Grant Writing 101 “ There is no grantsmanship that will turn a bad idea into a good one, but there are many ways to disguise a good idea.” - Norm Braverman,

Grant Writing 101

“There is no grantsmanship that will turn a bad idea into a good

one, but there are many ways to disguise a good idea.” - Norm

Braverman, NIH

What is a Grant?

A Grant is a conditional gift or a conveyance of funds with strings attached. No substantial involvement is anticipated between the sponsor and the recipient.

The funding source identifies the problem they want addressed, but no outcome is known in advance.

The idea originates with the grantee.

Grant vs. Contract

Grant• project

conceived by investigator

• agency supports or assists

• performer defines details and retains scientific freedom

• agency maintains oversight

Contract• project

conceived by agency

• agency procures service

• agency exercises direction or control

• agency closely monitors

Types of Grants

Research Curriculum Demonstration Training Equipment Fellowships Federal Laboratory Research Grants for Young Investigator’s

Writing a good grant proposal is not easy!

In academia, successful grantsmanship is often a requirement for successful

scholarship, and scholarship plays the key role in personal advancement in the

academy.

Grant proposals are ultimately based on good ideas, but good grant writing skills can be learned and improved through practice and

experience.

What keeps us from writing grant proposals?

Fear of Rejection !!!

2007 NIAAA 928 303 $79,607,144 32.7%

2007 NIA 2,812 675 $187,485,325 24.0%

2007 NIAID 6,390 1,472 $574,355,490 23.0%

2007 NIAMS 1,719 388 $100,821,073 22.6%

2007 NCCAM 712 107 $28,817,571 15.0%

2007 NCI 8,745 1,888 $659,904,799 21.6%

2007 NIDA 2,402 660 $202,755,120 27.5%

2007 NIDCD 1,056 377 $89,359,397 35.7%

2007 NIDCR 1,099 272 $78,045,843 24.7%

2007 NIDDK 4,421 1,090 $311,554,661 24.7%

2007 NIBIB 1,655 333 $94,579,744 20.1%

2007 NIEHS 1,257 283 $95,792,348 22.5%

2007 NEI 1,259 351 $115,889,018 27.9%

2007 NIGMS 4,972 1,678 $492,067,473 33.7%

2007 NICHD 3,500 848 $243,258,553 24.2%

2007 NHLBI 5,851 1,373 $567,286,362 23.5%

National Institutes of Health Funding Statistics (2007)(for selected institutes)

# reviewed #awarded

NSF 2007 44,593 11,484 26% $ 99,996

BIO 2007 6,726 1,303 19% $122,075

CSE 2007 5,738 1,626 28% $100,000

EHR 2007 4,249 904 21% $134,023

ENG 2007 9,575 1,958 20% $ 99,999

GEO 2007 4,373 1,347 31% $109,896

MPS 2007 7,316 2,361 32% $ 96,085

O/D 2007 1,109 449 40% $ 20,000

OPP 2007 1,202 372 31% $137,109

SBE 2007 4,291 1,150 27% $ 52,482

# Submitted # Funded Success Av. Award/yr

National Science Foundation Funding Statistics (2007)

Fear of Rejection vs Reality !!

• Reality - only one proposal in 5 is turned down because the idea wasn’t good enough

• Reality - a rejected proposal is worth its weight in gold in free advice

• Reality - the success rate is almost always higher for proposals turned in a second time

• Reality - on a third submission, your proposal will either fly (or you will be politely told not to come back!)

The grant writing process is never wasted!

Can’t get a grant unless you write one

Professionally fulfilling Requires you to focus your thoughts Armed with reviewers comments the

second proposal is nearly always stronger

Keys to Effective Grant Writing

Quality of the idea and its appeal to the funding source

Your ability to communicate clearly and concisely

The most substantial part of any grant application is some form of “case for

support”. It is this case which will persuade, or fail to persuade, your

potential funding body of the value of your proposal.

Your case for support will, with luck, be read by one or more experts in your field. But the

program manager, and most members of the panel that will weigh your proposal against others, won’t be as expert. You must, must,

must write your proposal for their benefit too.

