GRC Services

1
GRC Services Proposal Development Workshop
A Presentation for Troy State University

• Grants Resource Center
• American Association of State Colleges and
  Universities

Mimi Tangum, Director Ariel Herman, Program
Advisor February 23-25, 2005
2
The Grants Resource Center
provides both federal and private grants
information, support services, and advice to its
member colleges and universities nationwide. GRC
was created over 35 years ago to help strengthen
institutions by providing late-breaking
information on grant opportunities and technical
assistance in competing successfully for them.
If youre in Washington, DC, our home is your home
3
Grants Resource Center Services

• Daily electronic publications
• Rich resources posted to our Web
• Personalized information and advice
• Representation at Washington meetings
• Networking with colleagues and federal/private
  program officers
• Campus presentations and consultations

4
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing,
Informing, Consulting

• Researching
• Locating award recipients and facilitating
  connections with them
• Identifying appropriate funding sources for
  various faculty ideas
• Finding the experts who can interpret government
  regulations
• Monitoring the legislative process

• Representing
• Meeting with program officers to ask members
  general questions
• Attending agency budget briefings and technical
  assistance workshops
• Arranging for meetings with agency contacts

5
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing, Informing, Consulting
Informing

• We publish
• GrantWeek every Monday - an electronic magazine
  containing in-depth articles on pending
  legislation new grant programs proposed changes
  to agency rules and the federal budget
• GRC Bulletin (three times weekly) and GRC NIH/NSF
  Bulletin (every Wednesday)providing hundreds of
  funding alerts
• GRC Deadlinesgiving members a head start on
  proposal writing

• We monitor
• Latest priorities and pending legislation
• Outcomes of proposed policy revisions
• All information posted for members viewing
  exclusively at http//www.aascu.org/grc

6
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing,
Informing, Consulting
Consulting

• Individual Meetings with Faculty
• Helping faculty determine the most useful funding
  possibilities
• Assisting faculty to develop their ideas into
  proposals
• Advising new faculty on handling first meetings
  with program officers

• Campus Presentations
• Agency program and budget reviews, tailored to
  members requests
• Proposal Development Workshops
• Mock proposal reviews

7
GRC Custom Services
Researching, Representing,
Informing, Consulting
GRC WASHINGTON CONERENCES
Where researching, representing, informing,
and consulting come together
GRC Spring Conference Gaining New Ground Through
Proactive Alliances March 20-23, 2005

• Building networks with colleagues
• Building federal partnerships
• Listening to and talking with federal and private
  funding agency experts

8
Specialty GRC Resource Publications
http//www.aascu.org/grc/publications/referencegui
des/
Proposal Development Handbook Provides tips for
proposal development, from start to finish (under
revision)
Foundation Grants Handbook A documented
overview of the process of securing foundation
funding (under revision)
9
GRC Website
Easy-to-access and information-rich funding
resource for faculty and administrators

• Accessible to entire Troy State Universitys
  community (use lower case letters)
• Username tsu
• Password funding
• Funding program highlights with upcoming
  deadlines
• Special sections for targeted funding
  opportunities
• Library of funded proposals
• Library of current and archived GRC publications
• Links to a variety of other on-line resources

10
GrantSearch
Contains over 2,000 funding opportunities
specifically selected for GRC member-institutions.

• Searchable by
• Keyword or Title
• Subject
• Program name, sponsor, and/or activity
• CFDA number
• Entries include
• Description of the funding opportunity and links
  to on-line information
• Deadline and last verification date
• Contact information

11
Overview of Federal Funding

• Largest supporter of university research projects
• Compartmentalized, with pointed research
  interests that respond to Congressionally
  mandated priorities
• Funds localized projects primarily through basic
  research programs
• Maintains stringent reporting requirements under
  the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
  to ensure that goals of agency programs are met
• Processes program information electronically
• Especially interested collaborations, in
  leveraging federal dollars

12
Overview of Foundation Funding

• Approximately 60,000 private foundations in the
  U.S.
• Often have restrictions on eligibility, such as
  that of location or type of institution (GRC
  screens foundation opportunities to determine
  whether public institutions are eligibile to
  apply)
• Often have very specific areas of interest
• Many provide significant support for projects
  which federal agencies support in only a limited
  fashion
• See the Foundation Center Website for more
  information www.fdncenter.org

