TAMUC Proposal Writing Workshop If you dont write grants, you wont get any

1
TAMU-C Proposal Writing Workshop If you dont
write grants, you wont get any

• Presented by Mike Cronan, PE, Director, Office of
  Proposal Development, Texas AM University
• Introductory Tips on Proposal Writing
• Social Behavioral Sciences Education Funding
  Agencies (NSF, NIH, DoED, HHS)
• Developing Partnerships in Math, Science
  Education
• Research Funding Advice Strategies for Junior
  Faculty, or Faculty Transitioning Research to New
  Areas
• 830 to 230 (lunch will be served)
• 230 to 430 Individual PI meetings with Mike
  Cronan
• Mayo Room, 2rd floor, Memorial Student Center
• OPD WEB http//opd.tamu.edu/

2
Office of Proposal Development

• Unit of Vice President for Research Office
• Supports faculty in the development and writing
  of research and educational proposals
• center-level initiatives,
• multidisciplinary research teams,
• research affinity groups,
• junior faculty research,
• diversity in the research enterprise.

3
Office of Proposal Development, OPD-WEB

• OPD-WEB (http//opd.tamu.edu/) is an interactive
  tool and faculty resource for the development and
  writing of competitive research and educational
  proposals to federal agencies and foundations
• Funding opportunities (http//opd.tamu.edu/funding
  -opportunities)
• Junior faculty support (http//opd.tamu.edu/resou
  rces-for-junior-faculty)
• Proposal resources (http//opd.tamu.edu/proposal-r
  esources)
• Grant writing seminars (http//opd.tamu.edu/semina
  r-materials)
• Grant writing workbook (http//opd.tamu.edu/the-cr
  aft-of-writing-workbook)
• PI Observations

4
Members, Office of Proposal Development

• Jean Ann Bowman, ecological and environmental
  sciences/ agriculture-related proposals and
  centers, jbowman_at_tamu.edu
• Libby Childress, Scheduling, resources, training
  workshop management, project coordination,
  libbyc_at_tamu.edu
• Mike Cronan, center-level proposals, AM System
  partnerships, new proposal and training
  initiatives, mikecronan_at_tamu.edu
• Lucy Deckard, New faculty initiative,
  fellowships, physical science-related proposals,
  equipment and instrumentation, interdisciplinary
  materials group, OPD web management
  l-deckard_at_tamu.edu
• John Ivy (June 1), biomedical health related
  initiatives, NIH
• Phyllis McBride, craft of proposal writing
  training, NIH and related agency initiatives in
  the biomedical, social and behavioral sciences
  editing and rewriting, p-mcbride_at_tamu.edu
• Robyn Pearson, Education, social behavioral
  sciences, and humanities-related proposals,
  interdisciplinary research groups, editing and
  rewriting, rlpearson_at_tamu.edu

5
Presenter Background

• Mike Cronan, P.E., has 15 years experience at
  Texas AM University in planning, developing, and
  writing successful center-level research and
  educational proposals.
• Author of gt 60 million in System-wide proposals
  funded by NSF Texas AMP, Texas RSI, South Texas
  RSI, Texas Collaborative for Excellence in
  Teacher Preparation, CREST Environmental Research
  Center, Information Technology in Science, CLT.
• Named Regents Fellow (2000-04) by the Board of
  Regents for his leadership role in developing and
  writing NSF funded research and educational
  partnerships across the AM System.
• B.S., Civil Engineering (Structures), University
  of Michigan, 1983
• M.F.A., English, University of California,
  Irvine, 1972
• B.A., Political Science, Michigan State
  University, 1968
• Registered Professional Engineer (Texas 063512,
  inactive)
• http//opd.tamu.edu/people

6
Open Forum, QA Format

• Audience is encouraged to ask questions
  continuously
• Audience questions will help direct, guide, and
  focus the discussion on proposal topics.

7
Generic Competitive Strategies

• Understanding the mission, strategic plan,
  investment priorities, culture, and review
  criteria of a funding agency will enhance the
  competitiveness of a proposal.
• Knowledge about a funding agency helps the
  applicant make good decisions throughout the
  entire proposal development and writing process.

8
Analysis of the funding agency

• Know the audience (e.g., program officers,
  reviewers) and the best way to address them.
• Identify a fundable idea and characterized it
  within the context of the agency research
  investment priorities.
• Communicate your passion, excitement, commitment,
  and capacity to perform the proposed research to
  review panels.

9
Develop Agency Specific Knowledge Base

• Electronic Funding Alert Services / Email Alerts
• http//opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/electron
  ic-funding-alert-services-email-alerts
• Grants.gov
• http//www.grants.gov/
• http//www.grants.gov/search/subscribeAll.do
• MYNSF
• http//opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/electron
  ic-funding-alert-services-email-alerts
• NIH National Institutes of Health Listserv
• http//grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/listserv.htm
• U.S. Dept. of Education, EDINFO
• http//listserv.ed.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A1ind05Ledinf
  o

10
Writing a competitive proposal

• Preparing to write
• Developing hypothesis research plan
• Preliminary data background data
• Writing the proposal

11
Preparing to write a competitive proposal

• Develop a sound, testable hypothesis
• Ask other faculty to review proposal for
  competitiveness of ideas and appropriateness to
  agency
• Understand the program guidelines (RFP)
• Relationship with program officers (e.g.,
  NIH/NSF)
• Understand funding agency culture, language,
  mission, strategic plan, research investment
  priorities (e.g. NIH Roadmap, NSF Strategic Plan)
• Understand the agency review criteria, review
  process, review panels (http//opd.tamu.edu/pro
  posal-resources/understanding-the-proposal-review-
  process-by-agency)