Science relies on the Peer Review System for advice

One of the most valuable things you can do is ask lots of people to help you improve your proposal. Give it to your

colleagues, your friends, your spouse, your dog, and listen to what they have to say. If they don’t understand what you are trying to get across, rewrite your proposal

so it can’t be misunderstood. If your dog doesn’t immediately see the value of what you want to achieve,

then rewrite it until he/she does (or get a new dog).

Also, remember that program managers and panel members see tens or hundreds of

proposals at a time, so you only have a few minutes or less to grab your reader’s

attention.One of the most critical things you can do is to make sure your Abstract (or Project Summary, in the case

of NSF) acts as a stand-alone guide to the entire proposal. You should assume (and it’s probably a

safe assumption) that some readers will never get past the first page, or at best will read the first page and then skim the text and look at figures. So don’t

fill up the Abstract with boilerplate about the technical background and methodology. Instead,

present your case in clear and concise language – what you want to do, why it’s important, why you will

succeed, and so on.

Writing a Grant Proposal is Like Playing a Game

You have to Play by the Rules

GET the guidelines from the funding agency you choose to submit to

READ the guidelines

FOLLOW the guidelines

Following the Guidelines

You must follow the guidelines exactly.

Respond to all sections. Adhere to any format restrictions. Topics should be covered in the

order presented in the guidelines. Use headings that correspond to

the guidelines.

Call the Program Officer!85% of all successful grant seekers have had contact with the program

officer

Types of Grants Letter of Intent

• 2-4 pages• highlights what you

want to do and informs funding agency that you intend to submit – often get back no response other than an acknowledgement

Pre-proposal• typically about 5 pages• reviewed• invited to submit full

proposal

Full Proposal• from 10-40 pages• forms• attachments• specific format

A Grant Proposal is not an Idea

It is a Plan for addressing that Idea

The Process

A good idea A good institutional

fit Assemble a

winning team Match the idea to a

funding source Read the

Guidelines Read them again

Contact the sponsor

Plan in detail Develop the

budget from the detailed plan

Read the guidelines again with narrative in mind

Be persistent – ruthlessly revise and resubmit if needed

Anticipate what reviewers will ask

General questions: What is the central hypothesis?: validity, clarity. Is the question important and novel?: potential impact Are the specific aims logical and feasible?: organization.

More questions reviewers will ask

Are the proposed experiments or measurements feasible?

Are there compelling preliminary data?

Is there a predictable flow to the proposal?

Are the investigators qualified? Have they been productive with

previous support? (if applicable) Are the facilities, environment and

resources adequate?

The Hypothesis

Driving force for a strong application.

Emphasize in both abstract and specific aims.

Provide a strong rationale based on current information.

Should further the field (biology, writings of Faulkner, particle physics).

Should be a recurring theme throughout the application.

Appropriate Writing Style

Write to the funding source

Write in the correct language of the field - but no jargon

Never write in 1st person

Clarity

Write to inform• don’t use

language that is biased

Write to persuade• data from

reputable source• use current data• establish

credibility• no

unsubstantiated opinions

Technical Issues to Consider Before you

Write Matching

requirements? Human Subjects? Due date - received or

postmarked Page limit Spacing Numbering

Margin requirement Type requirement Do you need letters? Group or Collaborative

Projects – who leads? What is needed of partners?

Have you given yourself enough time??

Parts of a Grant Application

Cover Page Table of Contents Abstract Problem or

Needs Statement Goals and

Objectives Background/

Prelimi-nary Studies

Methodology

Expected Outcomes and Evaluation

Dissemination Broader Impacts References Cited Budget &

Narrative Vitae Appendices Forms,

Certifications and Assurances

The Project Title

The title is important It should convey what the project is

about It is often used to assign review

groups Go for succinct rather than catchy Don’t change on a revision

Abstract Should be able to stand alone

• it could be all the reviewers read Clear, concise, one page max Cover all key elements in order State hypothesis, objectives and

importance of goals State plans and general methods

to achieve these goals Write your abstract last!

The Problem Statement: Framing the Need

Don’t assume that no one else has ever thought of your idea.

