An Introduction to Grants
- What is Grant?
- A grant is money that is awarded to organizations and individuals, normally on a competitive basis, in order for the recipient to carry out a specific project
- It Starts with a Great Idea
- The central idea should be a solution to the problem
- What are you passionate about in your scholarly or professional life?
- What is the problem or need in your area of passion? Why is it important?
- What sources or kinds of data can you use to validate the importance of your proposed project?
- How is/are existing knowledge, practice, or resources inadequate?
- How is your idea new, unique, or better?
- How would the world be a better/different place if you solved the problem or addressed the needs?
- Reference
Getting Started in Grant Writing
- Timeline
- Idea Development, 1 month
- Funding Search, 1 month
- Proposal Planning, 2-3 months
- Proposal Writing, 2-3 months
- Proposal Submission, 1 week
- Proposal Review, 4-6 months
- It is different than academic writing
- the ultimate purpose of a grant proposal is to persuade the funding organization to provide resources for a project
- Expository Writing, factual, written in the third person, and free of emotion
- Persuasive Writing, based on facts or evidence, but its purpose is to convince the reader that the writer's idea or point of view is best
- Ask Early, Ask Clearly
- Need a very clear statement about what you are asking for and why
- Has a cover page and the dollar amount of your budget request is on the cover sheet
- It Is Not About You
- Does it align with the review criteria stated in the guidelines?
- Is it similar to other projects funded by this agency and program?
- Does the program officer respond favorably to your idea?
- More Comparisons of Academic and Grant Writing
- Academic Writing
- Expository
- Idea Focused
- Past Oritented
- Unrestricted Length
- Specialized Vocabulary
- Grant Writing
- Persuasive
- Outcome Focused
- Future Oriented
- Stric Length Constraints
- Accessible Language
- Grant proposals are also typically written in the future tense
- Avoid “not” (for example, “we broke no laws” instead of “we did not break any laws”)
- Single Word Replacement
- At this point in time, Now
- Has the potential to, Can or might
- In the near future, Soon
- Owing to the fact that, Because or since
- Makes an attempt, Tries
- In addition to, Also
- The Active Voice: Persuasive and Space-Saving
- Follow the Directions
- 80 percent of success is just following the directions
- You will fail more than you succeed
- The success rate is 18.7 percent for NIH research project grants in 2017
- The overall success rate is 23 percent at NSF in 2015
- Proposal Central
- Summary
- It takes a long time and significant effort
- It is different than academic writing
- You must follow the rules and directions
- You will fail more than you succeed – and you are in good company
- You will drown if you are just chasing the money
- Reference
Finding and Selecting Funding Opportunities
- Spending time researching a funding agency
- developing the skills to locate and analyze information about the grant programs it supports
- Government Agencies
- a request for proposals (RFP) or a request for applications (RFA)
- the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) call these funding requests “solicitations.”
- Federal Register
- grants.gov
- Georgia Grant Search
- Foundations
- Corporations and Corporate Foundations
- corporate foundation, a separate legal entity from the parent corporation, set up as a nonprofit entity in the same way as other foundations
- corporate giving, grants to organizations where employees volunteer or matching gifts to organizations that employees support
- Subscription
- NSH Awards
- NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool (RePORT)
Crafting a Proposal Development Plan
- Building the Plan
- Due Dates
- Annual (and possibly recurring) deadline
- Annual, one-time deadlines for programs that may not be repeated
- Multiple annual deadlines based on discipline or agency unit
- Multiple deadlines during the year
- Flexible submission dates, often in the form of a submission window
- Building a Proposal Development Plan
- fill out the top section with all of the relevant information
- complete Table 2 by filling in dates during the proposal submission period
- complete Table 1
- Delegating Tasks and Monitoring Progress
- ASSIGNED TO
- Holding weekly meetings
- The proposal development coordinator is responsible for updating the proposal development plan worksheet on a regular basis
Creating the Proposal Narrative
- Project Description (NSF), Research Strategy (NIH), Project Narrative (Others)
- NSF, the Project Description should outline the general plan of work, including the broad design of activities to be undertaken, and, where appropriate, provide a clear description of experimental methods and procedures. Proposers should address what they want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful
- NIH, the narrative should provide an intellectual justification for your project, covering the four areas listed below: research and contribution; methods and work plan; competencies, skills, and access; and final product and dissemination. A simple statement of need or intent is insufficient.