12
Developing the hypothesis research plan

• Review research currently funded by an agency
  within your research domain (e.g., reports,
  abstracts)
• Communicate your research passion and capacity to
  perform to reviewers
• Know your audience (e.g., agency, program
  officers, reviewers)
• Explain how your research fits the agency
• Support claims of research uniqueness and
  innovation
• Build on your research expertise
• Do not present overly ambitious research plans

13
Preliminary data background data

• Present evidence of research readiness to show
  the proposed work can be accomplished
• Present evidence of institutional support for the
  research (e.g., facilities, equipment
  instrumentation)
• Know what counts as preliminary and background
  data and how much is sufficient
• Map your research directions and interests to
  funding agency research priorities (e.g. NIH
  Roadmap)

14
Writing the proposal

• Tell a good story grounded in good science that
  excites the reviewers and program officers
• Ensuring the proposal is competitive for funding
  
• Proposal Form
• Use program guidelines as a proposal template
• Good writing, clear arguments, reviewer friendly
  text (dont make reviewers work), organization,
  figures, etc.
• Proposal Content

15
If you dont write grants, you wont get any

• Important to have your proposal targeted. Look
  for the intersection of
• where research dollars are available
• your technical interests and
• where you can write a competitive proposal within
  the time you have available.
• Researchers have a lot of great ideas but if not
  in scope of the agency it will not be funded
• For proposals that have RFPs, or others that are
  blue sky, unsolicited research, the key is to
  have a good idea that you are enough of an
  entrepreneur to sell someone else that it is a
  good idea and worthy of funding.

16
If you dont write grants, you wont get any

• Get someone who writes well to read your proposal
  for coherence and hook and to review the
  writing,
• Remember your reviewers are broader in scope than
  your one proposal and if you get too technical
  you get too many reviewers that dont understand
• Some think if you submit your best idea it will
  be stolen but if you submit your second best idea
  it wont be funded .

17
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Relates to purposes goals of the applicant
  agency.
• Adheres to the content and format guidelines of
  the applicant agency.
• Establish your major points succinctly
  repeatedly.
• Directed toward the appropriate audience--i.e.,
  those who review the proposal.
• Write for technically diverse reviewers
  intelligent readers, not experts
• Avoid unnecessary complexity and technical
  minutia

18
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Addresses the review criteria of the funding
  agency.
• Interesting to read compelling ideas conveys
  excitement to reviewers.
• Uses a clear, concise, coherent writing style,
  free of jargon, superfluous information, and
  undefined acronyms -- i.e., easy to read.
• Organized in a logical manner that is easy to
  follow use RFP as an organizational template.
• Use of figures, graphs, charts, and other
  visuals.
• Proofread so it is free of grammatical errors,
  misspellings, typos.

19
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Clear, concise, informative abstract that stands
  alone and serves as roadmap to the narrative.
• Clearly stated goals and objectives not buried in
  a morass of dense narrative densely formatted.
• Clearly documents the need to be met or problems
  to be solved by the proposed project.
• Indicates that the project's hypotheses rest on
  sufficient evidence and are conceptually sound.
• Clearly describes who will do the work (who), the
  methods that will be employed (how), which
  facilities or location will be used (where), and
  a timetable of performance outcomes (when).

20
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Justifies the significance and/or contribution of
  the project on current scientific knowledge.
• Includes appropriate and sufficient citations to
  prior work, ongoing studies, and related
  literature.
• Establishes the competence and scholarship PI
• Does not assume that reviewers "know what you
  mean."

21
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Makes no unsupported assumptions.
• Discusses potential pitfalls alternative
  approaches.
• Plan for evaluating data or the success of
  project.
• Is of reasonable scope not overly ambitious.
• Work can be accomplished in the time allotted.
• Demonstrates that PIs and the organization are
  qualified to perform the proposed project
• Does not assume that the applicant agency "knows
  all about you."

22
Elements of a Successful Proposal

• Includes vitae which demonstrate the credentials
  required (e.g., do not use promotion and tenure
  vitae replete with institutional committee
  assignments for a research proposal.)
• Documents facilities necessary for the success of
  the project.
• Includes necessary letters of support and other
  supporting documentation.
• Includes a bibliography of cited references.

23
Elements of a Successful Proposal Budget

• Has a budget which corresponds to the narrative
  all major elements detailed in the budget are
  described in the narrative and vice versa.
• Has a budget sufficient to perform the tasks
  described in the narrative.
• Has a budget which corresponds to the applicant
  agency's guidelines with respect to content and
  detail, including a budget justification if
  required.
• The forgoing list was collected from various
  sources, including Rebecca Claycamp, assistant
  chair, Department of Chemistry, University of
  Pittsburgh

24
Social Behavioral Sciences Education Funding
Agencies (NSF, NIH, HHS, DoED)

• Gain a better understanding of each agency
• Agency cultures
• Competitive strategies
• Comparisons among and between agencies
• Review processes
• Strategies for developing multidisciplinary
  proposals

25
Types of Research Agencies Research

• Basic research agencies (NIH, NSF)
• Mission-focused agencies (DoED)
• Hypothesis-driven research
• Need- or applications driven research at
  agencies.
• http//opd.tamu.edu/the-craft-of-grant-writing-wor
  kbook/manual/the-craft-of-grant-writing-workbook/a
  nalyzing-funding-agencies

26
National Institutes of Health

• It is interesting to get the "other side of the
  story" especially with respect to funding
  priorities and how they can change very quickly
  given specific research findings (not that the
  funding is immediately available for new
  projects, but more like decisions are made
  quickly about how to re-prioritize).
• Funding is definitely tight at NIH right now and
  will be for the next few years. Applications have
  to be exemplary and very much tied to the current
  strategic plan of each institute and center. I
  guess that's what you guys have been preaching
  for some time....it just seems particularly
  relevant now.
• Susan E. Maier, Ph.D., Office of Scientific
  Affairs, NIH/NIAAA (prior OPD)