The Problem Statement establishes a framework for the project’s goals, objectives, methods, and evaluation

Begin with a framing statement, then provide documentation

A Good Proposal should:

Show that you understand the problem

Demonstrate that this is an important problem to solve

Clearly describe the aspects of the problem that your project will address, and what gaps your work will fill

Describe the theoretical or conceptual basis for your project and your knowledge of the issues surrounding your proposed project

Include statistical data, if appropriate

Demonstrate that your approach is creative or innovative

Literature Review Reviewers want to know whether

you’ve done the necessary preliminary research to undertake your project. You need to demonstrate your understanding of the field.

Reviews should be selective and critical, not exhaustive. You are not writing a review paper – stay focused on the literature that is pertinent to your proposal.

Don’t cite mostly your own work – the review needs balance.

Project Description Often the most detailed and lengthy

section because it provides the meat of the proposal; may be divided into several subsections, as needed.

What specific activities will allow you to meet your objectives

Task oriented, specific, detailed Essential that you demonstrate all the

steps necessary to complete project with each flowing logically from the previous to the next.

Try to pre-empt and/or answer all of the reviewer’s questions.

Clearly and explicitly state the connections between your objectives, hypotheses, methodologies and expected outcomes.

Summarize plans for dissemination of results

Provide a work plan and timeline. If there are multiple investigators, provide a clear explanation of individual responsibilities.

Your Project Description should:

Overcoming Proposal Block

Take it piece by piece, don’t be overwhelmed.

Outline sections before writing. Brainstorm each section with others. Start with easiest section. Write, and edit, re-edit, re-edit, re… Take breaks

Don’t minimize the importance of Formatting – a “clean” proposal conveys an impression to your reviewers

• Do not overcrowd pages.

• Observe type size limitations (e.g., 6 lines/inch, 15 characters/inch).

• Observe margins (1/2 inch).

• Aim for an attractive and readable layout.

• Proposal should easily convey your ideas to a hurried reviewer.

A Readable Style Scannability Make sure that all pages are not just solid text Use bulleted items to make important points Don’t be afraid to use graphics; figures should

have stand-alone captions Use headings and subheadings, bold and

underline, but don’t go nuts Look at each introductory sentence of a

paragraph. It is the most important part and may be all that a reviewer will read

Use type faces with serifs, like Times, they are easier to read

Do not justify

Developing Your Budget

The Grants Office must be involved in this portion of proposal development.

Be realistic, don’t inflate Two parts to a budget

• the budget form which breaks the budget into specific categories

• a budget narrative that explains how you arrived at these figures and why you need the money

Two Types of Costs

Direct and Indirect

Direct Costs

Costs that can be identified specifically with a particular sponsored project, an instructional activity, or any other institutional activity; or that can be directly assigned to such activities relatively easily with a high degree of accuracy.

Indirect or Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs

Costs that are incurred for common or joint objectives, and, therefore, cannot be identified readily and specifically with a particular sponsored project, an instructional activity, or any other institutional activity.

Indirect Rate is negotiated with Cognizant Auditing Agency

Your Goal: A Reviewer Friendly Proposal

13 Reasons Why Proposals Fail

Deadline not met

Guidelines not followed

Nothing intriguing

Did not address program priorities

Not complete Poor literature

review

Appeared beyond capacity of PI

Methodology weak

Unrealistic budget

Cost greater than benefit

Highly partisan Poorly written Mechanical

defects

Recycle your Rejected Proposal

Success means having one in three grants funded

A rejected proposal does not always mean the idea was rejected

Obtain reviewer comments Call the program officer Rewrite, revise, resubmit

Websites Federal Government

http://www.grants.govhttp://www.nsf.govhttp://nih.govhttp://arts.endow.gov/grants/index.html

Search Engines

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/funding

Foundations and Non-Profits http://foundationcenter.org/

http://www.npguides.org/index.html

Websites

University of Miami

http://www6.miami.edu/UMH/CDA/UMH_Main/1,1770,8549-1;7394-3,00.html

http://www.wilbers.com/grants.htm