Writing a Department of Psychiatry Seed Funding Application: Some Tips and Tricks When Applying for Pilot Funds

1
Writing a Department of Psychiatry Seed Funding
Application Some Tips and Tricks When Applying
for Pilot Funds
Dr. Marnin J. Heisel, Ph.D., C.Psych. The
University of Western Ontario
Department of Psychiatry Research Interest Group
Presentation July 11, 2013
2
What is a Pilot Study?

• Typically a small study, of limited scope and
  duration (and cost)
• Intended to
• test a concept (proof-of-principle)
• evaluate methods or measures
• test the safety of a study protocol
• establish ones research abilities (as a PI)
• assess the feasibility of data collection
• generate an effect size for future analyses
• demonstrate the soundness of an idea
• pave the way for a future larger study

3

• Pilot studies are really not intended to be
  ultimate research projects, sui generis
• They are intended to test a new idea or
  practice, to demonstrate that something has
  promise or can work, with the ultimate aim of
  facilitating or promoting a larger project or
  undertaking
• Pilot projects are successful if they lead to
• innovative/important (publishable) findings,
  and
• success in extramural funding competitions

4

• One of the most common requests made by
  reviewers of full-scale grants (especially
  regarding new ideas, new researchers or
  research teams, or innovative protocols) is for
  some pilot data to demonstrate that the study
  can be carried out by this team in this fashion,
  and has a good chance of being completed and
  succeeding
• Having some pilot data, even if only a little,
  can sometimes make a difference between
  getting a so-so review (and no funding) and
  getting a project funded

5

• Sometimes it appears that reviewers want the
  full study to be carried out before they will
  consider funding the full study this is not
  appropriate
• Yet, reviewers (and funders) do not want the
  pilot study to be the end of the research, but
  rather the beginning
• Sadly, however, this sometimes occurs

6

• When it comes to moving health care
  practices forward efficiently, Canada is a
  country of perpetual pilot projects. We seldom
  move proven projects into stable, funded
  programs, and we rarely transfer the outcomes
  of pilot projects across jurisdictions. This
  approach is not serving our health care system
  well.
• Hon. Monique Bégin

7
Westerns Department of Psychiatry Seed Funding
Competition

• Purpose primarily (although not exclusively)
  to support research by trainees junior faculty
• The intention is to support new research ideas
  and new researchers
• It constitutes an investment, by the Department
  of Psychiatry, in its people (researchers,
  faculty, and trainees) and in the future of
  mental health research
• To raise the Departments profile
• To lay the foundation for extramural grants

8
Westerns Department of Psychiatry Seed Funding
Competition What It Is

• A competitive grant application process
• Not everyone will be funded, but repeat
  submissions are possible ( often encouraged)
• A peer-reviewed funding competition
• Projects are reviewed by the Department of
  Psychiatry Research Committee typically 2 or
  more individuals are selected to provide an
  anonymous review of the project

9
Westerns Department of Psychiatry Seed Funding
Competition What It Is Not

• A source of on-going funding
• A source of top-up or gap funding
• A way of preserving financial resources
• A vehicle for preferentially supporting a
  subject area or type of research or research
  group or program or theme or individual
• A source of start-up funds
• A source of funding for equipment
• A source of funding for travel or conference
  support
• A source of funding for training or education

10
Some Logistics

• The seed funding competition currently occurs
  twice yearly (usually in Spring and Fall)
• This year, we have decided to stagger the seed
  funding competition with the Lawsons Internal
  Research Funding (IRF) competition
• The departmental research office issues a call
  for proposals, usually 1 or more months prior
  to the submission deadline
• Faculty and trainees are encouraged to apply
  for funding and are provided with instructions
  and application forms (please follow them!)

11
Some Logistics (cont.)

• Project funding limit 7,500 (previously 5K)
• Available funds vary from competition to
  competition (and from year to year) we are
  currently in good fiscal shape-so apply often
• Funds are primarily to be devoted to carrying
  out a project, not for purchasing large
  equipment or for travel or conference support
• R.A. support, payment of participants (and for
  participant travel), for expendable equipment,
  and other direct study expenses are generally
  appropriate when within funding limits

12
Some Logistics (cont.)

• Partial, top-up, or gap funding is generally not
  encouraged, and may not be supported
• Although we are happy to support pilot studies,
  studies solely designed to assess project
  feasibility generally do not fare well
• We want to see innovative ideas, strong and
  appropriate methods, team members with
  relevant and/or necessary skills for carrying out
  the project, and projects with broader mental
  health relevance and with a good likelihood of
  translating into successful extramural funding
  applications

13
Before Submitting Your Application

• Plan well in advance writing grants takes time
• You typically dont want to begin writing your
  grant a day before the submission deadline
• When writing your application, think about the
  work you want to do (or project youd like to
  carry out), and then think about how you can
  begin to carry-out that program of research or
  what sort of data might be helpful to begin
  establishing your argument (and competence)
• Then focus your ideas seed fund projects need
  not be large or excessively complicated