27
NIH Reference Toolkit

• All About NIH Grants, Writing the R01
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm
• Annotated R01 Grant Application and Summary
  Statement
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/app/default.ht
  m
• How to Write a NIH Grant Application
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/write/write_pf
  .htm
• Advice for New Investigators Who is a New
  Investigator?
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/plan/plan_i1.h
  tm
• http//www.training.nih.gov/careers/careercenter/g
  rants.html
• Develop a Strong Hypothesis
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/plan/plan_c1.h
  tm
• Research Plan Section a. Specific Aims
• http//www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/write/write_j
  1.htm
• Proposal Writing The Business of Science (NIH)
• http//www.whitaker.org/sanders.html
• NIH Grant Writing Handbook, Univ. Pennsylvania
• http//www.med.upenn.edu/rpd/documents/gwm.pdf

28
Social Work Links HHS, NIH others

• HHS Funding (http//www.hhs.gov/grants/index.shtml
  )
• HHS Funding for Womens Health (http//www.4woman.
  gov/fund/)
• HHS Funding Opportunities, ACF (http//www.acf.hhs
  .gov/programs/hsb/grant/fundingopportunities/fundo
  pport.htm)
• HHS Office of Community Services Funding
  (http//www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_ocs.html)
• Research on Social Work Practice and Concepts in
  Health (R01) (http//grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/p
  a-files/PA-06-081.html)
• Research on Social Work Practice and Concepts in
  Health (R03) (http//grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/p
  a-files/PA-06-082.html)
• GWB School of Social Work, Washington Univ.
  (http//gwbweb.wustl.edu/library/websites.html)
• A Guide to Internet Resources in Social Work
  (http//www.abacon.com/internetguides/social/webli
  nks.html)

29
Social Work Links HHS others

• Social Work Internet Resources (http//www.hshsl.u
  maryland.edu/resources/socialwork.html)
• Institute for Advancement of Social Work Research
  (http//www.charityadvantage.com/iaswr/TechnicalRe
  sources.asp)
• Ball State Social Funding (http//www.bsu.edu/oars
  p/pubs/htmlnewsltr/dec2003/social.htm)
• LSU Health Science Center Funding
  (http//nursing.lsuhsc.edu/ResearchAndEvaluation/R
  esearch/FundingOpportunities.html)
• CNDC Funding (http//www.cndc2.org/funding_opportu
  nities.htmrecent)

30
Selected Slides for NIH
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
NIH Don't Propose Too Much

• Sharpen the focus of your application. Novice
  applicants often overshoot their mark, proposing
  too much.
• Make sure the scale of your hypothesis and aims
  fits your request of time and resources.
• Reviewers will quickly pick up on how well
  matched these elements are.
• Your hypothesis should be provable and aims
  doable with the resources you are requesting.

37
NIH Develop a Solid Hypothesis

• Many top-notch NIH grant applications are driven
  by strong hypotheses rather than advances in
  technology (NSF, DoD counterpoint).
• Think of your hypothesis as the foundation of
  your application -- the conceptual underpinning
  on which the entire structure rests.
• Generally applications should ask questions that
  prove or disprove a hypothesis rather than use a
  method to search for a problem or simply collect
  information.

38
NIH Develop a Solid Hypothesis

• Choose an important, testable, focused hypothesis
  that increases understanding of biologic
  processes, diseases, treatments, or preventions.
• It should be based on previous research. State
  your hypothesis in both the specific aims section
  of the research plan and the abstract.
• Avoid a fishing expedition. Reviewers see many
  grants that did not have a hypothesis rather,
  the investigator was obviously hoping that
  something interesting would pop up in the course
  of his or her investigation. That sort of
  approach is not appealing to a study section.

39
NIH Applications Driven Research

• A new trend is pushing NIH toward more applied
  research.
• Especially in key areas, such as studies of
  organisms used for bioterrorism, NIH is turning
  more to applications seeking to discover basic
  biology or develop or use a new technology.
• If your application is not hypothesis-based,
  state this in your cover letter and give the
  reasons why the work is important.

40
Section a. Specific Aims

• Your specific aims are the objectives of your
  research project, what you want to accomplish,
  and your project milestones.
• Write this section for audiences, primary
  reviewers and other reviewers, since they'll all
  read it.
• Choose aims reviewers can easily assess.
• Your aims are the accomplishments by which the
  success of your project is measured.
• Recommended length of this section is one page.
• A common mistake new applicants make is being too
  ambitious. You should probably limit your
  proposal to three to four specific aims.
• Design your specific aims and experiments so they
  answer the question posed by the hypothesis.
  Organize and define your aims so you can relate
  them directly to your research methods.

41
NIH Investigator-initiated review criteria

• Significance
• Does the study address an important problem?
• Approach
• Are the design and methods appropriate to the
  address the aims?
• Innovation
• Does the project employ novel concepts,
  approaches, methods?
• Investigator
• Is the investigator appropriately trained to
  carry out the study?
• Environment
• Will the scientific environment contribute to the
  probability of success?

42
Developing Partnerships in Mathematics, Science
Education

• There are three general categories of grants made
  to universities by federal agencies that include
  educational partnership components
• research grants,
• integrated research and education grants, and
• education grants.

43
Key Partnership Infrastructures

• Developing educational partnerships or
  partnerships to address agency specific
  educational and outreach components to research
  proposals, include
• institutional commitment to the effort
• resources available on campus,
• effective models,
• evaluation and assessment capacities,
• defining long term objectives and outcomes.