- Common Proposal Narrative Sections
- Problem Statement, why
- A rationale in the form of a literature review demonstrates your understanding of the problem
- Explain why the problem is of interest to the sponsor
- What has been done (or what is already known) and how your idea is new, different, or better
- Goals and Objectives, what will be done
- What outcomes you will achieve if the project is successful
- Address the project’s significance: why and to whom does it matter?
- The project goals and objectives should be aligned with those of the funding agency or specific program
- Repurpose the RFP’s language in your proposal goals and objectives
- Methodology, how and when
- Describe the activities that will occur during the grant period and provide a timeline of planned activities or experiments
- Must be very specific. The degree of specificity depends on the audience and overall length restrictions on the narrative
- Draft this section by including all of the possible details and then edit it so that the narrative meets the funding opportunity’s length requirements
- Personnel and Project Management, who will be doing the proposed work
- For complex projects involving multiple investigators and/or organizations, include an organizational chart to illustrate the project management plan and team hierarchy
- Provide a brief overview of credentials, roles, and responsibilities for each key project team member
- If space permits, mention the time commitment of each individual or group of individuals, but know that you may have more room for details in the budget justification
- Proposal most likely includes a biographical sketch for each key team member, so it is not necessary to include a great deal of curriculum vitae
- Expected Outcomes
- The project outcomes may be a separate section. Alternatively, the outcomes may be incorporated into the goals and objectives section
- This section may also be called evaluation. It is where you will describe what will happen as a result of your project and how you will measure its success
- Dissemination Plan
- Outline the strategies that will be used to share the results, such as conference presentations, published papers, and/or website or social media postings
- Mention several possible avenues for dissemination also positions you to request funds for these activities in your budget and budget justification
- Grant Guidelines as a Tool for Narrative Organization
- Organizing the NIH Research Proposal Narrative
- Significance
- Innovation
- Approach
- The first two sections answer the why question, the three – addresses issues of what, when, where, and how
- Dealing with Specificity
- Know Your Audience
- S.M.A.R.T. Objectives and Aims
- Specific
- Measurable
- Achievable
- Relevant
- Time-bound
- Sentences written with vague verbs like “improve,” “enhance,” and “expand” are appropriate for a goal statement
- Increase the success of students who transfer from Local Community College to Nearby State University
- Objective statements should be S.M.A.R.T.