13
Federal vs. Private

• Foundation Funding
• Priorities set by the board
• Likely to make small awards, good for start-up
• Limited staff
• Annual reports are best source of information
• Proposals sometimes evaluated without specific
  quantitative scoring criteria
• Proposals often evaluated by foundation board
  members who may not be experts

• Federal Funding
• Priorities set by legislation
• Likely to make large awards
• Large staff
• Well-established application process
• Proposals usually evaluated using objective
  scoring or rating criteria
• Proposals usually evaluated by experts or
  knowledgeable staff members

14
Key Words in Current Funding Climate

• Interdisciplinary Projects
• Collaborations
• Partnerships

15
Seed / Exploratory Grants

• For researchers exploring new, innovative, or
  high-risk research areas
• For those beginning or returning after career
  interruption
• More specifically
• For reduced-scale projects, to break new ground,
  or explore partnerships/collaborations,
  internally and externally, to grow a project
  for later application for larger grants or
  external funding

16
Some Examples

• Sampling of small, seed, and exploratory programs
  (nearly 350 appear in the GRC database)
• NIH Academic Research Enhancement Awards (AREA),
  at http//grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/area.htm
• NIH Academic Career Awards, K07, at
  http//grants.nih.gov/training/careerdevelopmentaw
  ards.htm
• Agency for Healthcare Research Quality Small
  Research Grant Program, at http//grants.nih.gov/g
  rants/guide/pa-files/PAR-01-040.html
• Dreyfus Foundation Teacher-Scholar Awards
  Programs, at http//www.dreyfus.org/tc.shtml
• NSF Earth Sciences Postdoctoral Research
  Fellowships, at http//www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?d
  ivEAR
• Educational Leadership Foundation Grants, at the
  American College Personnel Association,
  http//www.elfacpa.org/

17
Turn your idea into a project

• Develop a prospectus
• Identify possible funding sources
• Obtain specific program information
• Contact the program officer
• Early, frequent contact builds the relationships
  and provides the knowledge that pay off at review
  time

18
Obtaining and Using Funded Proposals

• Useful?
• Can be useful as guides (if not followed too
  closely)
• Request for funded proposal can lead to contact
  with successful Principal Investigator for inside
  information on program, funded project outcome,
  collaborative potential between prospective PI
  and PI
• How to obtain funded proposals (not using FOIA)
• Use GRC, Sponsored Research Office, agency
  contacts, awards lists and databases to
  locate/request copies of funded proposals
• Prospective PI to successful PI is best to reap
  benefits of others experience

19
You already have...

• Found a likely funding source
• Studied the proposal guidelines
• Called the program officer, who was encouraging
• Gotten a sample funded proposal and talked with
  the very helpful PI
• Written a proposal, and . . .

20
Dear Professor

• This cycle we received an unusually high number
  of excellent proposals.
• Unfortunately, . . ..

21
ONLY ONE TASK REMAINS

• A closer look at the proposal development
  process.

22
Beginning Again

• Obtain the reviewers comments.
• Put them away for two weeks.
• Grit your teeth, and
• Study them closely
• Call the program officer
• Work to resubmit.

23
WRITING IS THINKING. --Wise Saying

• Think about the audience
• What do they already know about you, your
  institution, your idea?
• What do they need to know for your proposal to
  rise to the top of the stack?

24
WRITING IS MORE THINKING. --Wiser Saying

• Continue to
• Put yourself in the place of the readers
• What can you do to make it easy for them to
  follow your complex proposal?
• As an NIH program officer put it, There is no
  such thing as being too explicit.

25
WRITING IS REWRITING. --Wisest Saying

• Get feedback from an excellent writer NOT in your
  specific or general area of expertise
• Did you leave out anything called for by the
  guidelines?
• Is there repetition or anything that diverts the
  focus of the proposal?
• Is anything uncleartaken for granted-- in any
  part of proposal not requiring disciplinary
  expertise to understand?
• Rewrite.