44
Required Educational Partnerships

• Increasingly, principal investigators are
  required by federal research agencies, most
  notably the National Science Foundation, to
  address educational or related activities in
  research proposals.
• At NSF, this requirement derives from two
  agency-wide priorities 1) the agency strategy
  for the integration of research and education and
  2) the broader impacts review criterion
  (http//opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources/broaderimp
  acts/main.html).
• However, many researchers struggle with the
  boarder impacts requirement, and often seek help
  in developing this section of the proposal and
  implementing and evaluating it if funded.

45
Educational Partnership Topics

• Topics will include
• Developing and writing educational components to
  research grants,
• Developing and writing any required evaluation
  and assessment components
• Linking to successful broader impacts models,
• Linking to other groups on campus that can
  implement the required broader impacts or
  educational components to research grants

46
Define Community of Interest

• Researchers
• Providers of educational components
• Providers of educational component models
• Providers of evaluation and assessment
• Writers of educational components of research
  grants

47
Define Educational Components by Agency

• National Science Foundation
• Broader Impacts criterion
• Research-education integration core strategy
• Societal impacts
• National Institutions of Health
• Educational objectives mostly separate programs
• NASA Education and Public Outreach
• http//science.hq.nasa.gov/research/epo.htm
• http//ssibroker.colorado.edu/Broker/Eval_criteria
  /Guide/Default.htm
• Energy, NOAA, Others

48
NSF Broader Impacts

• The advance of discovery and understanding
• Improvement of the participation of
  underrepresented groups
• Enhancement of the education/research
  infrastructure
• Broad dissemination of results and
• Benefits of the activity to society at large.
• http//www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf032/bicexamples.pd
  f

49
1. Tips on Developing Partnerships

• Fully committed PI with institutional support
• Beware good idea that lacks institutional
  advocate
• Analysis of the RFP
• Assemble proposal development team
• Partnerships/collaboratives are often more
  competitive
• Ensure team members "brings something to the
  table"

50
2. Tips on Developing Partnerships

• Clearly define reasons for and nature of
  partnership
• State concise benefits of the partnership
• Review each team member's relevance to the RFP
• Develop major concepts specific to each RFP item

51
3. Tips on Developing Partnerships

• Develop strong arguments specific to each RFP
  item or objective
• Integrate specific objectives into overarching
  vision or strategic plan
• Integrate evaluation and assessment
  (http//opd.tamu.edu/proposal-resources/online-pro
  ject-evaluation-assessment-resources-for-principal
  -investigators)

52
4. Tips on Developing Partnerships

• Initial teaming process and brainstorming will
  not be linear
• Distill concepts and arguments into linear
  presentation
• Converge drafts and interactions to final text

53
Research Funding Advice Strategies for Junior
Faculty Other Researchers

• How to be successful in winning funding early in
  your research career
• Special challenges and opportunities available to
  new faculty as they work to establish their
  research program and to compete for federal
  research funding
• NSF, NIH and related Young Faculty CAREER awards

54
1. How to be successful in winning funding

• Critical to gain as much informal insight into
  funding situation as possible
• Each agency has its own culture, its own track.
  Your research should be what you love not just
  what is popular
• Make yourself known in the scientific community
  and to reviewers.
• Give talks at meetings, seminars know how to be
  politically savvy and engaged with peer
  community
• Make your scientific enterprise work for you
• Publish

55
2. How to be successful in winning funding

• Experience working with large interdisciplinary
  teams. Different agencies have a different view
  of research.
• Choose your opportunities carefully its easy
  to see your own research interests in many
  different solicitations, but you have to do your
  homework and review the agency, the
  solicitations, and look for related workshops and
  primary documents that have led to the
  solicitations.
• Particularly at NSF, know your program manager.
  Dont hesitate to call.

56
3. How to be successful in winning funding

• As junior faculty, if you have start-up funds,
  you want to spend some of that to develop
  preliminary data to develop your track record.
  Use it as a foundation to move forward.
• The role of mentors is critical. Some junior
  faculty just need the support. Learning how to
  write, learning about the agency. What does the
  RFP really mean?

57
4. How to be successful in winning funding

• It is crucial to read the RFP very carefully.
  Write to the RFP. You have to respond to every
  item.
• Proposals take a lot of effort. Dont lose
  because of some overlooked requirement.
• Get help from others who have read the RFP or who
  have funding already.
• Your summary or abstract is critical. That can be
  what sells your proposal makes reviewers want
  to keep reading. It should include all the
  critical points of your proposal.

58
5. How to be successful in winning funding

• At NSF, it is very important to know the program
  officers. They have power. They keep up with
  trends in their field. They need to know your
  name. Theyll work with you.
• However, just because you know the PD doesnt
  guarantee funding. There are checks and balances
  at NSF. Theres still a peer review process. It
  is a professional relationship, and its
  objective. Just getting along with the program
  officer wont turn bad science into good science.

59
6. How to be successful in winning funding

• Consider writing a white paper first,
  particularly for unsolicited proposals to NSF,
  defense agencies or others.
• Call the program manager often there is money
  set aside. Theyre looking for new ideas, but
  wont just fund a cold proposal. Send the white
  paper and ask if theyre interested or if they
  know someone who might be.
• This saves you time and gives you a reasonable
  chance of getting funded.
• A white paper is a broad-brushed outline what
  you will gain and why it will be successful and
  how youll do it, and rough costs.

60
7. How to be successful in winning funding

• It is informative to look at what has been funded
  before, especially if youre having trouble
  finding out what the RFP means.
• Also, you can see workshop documents, etc. You
  can prepare by going to workshops get to know
  the research community and the program directors.
  
