional review criteria that the program will delineate in the proposal solicitation; therefore, it is important to read the list of review criteria presented in this document, as well.



84

Agency review criteria and review process DHHS (NIH)

Center for Scientific Review http://cms.csr.nih.gov/

NIH review criteria http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/basics/basics_b3.htm

NIH peer review process http://cms.csr.nih.gov/AboutCSR/OverviewofPeerReviewProcess.htm

NIH review groups http://cms.csr.nih.gov/PeerReviewMeetings/CSRIRGDescription/

NIH study section rosters http://www.csr.nih.gov/Committees/rosterindex.asp

NSF

NSF review process, criteria Sec. 3 http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/nsf04_23/3.jsp

DOD

AFOSR review process, criteria Sec. 2.14 http://www.afosr.af.mil/pdfs/proguide.PDF

ARO review process, criteria Sec. 3 http://www.aro.army.mil/research/arl/arobaa06a.pdf

DARPA review process, criteria http://www.darpa.mil/body/information/proposal.html

ONR review process, criteria Sec. 5 http://www.onr.navy.mil/02/baa/docs/baa_05_024.pdf

USDA

NRI review process, criteria http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/nri/pdfs/nri_review_guidelines.pdf

NASA

NASA review process, criteria App. C http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/nraguidebook/proposer2005.doc

Department of Energy

DOE review process, criteria http://www.sc.doe.gov/grants/process.html

US Department of Education

ED review process, criteria Sec. 5 http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/grantmaking/pt504.html



85

Understand the review process The review process varies – sometimes significantly

– from one agency to the next (following slide). The review process may include a peer review,

where outside experts from related fields are invited to review the proposal; an internal review, where agency personnel evaluate the proposal; or a combination of both.

However, most agency review processes share some common features. At most agencies, for instance, an application will first undergo a merit review and, depending upon the results, an administrative review.



86

Difference between NSF & NIH This is a fundamental difference between NIH's and NSF's selection

methods--by the end of the NIH review, applications are ranked alongside other entries according to an overall numerical priority score. At NSF however, proposals are not given a numerical rating but are classified according to written "recommendations."

Fred Stollnitz, program director at NSF explains further: "When panels review, [the reviewers] put each proposal into categories such as 'outstanding,' 'good and should be funded,' 'not ready in its present form,' or 'decline.' "

A particularly vocal reviewer could influence the final rating of the panel or where the proposal should be classified, but because there is no absolute score, only opinions are noted in the review analysis report--not actual decisions. An opinionated NIH reviewer on the other hand could affect the scores an application receives and so alter its ranking.

Source: http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1999/10/06/3



87

NSF review panelists NSF panelists convey their opinions and recommendations in a

"panel summary." They compose an overall analysis of review for each proposal that incorporate factors such as the panel summary, subject area, available resources, and the potential impact of the research. They then make final award decisions with the division director. Proposals that receive lower classifications by the panel can sometimes be funded over "higherrated“ research proposals because their overall assessment by the program officer is more favorable.

The budgetary consideration also plays a key role in the decision-making process. "The program officer doesn't just make 'yes' or 'no' decisions," explains Stollnitz. "They have to balance all those proposals that should be funded with the actual funds that are available." Sometimes a proposal classified as 'good and should be funded' submitted by an investigator with minimal existing funds may be given the edge over an 'outstanding‘ proposal submitted by an established and well-funded candidate.

Source: http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1999/10/06/3



88

NSF proposal process and timelines



89

NSF example review criterion 1 What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? How important is the proposed activity to advancing

knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields?

How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.)

To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts?

How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?

Is there sufficient access to resources?



90

NIH review criteria

Significance. Does the study address an important problem?

Approach. Are the methods appropriate to the aims of the project?

Innovation. Does the project employ novel concepts or methods?

Investigator. Is the investigator well trained to do the work?

Environment. Does the environment contribute to success?



91

Write for the reviewers Reviewers are typically given multiple proposals to review, and

often tight timelines for completion; “While you may be viewing your grant application as the

magnum opus of your life's ambitions and plans--for the next 5 years anyway--a reviewer sees it as one of six to 12 other "magnum opii" projects to evaluate.” (Source:

http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2003/12/10/6) The proposal needs to clearly present everything the reviewers

will need to read, understand, and evaluate the proposed research project;

Synthesize key concepts and articulate the links between the overarching goal and the specific objectives, between the specific objectives and the hypotheses, between the hypotheses and the approach, between the approach and the expected outcomes, and, finally, between the expected outcomes and the significance and broader impacts of the project.