26
AND MORE REWRITING.

• Get feedback from someone in your specific
  disciplinary area
• Is the proposal compelling in addressing a vital
  need of the field?
• Is the methodologys soundness persuasively
  presented?
• Rewrite. Again.

27
NEARLY FINISHED REWRITING

• Think as the reviewers will
• Critique your own proposal.

28
Writing Better Proposals

• What makes a proposal fatally flawed?
• Project does not fit agency mission
• PI is ineligible to hold grant from agency (check
  guidelines)
• Institution/department is ineligible for program
• Proposal violates mechanical guidelines (format,
  length, budget)
• Use of out-of-date forms

29
Writing Better Proposals

• What makes a proposal fair (i.e., severely
  flawed)?
• Obsolete topic
• Obsolete approach
• Limited significance or impact
• Arguments not compelling
• Capabilities of investigators, students,
  institutions not convincingly presented

30
Writing Better Proposals

• Flaws to a proposals success
• Vague language lack of clarity
• Poor organization (unclear abstract, repetitive,
  rambling narrative)
• Ideas introduced that dont illuminate point of
  the proposal
• Outcomes of project not specified
• Funders priorites not explicitly addressed
• Mystery budget
• Scope of project impractical in time or use of
  funds (see Mystery budget, too)

31
Writing Better Proposals

• Some General Truths
• Proposal readers are well-disposed toward
  research in your field
• A well-written abstract makes for a happier
  reader
• Over-familiarity with the project leads to
  obscure proposals and skipped logic
• Proposals finished just before the deadline are
  not really finished

32
Evaluating Your Proposal

• Read the entire draft make only obvious
  spelling/grammatical corrections as you go
• Start with the abstract
• Try to form an idea of the proposal from abstract
  (if you cant, theres trouble).
• Does the abstract convince you that the problem
  is worthy of investigation?
• Does it make you want to read more?
• Does its creativity/ingenuity impress you?

33
Evaluating Your Proposal (cont)

• Read Background/Significance/Preliminary Results
• Does the section clearly explain a gap in the
  knowledge, an area requiring significant
  improvement, or a real need for the activities,
  technology, etc.?
• Are you convinced, through preliminary results or
  prior experience cited, that the P.I will be able
  to address the need?
• Are you left with the conviction that the
  solution to the stated problem would
  significantly impact the disciplinary areas?

34
Evaluating a Proposal (cont.)

• Read the research plan (this should represent the
  majority of the proposal)
• Is it easy to follow?
• Does it follow a chronological plan, and is it
  well-conceived?
• Does it flow, one concept clearly lead to
  another, in the true sense of a narrative?
• Are procedures adequately supported with
  literature references, when necessary?
• Is it clear exactly what the investigator expects
  to accomplish?
• Are contingency plans considered if certain
  outcomes do not occur as expected?
• Is the language professional without being
  stuffy?
• Is the timeframe realistic?

35
Proposal Review Checklist

• What are the strengths of the proposal?
• Is the proposal written clearly for the assumed
  audience?
• Is the proposal organized logically so that it is
  easy to follow?
• Does the proposal persuade you that the project
  is significant?
• Does it persuade you that the PI can direct the
  project and see it through to completion?
• Is there evidence of institutional commitment?
• How can the proposal be strengthened?

36
Final Thoughts

• Do your homework before applying
• Be aware of entire application process letters
  of intent/pre-proposals/workshops/full proposals
• Ask questions
• Sponsored Research Office, GRC, program officers,
  colleagues
• Make clear that institutional strengths match
  priorities of funding agency that project
  responds to sponsors goals
• Build relationships, especially with program
  officers
• Ask for critiques by at least three colleagues
• Persevere!

37
Final Thoughts (cont.)

• Ask questions
• GRC, Sponsored Research Office, program officers,
  colleagues
• Solicit input seek critiques of draft
• Just in case it becomes necessary...
• Use reviewers comments
• Call program officer
• Resubmit.

38
Contact GRC through Troy State Universitys
Office of Sponsored Programs
Name Judy B EnfingerTitle Assistant Director,
Grants/ContractsDepartment Sponsored
ProgramsEmail Address enfinger_at_troyst.eduPhone
334-670-3102Room 231Building Adams
Administration