• If youre involved in the planning of future
  directions, youre in a better position for
  future funding. Might be difficult for a young
  faculty, but certainly should do this as your
  career develops.

61
8. How to be successful in winning funding

• A common mistake among young investigators is to
  combine 3 projects into what should be only one.
  Focus is the key term write a blue sky section
  at the end, if you like, talking about what your
  plans are for the future.
• It doesnt matter how good your idea is if it is
  not well presented, it wont get funded. The
  opposite is also true no matter how well written
  a proposal is, if the science isnt there, it
  wont get funded. You have to have both form and
  content.
• If your proposal has grammatical errors or is
  hard to follow, it can indicate sloppy research
  to reviewers.

62
Twelve Steps To A Winning Research Proposal by
George A. Hazelrigg, NSF

• I have been an NSF program director for 18 years.
  During this time, I have personally administered
  the review of some 3,000 proposals and been
  involved in the review of perhaps another 10,000.
  Through this experience, I have come to see that
  often there are real differences between winning
  proposals and losing proposals. The differences
  are clear. Largely, they are not subjective
  differences or differences of quality to a large
  extent, losing proposals are just plain missing
  elements that are found in winning proposals.

63
1. Know yourself (Back)

• Know your area of expertise, what are your
  strengths and what are your weaknesses. Play to
  your strengths, not to your weaknesses. Do not
  assume that, because you do not understand an
  area, no one understands it or that there has
  been no previous research conducted in the area.
• If you want to get into a new area of research,
  learn something about the area before you write a
  proposal. Research previous work. Be a scholar.

64
2. Know program from which you seek support

• You are responsible for finding the appropriate
  program for support of your research. Dont leave
  this task up to someone else. If you are not
  absolutely certain which program is appropriate,
  call the program officer to find out.
• Never submit a proposal to a program if you are
  not certain that it is the correct program to
  support your area of research.
• Proposals submitted inappropriately to programs
  may be returned without review, transferred to
  other programs where they are likely to be
  declined, or simply trashed in the program to
  which you submit. In any case, you have wasted
  your time writing a proposal that has no chance
  of success from the get-go.

65
3. Read the program announcement

• Programs and special activities have specific
  goals and specific requirements. If you dont
  meet those goals and requirements, you have
  thrown out your chance of success.
• Read the announcement for what it says, not for
  what you want it to say.
• If your research does not fit easily within the
  scope of the topic areas outlined, your chance of
  success is nil.

66
4. Formulate an appropriate research objective

• A research proposal is a proposal to conduct
  research, not to conduct development or design or
  some other activity. Research is a methodical
  process of building upon previous knowledge to
  derive or discover new knowledge, that is,
  something that isnt known before the research is
  conducted.
• In formulating a research objective, be sure that
  it hasnt been proven impossible (for example,
  My research objective is to find a geometric
  construction to trisect an angle), that it is
  doable within a reasonable budget and in a
  reasonable time, that you can do it, and that it
  is research, not development.

67
5. Develop a viable research plan

• A viable research plan is a plan to accomplish
  your research objective that has a non-zero
  probability of success. The focus of the plan
  must be to accomplish the research objective. In
  some cases, it is appropriate to validate your
  results. In such cases, a valid validation plan
  should be part of your research plan.
• If there are potential difficulties lurking in
  your plan, do not hide from them, but make them
  clear and, if possible, suggest alternative
  approaches to achieving your objective.
• A good research plan lays out step-by-step the
  approach to accomplishment of the research
  objective. It does not gloss over difficult areas
  with statements like, We will use computers to
  accomplish this solution.

68
6. State research objective clearly in proposal

• A good research proposal includes a clear
  statement of the research objective. Early in the
  proposal is better than later in the proposal.
  The first sentence of the proposal is a good
  place. A good first sentence might be, The
  research objective of this proposal is... Do not
  use the word develop in the statement of your
  research objective. It is, after all, supposed to
  be a research objective, not a development
  objective.
• Many proposals include no statement of the
  research objective whatsoever. The vast majority
  of these are not funded. Remember that a research
  proposal is not a research paper.
• Do not spend the first 10 pages building up
  suspense over what is the research objective.

69
7. Frame project around the work of others

• Remember that research builds on the extant
  knowledge base, that is, upon the work of others.
  Be sure to frame your project appropriately,
  acknowledging the current limits of knowledge and
  making clear your contribution to the extension
  of these limits.
• Be sure that you include references to the extant
  work of others. Proposals that include references
  only to the work of the principal investigator
  stand a negligible probability of success.
• Also frame your project in terms of its broader
  impact to the field and to society. Describe the
  benefit to society if your project is successful.
  A good statement is, If successful, the benefits
  of this research will be...

70
8. Grammar and spelling count

• Proposals are not graded on grammar. But if the
  grammar is not perfect, the result is ambiguities
  left to the reviewer to resolve.
• Ambiguities make the proposal difficult to read
  and often impossible to understand, and often
  result in low ratings. Be sure your grammar is
  perfect.
• Also be sure every word is correctly spelled. If
  the word you want to use is not in the spell
  checker, consider carefully its use. Not in the
  spell checker usually means that most people
  wont understand it. With only very special
  exceptions, it is not advisable to use words that
  are not in the spell checker. Reviewers used to
  say, Hes just an engineer. Dont mind the fact
  that he cant spell. Now they say, Hes
  proposing to do complex computer modeling, but he
  doesnt know how to use the spell checker...