- Achieve an annual 10 percent increase (above 2018 baseline) in the number of Local Community College associate's degree recipients who earn bachelor's degrees from Nearby State University within three years of matriculation
- Methods, Timeline, and Budget
- Methods
- The methods section (or approach in an NIH proposal) requires a substantial amount of detail to satisfy the peer reviewers with expertise in the field
- Timeline
- For longer projects, increments of quarter-years (three months) or semesters (fall, spring, summer) are appropriate for sequencing the project tasks
- Shorter projects, such as one year, might break out the timeline into one- or two-month segments
- Budget
- While technically not a component of the narrative, the budget plays a role in convincing the sponsor that your project is realistic
- Review Criteria as a Narrative Organizer
- Selection Criteria of U.S. Department of Educaiton
| Text in GAANN Proposal | Corresponding Outline Section | Percent |
|---|
| Meeting the purposes of the program (7 points) | A. Purpose | 7.4% |
|---|
| Extent of need for the project (5 points) | B. Need | 5.3% |
|---|
| Quality of the graduate academic program (20 points) | C. Program Structure and Faculty | 21.1% |
|---|
| Quality of the supervised teaching experience (10 points) | D. Supervised Teaching Experience | 10.5% |
|---|
| Recuritment plan (5 points) | E. Recruitment Plan | 5.3% |
|---|
| Project administration (8 points) | F. Project Administration | 8.4% |
|---|
| Institutional commitment (15 points) | G. Institutional Commitment | 15.8% |
|---|
| Quality of key personnel (5 points) | H. Key Personnel | 5.3% |
|---|
| Budget (5 points) | Budget | 5.3% |
|---|
| Evaluation Plan (15 points) | J. Evaluation Plan | 15.8% |
|---|
| Adequacy of Resources (5 points) | K. Project Resources | 5.3% |
|---|
- Special Considerations in Narrative Development
- Non-Research Proposals, Grant proposals for programmatic support
- Evidence, the peer-reviewed literature
- Context, your organization’s setting
- Evaluation, the importance of a plan
- Specific changes in student learning, faculty behavior, or other metrics like enrollment and degree completion
- Foundation Proposals
- Focus on the outcomes and alignment with the foundation’s mission
- Avoid overly technical language and minimize the amount of detail about methodology
- The program officer is your ally, not your adversary
Tables, Forms, and Documents
- Project Abstracts: Variations on a Theme
- It should be the last document finalized in order to ensure it is consistent with everything
- National Science Foundation (NSF): Project Summary
- one-page project summary
- Overview, a description of the activity that would result if the proposal were funded and a statement of objectives and methods to be employed
- Intellectual Merit, the potential of the proposed activity to advance knowledge
- Broader Impacts, the potential of the proposed activity to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes
- National Institutes of Health (NIH): Project Summary/Abstract
- It is limited to 30 lines of text
- The project’s broad, long-term objectives and specific aims
- A description of the research design and methods for achieving the stated goals
- The No-Rules Abstract
- The significance (need) of the work
- The hypothesis and major objectives of the project
- The methods or processes to be followed to accomplish the objectives
- The expected outcomes if the project is successful
- Compliance: Vertebrate Animals and Human Subjects
- Biosketches: Marketing Your Qualifications
- How well qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct the proposed activities?
- National Science Foundation (NSF)
- Template
- Professional Preparation, lists an individual’s educational background
- Appointments, a list, in reverse chronological order, of all the individual’s academic/professional appointments beginning with the current appointment
- Products, a list of two groups of publications or products such as datasets, software, patents, and copyrights
- Synergistic Activities
- Avoid listing activities that are part of your regular job duties
- Innovations in teaching and training (for example, development of curricular materials and pedagogical methods)
- Contributions to the science of learning
- Development and/or refinement of research tools
- Computation methodologies and algorithms for problem-solving
- Development of databases to support research and education
- Broadening the participation of groups underrepresented in STEM
- Service to the scientific and engineering community outside of the individual's immediate organization
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Template
- Personal Statement
- is written in the first person
- demonstrate how your experience and qualifications make you especially well-suited for your role on the proposed project
- demonstrate your understanding of the project
- Positions and Honors
- in chronological order, oldest to newest
- The honors section should include relevant and significant accomplishments
- Other professional experiences can be included in the positions and honors section, such as service on editorial boards, leadership positions in professional organizations, and membership on grant review panels
- Contributions to Science, where publications are listed according to topic groupings
- Research Support
- Letters of Commitment and Support
- Organizational Data Tables
- Who has the data?