92

Create reviewer-friendly text Divide the proposal into the required sections. Place the sections in the required order. Use parallel structure at both the section and sentence levels. Incorporate logical paragraph breaks. Open paragraphs with clear topic sentences. Discuss important items first. Avoid the use of inflated language. Use declarative sentences. Define potentially unfamiliar terms. Spell out acronyms and abbreviations. Employ appropriate style and usage. Use correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Run a spell-check and proofread the application.



93

Finding information on funded projects

NSF Award Search Site:http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/index.jsp

NIH Award Search Site:http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/crisp/crisp_query.generate_screen

Dept. of Ed. Awards Search:

http://wdcrobcolp01.ed.gov/CFAPPS/grantaward/start.cfm USDA Awards Search:http://cris.csrees.usda.gov/

NEH Awards Search: http://www.neh.gov/news/recentawards.html



94

Craft of writing

Good writing lies at the core of the competitive proposal.

It is the framework upon which the competitive applicant crafts and structures the arguments, ideas, concepts, goals, performance commitments, and the logical, internal connectedness and balance of the proposal.



95

The proposal is the only reality In its final form, a proposal is not unlike a

novel or a movie. It creates its own, self-contained reality.

The proposal contains all the funding agency and review panel will know about your capabilities and your capacity to perform.

With few exceptions, an agency bases its decision to fund or not fund entirely on the proposal and the persuasive reality it creates.



96

Good writing is more than mechanics Strong, comprehensive, integrated knowledge base; Organizational clarity (stepwise logic/connections;

sequencing); Structural clarity (integrative logic; logical transitions) Argumentative clarity (reasoning; ordering; synthesis) Descriptive clarity (who, what, how, when, why, &

results) Clear, consistent vision sustained throughout text Comprehensive problem definition; corresponding

innovative solutions Confidence in performance must and excitement for your

ideas must be instilled in reviewers Capacity for synthesis



97

Internal consistency & synthesis A competitive proposal must be internally consistent

by language, structure, and argument; all internal ambiguities must be resolved.

The competitiveness of a proposal increases exponentially with the capacity of the author to synthesize information.

Synthesis represents the relational framework and conceptual balance of the proposal. It is the synaptic connections among concepts, ideas, arguments, goals, objectives, and performance.



98

Ideas matter (Slogans are not Ideas) Shaping ideas by language is hard work Do not confuse slogans, effusive exuberance,

and clichés with substantive ideas Show the reviewers something new by

developing ideas that are clear, concise, coherent, contextually logical, and insightful

Capitalize on every opportunity you have to define, link, relate, expand, synthesize, connect, or illuminate ideas as you write the narrative.



99

Introductory writing tips The abstract, proposal summary, and

introduction are key—that may be all many reviewers read– and it is here you must excite and grab the attention of the reviewers;

Reviewers will assume errors in language and usage will translate into errors in the science;

Don’t be overly ambitious in what you propose, but convey credibility and capacity to perform;



100

Introductory writing tips

Sell your proposal to a good scientist but not an expert;

Some review panels may not have an expert in your field, or panels may be blended for multidisciplinary initiatives;

Agencies & reviewers fund compelling, exciting science, not just correct science;

Proposals are not journal articles—proposals must be user friendly and offer a narrative that tells a story that is memorable to reviewers;



101

Following agency guidelines Read solicitation and/or proposal guide

carefully for formatting requirements and follow scrupulously Font and font size Page limits Biosketch formats Citation format

Avoids disqualification of your proposal Avoids irritating reviewers



102

Set up a schedule to produce proposal

Work back from deadline Allow plenty of time for routing Start budget early



103

Make your proposal easy to read Reviewers often have 8 or 10 proposals to

read Use white space, underlining, bold, bullets,

figures, flowcharts to make main points easy to find

Put main idea of sections and paragraphs up front



104

Must convince reviewers…

Your proposed project should be funded It’s important and supports the agency mission

and program goals It’s exciting It has a good chance of succeeding

You are the person who should conduct the proposed project Your team is knowledgeable and well-qualified You have the support and resources required



105

Proposal sections examples Project Summary Goals/Objectives/Specific Aims Introduction/Overview Background and Significance Approach/Methodology Research Plan Preliminary Data Broader Impacts (NSF) Literature Cited



106

Executive summary May be the only thing the reviewer reads Must “grab” the reviewer Should communicate concisely:

Intellectual framework of proposed project The goals and signficance of the proposed project Who will be conducting the project and, briefly, their

qualifications Project outcomes

Must communicate excitement Check for additional requirements

E.g., intellectual merit and broader impacts in NSF proposals Project name, category, etc.