71
9. Format and brevity are important

• Do not feel that your proposal is rated based on
  its weight.
• Do not do your best to be as verbose as possible,
  to cover every conceivable detail, to use the
  smallest permissible fonts, and to get the
  absolute most out of each sheet of paper.
• Reviewers hate being challenged to read densely
  prepared text or to read obtusely prepared
  matter. Use 12 point fonts, use easily legible
  fonts, use generous margins. Take pity on the
  reviewers. Make your proposal a pleasant reading
  experience that puts important concepts up front
  and makes them clear. Use figures appropriately
  to make and clarify points, but not as filler.
• Remember, you are writing this proposal to the
  reviewers, not to yourself. Remember that
  exceeding page limits or other format criteria,
  even marginally, can disqualify your proposal
  from consideration.

72
10. Know the review process

• Know how your proposal will be reviewed before
  you write it. Proposals that are reviewed by
  panels must be written to a broader audience than
  proposals that will be reviewed by mail. Mail
  review can seek out reviewers with very specific
  expertise in very narrow disciplines. This is not
  possible in panels. Know approximately how many
  proposals will be reviewed with yours and plan
  not to overburden the reviewers with minutia.
  Keep in mind that, the more proposals a panel
  considers, the more difficult it will be for
  panelists to remember specific details of your
  proposal.
• Remember, the main objective here is to write
  your proposal to get it through the review
  process successfully. It is not the objective of
  your proposal to brag about yourself or your
  research, nor is it the objective to seek to
  publish your proposal.
• Again, your proposal is a proposal, it is not a
  research paper.

73
11. Proof read your proposal before it is sent

• Many proposals are sent out with idiotic
  mistakes, omissions, and errors of all sorts.
• NSF program managers have seen proposals come in
  with research schedules pasted in from other
  proposals unchanged, with dates referring to the
  stone age and irrelevant research tasks.
  Proposals have been submitted with the list of
  references omitted and with the references not
  referred to. Proposals have been submitted to the
  wrong program. Proposals have been submitted with
  misspellings in the title.
• These proposals were not successful. Stupid
  things like this kill a proposal. It is easy to
  catch them with a simple, but careful, proof
  reading. Dont spend six or eight weeks writing a
  proposal just to kill it with stupid mistakes
  that are easily prevented.

74
12. Submit your proposal on time

• Duh? Why work for two months on a proposal just
  to have it disqualified for being late? Remember,
  fairness dictates that proposal submission rules
  must apply to everyone. It is not up to the
  discretion of the program officer to grant you
  dispensation on deadlines. That would be unfair
  to everyone else, and it could invalidate the
  entire competition. Equipment failures, power
  outages, hurricanes and tornadoes, and even
  internal problems at your institution are not
  valid excuses. As adults, you are responsible for
  getting your proposal in on time. If misfortune
  befalls you, its tough luck. Dont take chances.
  Get your proposal in two or three days before the
  deadline.

75
Improve your prospects for success as an academic
researcher (by George A. Hazelrigg, NSF)

• There are two more things that you can do to
  vastly improve your prospects for success as an
  academic researcher.
• First, you have to know yourself as well as you
  can. Who are you? Where are you going? Where do
  you want to go? I strongly urge people,
  especially young faculty just starting their
  careers, to write a strategic plan for their
  life. Where are you today? Where do you want to
  be in five years, ten years, twenty years?
• Then create a roadmap of how to get from where
  you are to where you want to be in the future.
  The focus of this roadmap should be the things
  over which you have control, and it should
  acknowledge the things over which you have no
  control. If you cant write such a plan, then
  your goals for the future are not realistic. You
  can revise the plan as often as you wish. But the
  fact that the plan exists will influence your
  proposal in a very positive way, as it will place
  the research project you propose into the broad
  context of your life plan.

76
Resources for Junior Faculty

• Resources for Junior Faculty
• http//opd.tamu.edu/resources-for-junior-faculty
• Funding for Junior Faculty
• http//opd.tamu.edu/funding-opportunities/funding-
  opportunities-by-category/programs-for-junior-facu
  lty.html

77
Early Career Programs for Faculty (Back)

• NSF CAREER
• DoD
• Young Investigator (ONR, ARL)
• Congressionally Mandated Directed Medical
  Research Programs Young Investigator
• NASA New Investigator Program in Earth-Sun
  Systems
• NIH
• Scientist Development Award for New Minority
  Faculty
• Career Development Awards (K-awards)
• Esp. Career Transition (K22) Award
• NIAMS Small Grants Program for New Investigators

78
Early Career Programs for Faculty

• Foundations
• Burroughs Wellcome Fund
• PhRMA Foundation
• Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Early Career
  Fellowship in Economic Studies
• Kellogg Forum Rising Stars, etc.
• Professional organization early career or
  young investigator programs
• American Philosophical Society Franklin
  Research Grants
• Listing of Programs
• http//www.spo.berkeley.edu/Fund/newfaculty.html

79
NSF CAREER Program

• Duration 5 years
• Funding level minimum 400K total (except min.
  500K total for BIO directorate)
• Eligibility
• Have a PhD
• Untenured, holding tenure-track Asst. Prof.
  position or equivalent
• Have not competed in CAREER more than two times
  previously
• Have not won a CAREER award
• Due July 19 21 depending on directorate
• Typical 10 20 success rate
• Solicitation http//www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_
  summ.jsp?ods_keynsf05579

80
Key Points for CAREER

• Career Development Plan to build a firm
  foundation for a lifetime of integrated
  contributions to research and education
• Where is your field going over the next 20 years?
• What will help you become established at national
  level?
• Establish that you have the experience and
  resources to accomplish what you propose