- Office of Institutional Research or Office of Institutional Effectiveness
- Office of Admissions
- Registrar
- The Value of Visualization
Preparing the Budget and Budget Justification
- Cost Principles on Federal Grants
- Allowable costs, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards
- Cost Principles, allowable, allocable, reasonable, consistent
- Grant Budget Categories
- Personnel
- Salary
- Wage
- Fringe Benefits, the organization’s contribution to insurance (medical, dental, and/or vision), retirement, and other employer-paid benefits
- Equipment, tangible, nonexpendable property having a useful life of more than one year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit
- Computers are not considered equipment and need to be budgeted as “supplies” in the “other direct costs” category
- Travel
- Participant Support
- Occur in grant projects where individuals are the recipients of training activities (such as a summer research program) or attendees at an event
- Supplies, publications, and computer services
- Other Direct Cost
- People: A Major Budget Expense
- percent effort and person-months
- NSF normally limits support to 2 months for any individual
- Indirect Costs: Rates and Calculations
- facilities, laboratory, research, and program spaces, information technology infrastructure, telecommunications, utilities, furnishings, and more
- administrative, includes all of the legal, financial, and other support personnel required to manage grant-funded projects
- Indirect Cost Base: Direct Cost - Equipment - Capital Expeditures - Rental Costs - Patient Care - Tuition, Scholarships, and Fellowships - Participant Support - Portion of Each Subaward in excess of $25,000
- Budget = Direct Cost + Indirect Cost Base * Indirect Cost Rate
- The Budget Justification: Explaining Your Calculations
- The Big Picture: How is this used?
- Aligning the Justification with the Budget
- The Details Matter
Understanding the Proposal Review Process
- Types and Levels of Review
- Electronic System Compliance Review
- NSF
- Program Officer, manage the proposal review process, oversee the project content once the grant is funded, and serve as the financial manager
- Fastlane
- FastLane compliance checks, look for compliance with page lengths, fonts, page formatting, and internal consistency between various parts of the proposal
- Research.gov
- NIH
- Scientific review officers, administer the review process
- Program officers, oversee the scientific and technical aspects of the review process
- Grants management officer, budget modifications
- NIH eRA commons, eRA commons validation
- Administrative Review
- Peer Review
- NIH
- Significance, Investigators, Innovation, Approach, Environment
- Preliminary Score 1 (best) to 9 (worst)
- Three factors
- How clear is the language
- What is the quality of the idea
- Innovation
- Agency Review
- Fundation Search
- Individuals serve on the board may not be experts in the proposal’s subject matter
- Must be written in language that is understandable by an educated non-expert
- Focus on the project’s impact, and its ability to advance the foundation’s agenda, rather than on the work’s technical details
- Writing for the Reviewer
- Public Reviewer Rosters
- NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools
- Identify study section members working on projects similar to yours, be sure to review and cite their work to the extent
- Think Like a Reviewer
- Seven Characteristics
- Neat, well-organzied, and easy to read
- Good fit with the funding opportunity
- Fresh insight into an important problem
- Writing that communicates the writer's enthusiasm and commitment to the project
- Evidence that the PI knows the field
- Convincing the preliminary data
- A feasible work plan supported by an appropriate budget
- A list of common mistakes
- Vague and unfocused writing
- Sloppiness and lack of proofreading
- Lack of effort as evident in an obvious copy-and-paste job from other documents and proposals
- Inside the Peer Review Process
- Becoming a Reviewer
- Making the Most of Review Criteria
- NSF
- holistic review, the proposal is rated in its entirety rather than its individual parts or components
- how your proposed project is new, different, or better than what has been done before, incorporate this in the project summary and allow space throughout the narrative to reinforce the idea
- NIH
- semi-quantitative review system, assign a preliminary impact score ranging from 1 (exceptional) to 9 (poor) as well as scores from 1 to 9 on 5 review criteria
- The impact score determines whether the proposal is discussed at the review meeting
- ED
- rubric-driven review, the points assigned to sections and subsections added up for an overall numerical score
- allot more of your time to developing that content and more of the narrative page space to those sections or topics having more points than other sections or topics
- Next Steps After Review
- Classifications of Comments
- The quality of the overall idea (I)
- The fit (F) between the idea and the funding agency's priorities for this program
- The overall organization (O) and presentation of ideas
Course Summary: Bringing It All Together
- Key Steps in Proposal Development
- Idea Development
- Funding Search
- Proposal Planning
- Proposal Writing
- Proposal Submission
- Proposal Review
- Videos
- Resources
Resources