107

Goals & specific aims

State specific, measurable goals of your project

Tie to program/agency mission and goals

If hypothesis-based research, state your hypothesis

Discuss expected outcomes



108

The succinct proposal introduction

Serves as reviewers’ “road map” to the full text

Opportunity to make most important points up front

States vision, concepts, goals, objectives, outcomes, and deliverables

Briefly tells who you are; what you are going to do; how you are going to do it; who is going to do it; why you are going to do it; and demonstrates your capacity to perform



109

Background & literature review Spend some time researching this This section should tie closely to your proposed

research and should tell a story What are the holes in current knowledge that your work will

fill? How does your research extend and advance knowledge

in the field? Do not be dismissive of previous research Be thorough in citing important work but be concise



110

Significance

Explain explicitly why proposed research is important Tie to agency and program goals Relate to review criteria

Make this easy to find



111

Approach/research plan/methodology Be very clear about how you will accomplish your

stated goals and objectives Include details

What, specifically, will you do when you get the money? Schedules and milestones may be helpful This is especially important if you are a relatively new

researcher Address any potential dead ends, roadblocks, show-

stoppers and how you will deal with them Avoid ambiguous terminology – be very specific!



112

Preliminary data

Understand the expectations of the agency and program How much preliminary data is expected? Higher risk research will require more preliminary

data Less experienced researchers will generally need

more preliminary data Preliminary data should strengthen reviewers’

perception of your chance of success



113

Collaborations/partnerships Work on these before you start writing Be clear about roles of collaborators and partners Establish split of resources Be sure collaborators and partners get something

out of participating in the project If you need a letter of collaboration, offer to write a

draft for your collaborator to edit Include specifics on what they will do and support they will

provide Explain who the collaborator is and their motivation



114

Institutional support

Is cost sharing (matching) required? What type? (Cash, in-kind?) What rules apply?

Are other resources required? Work to set these up early Determine supporting documentation needed



115

Connect narrative text to budget Budget categories are defined by the funding agency

Be sure activities discussed in narrative are reflected in budget

Connect narrative text to the budget to ensure appropriate balance and proportion,

If a budget justification section is requested, use it to complement and deepen the narrative detail



116

Beware of boiler plate; don’t copy & paste

Boiler plate refers only to the grant application forms required by the funding agency

Thinking of proposal narrative as “boiler plate” will result in a mediocre, disjoint proposal

Begin each proposal as a new effort, not a copy & paste

Be very cautious integrating text inserts Strong proposals clearly reflect a coherent, sustained,

and integrated argument grounded on good ideas



117

Outcomes or deliverables

Develop short, hard-hitting lists off-set by bullets or other typographical formats

Relate outcomes to goals and objectives Outcomes should be specific and measurable Timelines and schedules with milestones can

orient reviewers and provide a quick overview of how program components fit together



118

Project assessment and evaluation How will you know if you were successful? Describe what will be measured in order to

assess how well project met each of its objectives Who will conduct assessment? Discuss logistics

Formative assessment: conducted throughout project and results fed back to improve project

Summative assessment: final assessment at end of project



119

Craft of grant writing web sites http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/research/writing.htm http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/

1999/08/27/1 http://grants.library.wisc.edu/index.html http://www.research.umich.edu/proposals/PWG/

pwgcomplete.html http://www.asru.ilstu.edu/grantwritingseries.htm http://grants.nih.gov/grants/grant_tips.htm http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04016/start.htm http://www.aecom.yu.edu/ogs/Guide/Guide.htm http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/

23947?fulltext=true&print=yes&print=yes http://www.pitt.edu/~offres/proposal/propwriting/websites.html

Documents

Office of Proposal Development 10/21/2005 Vice President for Research, Texas A&M Vice Chancellor for Research, TAMUS 1 Presentation topics Overview of