81
Key Points (contd)

• Integrated Education Plan
• Along with Broader Impacts, often the
  discriminator among many technically good
  proposals
• Looking for innovative approaches to integrating
  education and research
• Use strategic approach dont overburden yourself
  with unreasonable education workload
• Do what interests you, makes sense for your
  project
• Be sure to address diversity issues

82
Key Points (contd)

• Outreach and Broader Impacts
• Broaden participation of under-rep. groups
• Dissemination
• Societal benefits
• Improve infrastructure for research
• Discuss throughout proposal AND in separate
  section in both Project Summary and Description
• Connect to existing programs (ITS Center,
  Research Experiences for Teachers, Research
  Experiences for Undergraduates, Rural Systemic
  Initiatives, etc. - more later)

83
Review Criteria

• Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts equally
  weighted
• Must show you have the skills to carry out the
  project
• Collaboration helpful, especially if moving into
  new area need letter saying you are
  collaborating (no co-PIs)
• If moving into new area explain why this area
  should be investigated
• Data from your prior work good idea
• Publications in area greatly improves
  competitiveness

84
Review Criteria

• Support from your department is critical
• Highlight benefits of your project to the
  department (does it add important capabilities,
  fit in with departments strategic plan, bring in
  new infrastructure?)
• Discuss any connections to NSF priority areas,
  even if peripheral
• State benefits of your research clearly
• Why is it important?
• How will it advance knowledge in field?
• Societal benefits
• Be sure to emphasize integration of education and
  research

85
Strengths of Successful Proposals

• Novel or high-impact research focus
• Innovative research plan
• Education plan is well-developed, integrated with
  research and includes some consideration of
  evaluating its success
• Education plan goes beyond routine course
  development expected of all assistant professors
• Quoted from J. Tornow presentation at QEM
  Workshop http//qemnetwork.qem.org16080/tornow_pr
  esentation/Joanne.htm

86
Weaknesses of Unsuccessful CAREER Proposals

• Research is either too ambitious or too narrowly
  focused
• Proposed methods do not address the stated
  research goals
• Educational component is either limited to
  routine courses or is unrealistically
  overambitious
• Integration of research and education is weak or
  uninspired
• Quoted from J. Tornow presentation at QEM
  Workshop
• http//qemnetwork.qem.org16080/tornow_presentatio
  n/Joanne.htm

87
Typical CAREER Review Process

• Program director identifies 3 to 6 reviewers with
  expertise in technical area
• Note PI can suggest reviewers
• Advantage if reviewers are familiar with PI or
  PIs advisor
• Proposal mailed to reviewers, who focus on
  technical merit
• Does research address an important question in
  the field?
• Is research innovative and exciting?
• Is it likely that the researcher will be
  successful in reaching her/his goals
• Are researchers goals and methods clear?
• May evaluate education, broader impacts but not
  main focus

88
Typical Review Process

• After mail reviews, proposal reviewed by panel at
  NSF
• How well does proposed work integrate education
  with research?
• Is education plan innovative and does it make
  sense for project?
• What are broader impacts?
• How well does project promote diversity?
• Balance of topics of funded projects (i.e., wont
  fund 10 projects in same area)
• Process varies by directorate
• For example, Physics directorate does not have
  mail reviews

89
Coming up with a Research Idea

• What do you want to do?
• Does it address important questions in your
  field?
• Is it novel and cutting-edge
• Not incremental improvement or refinement of
  established research
• Where is your field going in the next 20 years?
• Do you have the background and resources to
  accomplish your goals?
• If you are moving into a new but related area, be
  sure you discuss collaborations with researchers
  who will fill any gaps
• Will it contribute to your career goals?
• Will it contribute to your departments goals?
• Important Talk to your department head and
  research departmental goals!

90
Next Step Strategic Info Gathering

• Determine which NSF program to submit your
  proposal to.
• Extremely important! Submitting to wrong program
  can doom good proposal.
• Do this by e-mailing or calling program director.
• Have a paragraph summary of your proposed
  research prepared.
• Use NSF web site
• Search awarded CAREER projects in directorate
• Check program goals
• Talk to senior researchers in the area where are
  they funded?

91
General Writing Advice

• Follow directions! (See solicitation, Grant
  Proposal Guide)
• Make it easy to read and understand
• Reviewer may be scanning your proposal on an
  airplane
• Use bullets, tables, graphs, illustrations as
  much as possible this is what they will look at
  first
• Watch your font the Grant Proposal Guide gives
  rules on minimum font size. Best to stay at 12
  pt for readability

92
General Writing Advice (contd)

• Make the main points easy to find
• Put them at the beginning of the paragraph
• Use underline, bold, white space, etc.
• Specifically state all benefits of your project
• Even if its obvious to you, may not be obvious
  to reviewer outside your area
• Communicate your excitement!

93
Project Summary (1 page)

• Clearly address intellectual merit and broader
  impacts separately (and label them) if you
  dont , your proposal will be returned without
  review!
• This is a sales document and may be the only
  thing the reviewer will read
• Must pique the reviewers interest
• State up front the advantages of your project
  (technical, societal, diversity, etc.) dont be
  shy!
• Summary should be clear and easy to read spend a
  lot of time on this!