14

• Take the time to review the literature, see what
  has been done before, what has worked (and
  what hasnt), and to identify gaps in the field
• Applications will likely not be funded if the
  study being proposed has already been done by
  someone else, or it has not worked, or the
  published study was far more advanced than
  what you are proposing
• Be up to date, use current methods and tools
  and ask relevant questions
• Show innovation, but within reason
• Attend to issues of grantsmanship

15
Grantsmanship

• See (for e.g.,)
• the Art of acquiring peer-reviewed research
  funding (Jacob Kraicer)
• http//www.hfsp.org/funding/art-grantsmanship

16
Grantsmanship

• Wordsmithing
• Strategizing
• Persuasion
• Demonstrate knowledge, acumen, and vision
• Walking the walk and talking the talk
• to get you funding

17

• Ultimately, great research studies begin with
  great ideas researchers generally are rewarded
  for being thinkers (although not always)
• Your project is likely to float (or sink)
  depending on the science involved
• If the idea is good, the aims reasonable, the
  methods strong, and the team (and budget)
  appropriate, you stand a good shot at success
• Although not always on your first attempt
  please do not despair if you are not funded

18

• When writing your application, please be very
  clear regarding
• how your project fits within the field
• how your research will help advance the field
  (incrementally, at first)
• your study goals/aims and hypotheses
• your study methods, measures, procedures
• your sample (if relevant)
• your personnel (if relevant)
• data collection, storage, and security
• data analysis (including statistical approach)
• sample size justification!!!!!
• relevant ethical issues
• anticipated pitfalls (and remedies)
• dissemination/KT
• next steps (especially plans for future grants)

19

• It helps to demonstrate passion and excitement
  about your topic if you arent enthused about
  your work, the reviewer isnt likely to be
  either
• Write clearly
• avoid jargon
• define key terms
• avoid acronyms (they can lead to acrimony)
• avoid lengthy and run-on sentences
• keep to one idea per sentence
• and one main idea per paragraph
• avoid meandering literature reviews
• demonstrate the need for your study

20

• A good grant reads likea good read
• There is format, syntax, context, and a clear
  beginning, middle, and end
• You are telling a story walk your reader
  through it, from beginning to end
• Dont leave it to your reviewer to figure out
  what you are saying (or the value in your
  project) they might not
• Try to adopt a tone of interest, competence,
  and respect, avoid being argumentative

21

• Applicants are strongly encouraged to be in
  touch with me to discuss project ideas well
  ahead of submission deadlines
• I am happy to provide feedback and assistance
  in developing project ideas
• It is, similarly, a very good idea to find
  strong research mentorship and to access your
  mentor in developing the research idea and
  methods and in writing (and re-writing) your
  application
• Please have your work peer-reviewed prior to
  submitting it for funding
• You might want to ask a friend to read it too

22
A Few Words on Budgeting

• 7,500 will only go so farbut its a start
• Budget appropriately
• Demonstrate that your expenses are
  appropriate and necessary in order to carry out
  your study
• Be economical, if you can
• Share resources, if you can
• But dont worry about asking for 7,500 if that
  is what you need
• Make sure to justify your proposed expenses
• And please get the math right

23
After Submitting Your Application

• Once you have submitted your application, it
  will be reviewed initially by the research office
  to generally make sure that it fits within the
  scope/instructions of the competition
• We will then send it out for peer-review to
  department research committee members (and
  occasionally to faculty outside of the research
  committee, if additional expertise is required)
• Reviewers will be asked to share their review
  with the research committee (in-person or in
  writing) for the committees review of
  proposals and funding decision-making

24

• Similar to CIHR, we use a 5-point scale (5 is
  best) submissions scored below 3.5 are
  typically not considered eligible for funding
• Submissions scored above 3.5 are not
  automatically approved for fundingthat
  decision is made based on committee discussion
  and available funds during that competition
• We wont always know how many projects will
  be funded for a while (e.g., if someone is
  awaiting word on other outstanding funding
  submissions)

25

• I will write to you, informing you of the
  results of the competition, and sharing your
  reviews
• I may also ask for clarification on certain
  points
• Possible results you are funded, you are not
  funded, or you are partially funded, contingent
  on some issue(s)
• I am always available to meet and talk about
  the funding competition in general and your
  submission in particular
• I am also happy to help you think-through next
  steps (whether you had been funded or not)

26

• Do not despair if you are not funded at first
• It never feels good to be turned-down for
  funding that never goes away in ones career
• Successful researchers are not necessarily
  smarter, brighter, luckier, or more plugged-in
  to clinical/scientific/political/funding
  realities than are those who are not
  successful
• Successful researchers somehow find a way to
  avoid being devastated by rejection (usually)
  and lick their wounds and try again (and again,
  and again, and again sometimes)
• I knoweasy to sayhard to do

27
After you Are Funded

• Before receiving access to project funds, you
  must
• Receive research ethics approval (we can help
  you with this)
• Write a ROLA and open a study account
  (Bernice James can help with this)
• Buy needed equipment, hire needed personnel,
  recruit needed participants, do needed research!
• Disseminate your findings
• Seek/receive extramural funding support
• Await call from the Nobel committee

28
Thank You