94
Project Description (15 pages)

• Description of proposed research project
• Description of proposed educational activities
• Description of how research and educational
  activites are integrated
• Results of Prior NSF support, if applicable (5
  pgs max)
• Last 5 years
• Report on only one program (most closely related)

95
Project Description

• Objectives and Significance
• Relation of research to current state of
  knowledge
• Outline of Plan of Work including evaluation of
  education activities
• Relation of plan to career goals and
  responsibilities
• Relation of plan to department goals
• Prior Research and Education Accomplishments

96
Project Description

• Objectives and Significance of Plan
• State your objectives clearly and at the
  beginning include education goals
• Describe briefly how your plan will advance
  knowledge in the field, improve education,
  provide societal benefits, etc.
• Background relationship of research to current
  state of knowledge in the field
• Provide enough background to bring non-expert in
  field up to speed and demonstrate your knowledge
• Give plenty of references, particularly of
  experts in field (who may be reviewing your
  proposal)
• Do not be dismissive of previous work
• Relationship of education activities to research
  on effective teaching and learning in your field

97
Project Description (contd)

• Your Prior Work
• Describe what you have done to date in area
• Cite publications
• Present any data you have generated
• Establish your expertise in the area (or in
  related area)
• Use graphs, figures, etc. where possible
• Avoid too dense text
• Describe any directly related education
  experience

98
Project Description

• Plan of Work
• Measurable goals and objectives (research,
  education, diversity, outreach, etc.)
• Methods and Procedures (include education
  evaluation methods)
• Be sure to discuss broader impact, diversity,
  outreach, etc.
• Include activity and milestone chart by year
  (both research and education included in each
  year)

99
Project Description

• Examples of Education Components
• Go more than would be expected as part of your
  job
• Develop a course related to your research
• Must be innovative (e.g., active learning
  approach, technology assisted learning,
  interdisciplinary outlook, connection with
  industry, communication, ethics or sociology
  component, etc. refer to NSF-funded Foundation
  Coalition)
• Involve undergraduates in research
• What is your goal?
• Encourage them to continue to grad school? Then
  include mentoring, info on application process
• Prepare them for industry? Then connect them
  with industrial representatives, potential
  internships
• Innovative graduate student education
• Interdisciplinary focus, international component,
  etc.

100
Treat Education as a Scholarly Enterprise

• Cite research and publications on best education
  practices, suggested reforms
• 1999 National Research Council report How People
  Learn Brain, Mind, Experience, and School
• NRC report Knowing What Students Know The
  Science and Design of Educational Assessment.
• NSF report SHAPING THE FUTURE New Expectations
  for Undergraduate Education in Science,
  Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology
• The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates
  in the Research University, REINVENTING
  UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION A Blueprint for
  America's Research Universities
• Discipline-specific pubs e.g., BIO 2010
  Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future
  Research Biologists (2003), Committee on
  Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare
  Research Scientists for the 21st Century,
  National Research Council of the National
  Academies, The National Academies Press.
• Pilot Study to Establish the Nature and Impact of
  Effective Undergraduate Research Experiences on
  Learning, Attitude, and Career Choice, Research
  on Learning and Education (ROLE), David E.
  Lopatto, Principal Investigator, Grinnell

101
Education Component

• Goals should be specific and measurable
• Evaluation should measure how well your approach
  is working
• E.g., percentage of undergrads mentored
  continuing to grad school, improvement in test
  scores, etc.
• See NSF Handbook on Evaluation at
  http//www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_k
  eynsf02057
• Plans should include details to make them real
• E.g., Number of students served, need being
  addressed with statistics
• Check with your College for statistics on
  enrollment, etc.

102
Broader Impacts and Outreach

• Address diversity issues!
• Examples (choose what interests you and make
  sense for your project)
• Work with K-12 teachers
• Research Experiences for Teachers (RET)
  supplement
• Connect with PEER Program
• Work with pre-service teachers
• Work with undergrads from other schools (e.g.,
  minority serving)
• Research Experiences for Undergraduates
  supplement (is there an REU site in your
  department?)

103
Broader Impacts More Examples

• Work with high school students on Science Fair
  projects
• Work with Community College teachers
• Collaborate with faculty from smaller and/or
  minority serving institutions
• Give them summer access to your facilities
• Connect to student chapters of minority
  professional organizations (e.g., Society of
  Women Engineers, Society of Mexican American
  Engineers and Scientists) look for natural
  connections

104
Career goals

• Relation of PIs Career goals to goals of
  department/organization
• Talk to your Department Head!
• Check planning documents for department and
  reference
• Reference Vision 2020 and how you will contribute
  to these goals
• http//www.tamu.edu/vision2020/

105
Departmental Endorsement (load under
Supplementary Docs)

• Letter from Dept Head
• Must be signed by Head with name, title, date
  printed below signature
• Proposed activities supported by and integrated
  into goals of department and department will
  support the development of the PI
• Mentoring, Facilities, Summer salary (can list
  components from your start-up package), etc.
• Description of
• Relationship between project, PIs career goals
  and responsibilities and department goals
• Ways in which DH will ensure mentoring of PI
• Verification PI is eligible

106
Other Documents (contd)

• Supplementary Documents
• PI self-certification of eligibility (on
  Fastlane)
• Letters of commitment from collaborators
• No reference letters allowed
• 2-page bio
• see Grant Proposal Guide for format and follow it
  (some directorates very picky!)
• Current and Pending
• Lists currently funded project (from any source,
  not just NSF) and any pending proposal for
  external funding
• See Grant Proposal Guide
• Facilities

107
Budget and Budget Justification

• No support of other Senior Personnel (faculty,
  etc.)
• Be sure to fund your educational activities also
• Budget Justification
• Another way to sell your ideas
• Make sure its easy to follow and supports the
  stated work plan

108
Resubmissions

• Read and address reviews from last submission
• Reviewers will have access to your last
  submission
• Call your program officer for input
• Best soon after receiving reviews
• But if you have questions about some reviews,
  call him/her now

109
ONR Young Investigator Program (Office of Naval
Research)

• 100,000 per year for three years
• FY 05 proposal was due 12 January 2006.
• FY07 announcement usually posted in September
• http//www.onr.navy.mil/sci_tech/archive_to_dvd/in
  dustrial/363