Mais conteúdo relacionado

Apresentações para você(20)

Similar a Ohiou grant intelligence workshop fall 2016(20)


Ohiou grant intelligence workshop fall 2016

  1. Increasing Your Grant Intelligence College of Arts and Sciences November 14, 2016
  2. Overview • Introductions • Grant Writing Overview • OU Resources – Research Division • Topics of Interest and Discussion • Upcoming Activities and Initiatives
  3. Quote from the world of sports Everyone has the will to win. What makes the difference is who has the will to prepare to win.
  4. What makes a proposal competitive? • The problem • The approach • The investigator(s) • The setting
  5. The Problem • Connecting with the big picture • Connecting with the reviewer Anthropology Transportation Economics International relations Psychology Sociology
  6. The Approach • Preparing to recognize a good idea • Break new ground (paradigm pioneer) • Find your own path
  7. The Investigator • Explain how you have been preparing for your whole life for the opportunity to pursue the proposed project! • Basically, explain why you are special with respect to achieving the proposed project goal • Are you a good investment as a: » Young investigator? » Senior scholar?
  8. The Setting • I have access to unique/necessary – Materials – Equipment – Colleagues – Location – Research participants
  9. General Comments • Writing a scholarly paper and a proposal is not the same • Compete within your league! • Practice, practice, practice • Proposal writing is like baseball- no one bats 1000 • Proposal development takes longer than you think • Cultivate a cadre of critics- remember von Bekesy!
  10. Research Division Roxanne Malé-Brune
  11. Edison Biotechnology Institute Industry Partnerships Innovation Center Internal Awards Office for Research and Sponsored Programs Research Compliance/Laboratory Animal Resources Research Communications Technology Transfer
  12. Internal Awards The university will invest more than $5.5 M in faculty, staff and student research & creative activity this year. Innovation Strategy Air Travel OURC Baker Student Enhancement Awards PURF UG Travel Konneker Faculty Research Support 1804 Fund
  13. Electronic database of all proposals submitted and awards received since 1980. Search by: Title College Sponsor Department Investigator Fiscal Year Program Type Proposal Status
  14. PIVOT One of the most comprehensive databases available for locating funding opportunities and identifying potential collaborators. Sources include U.S. federal, U.S. state and local, private foundations, professional societies and associations, and international governmental and private entities.
  15. PIVOT Log on the 1st time within the university IP address, using your email Then use it anywhere! Search for: Grants Fellowships Internships
  16. Topics of Interest
  17. Writing Tips • Your idea must be –Plausible (does it make sense; easy to follow; sections are well linked) –Practical (worth investing in) –Doable (show evidence that you can pull this off; do not promise too much or be too ambitious) –Meaningful (for research and/or practice; will results generalize?)
  18. Writing Tips • “This has never been done before” is not a sufficient or compelling rationale • Show a timeline of the proposed work • Use figures to efficiently convey your ideas • If you want the reviewer to read it, put it in the proposal, not the appendix • Convince them you have the skills & resources • Read the most current guidelines/RFA
  19. Specific Aims • Clarity & Simplicity – do not get too complex; sometimes simplicity is elegant. • Background: Tell a story: by the end of the section, the reviewer should know what the aims are • Well-linked to measures and analyses • Once is not enough: state them up front, at the end of the background section, and again in analyses
  20. Impact • What is the significance of your proposed work to your field and society? • Convey the outcomes in meaningful units • If you had the findings of your study today, – How could it change the field? – How would it impact clinical practice? – How would it impact teaching/training?
  21. Impact • NSF has two areas of impact you need to address, Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts • At NSF, your proposal is judged based on these two criteria. Funded proposals address these two areas in the Project Abstract, which you can view on the web.
  22. Intellectual Merit • How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? • How well qualified is the proposer to conduct the project? • To what extent does the proposed activity explore creative and original concepts? [WOW Factor, Transformative project] • How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? • Is there sufficient access to necessary resources?
  23. Broader Impacts • How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning? • How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups? • To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships? • Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? • What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? • Examples and further information provided at:
  24. Staffing & Team Development • Co-Investigators and Consultants – To add expertise; to add mentorship; – Tech support; statistical analyses • Single site or multi-site project – Advantages and disadvantages – Choose your collaborators carefully • Project managers – Hired staff, post-doctoral fellows, graduate students • Identify roles for each; specify in the budget narrative
  25. Postdoc Mentoring Plans • Template for NSF Postdoctoral Fellow Mentoring Plan • Sample_Postdoc_Mentoring_Plan.doc
  26. Budget • Talk with your ORSP pre-award representative – Communicate budget needs; request spreadsheet • Personnel – Academic Salary (course buy-outs) – Summer Salary – Benefits • Equipment – One-time purchases; maintenance costs
  27. Budget • Travel (some agencies require high specificity) – _services_per_diem.cfm – _services_mileage.cfm • Materials/Supplies; Postage; Photocopies • Human Participant Payments • Indirect costs (on or off campus rates) •
  28. Pilot Data/Preliminary Data • For some proposals: essential to be competitive. • Internal grants and Research Incentive funds can often be used to obtain such data (see new Research Enhancement initiative). • Such data speaks to the feasibility of the project and can illustrate your qualifications to complete the project. • One reason a proposal is not funded may be because insufficient preliminary data are presented to establish project feasibility. • Use figures and tables to present your preliminary data clearly and concisely. • Pilot data should be well connected to the proposed work.
  29. Data Management • Template for NSF Data Management Plan. In general, the data management plan should answer these two questions: 1) What data are generated by your project? 2) What is your plan for managing the data? • Expected Data Formats • Access to Data and Data Sharing • Practices and Policies • Policies for Re-use, Re-distribution of Data • Archiving of Data • ntplans
  30. Data Management • For confidential/sensitive information: • Ohio University now supports Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) • • HIPAA compliant • Store consents in separate location than data • Ensure password protection and encryption of the master file linking IDs to names
  31. Mentoring/Networking • Having a colleague read and critique your proposal has many benefits • We want to create a culture of peer critique at Ohio University • Consider peer consultants in your department, in another department, or at another university – Talk to Brian McCarthy or our committee if looking for relevant peer consultant/s
  32. Responding to Reviews • Do not get discouraged! Do resubmit! Persist! • View direct constructive criticism as helpful • Take a breath – read reviews several times before responding • Talk to program officers to get perspective • Have a colleague review your response to confirm response is reasonable/strong, and not negative in tone • Do not send it on the day you write it
  33. The Psychology of the Review • Reviewers are people too! • Help your advocate help you • First impressions most important • Reading to reject – Derivative ideas (ho-hum) – Feasible – Innovation – Impact
  34. Top 10 List • Be Persistent! • Talk to the Program Officer • Do not write in isolation • Have a good idea • Convince them you’re the best person to do the work
  35. Top 10 List • Read successful grants • Complete all parts of the application • Make a strong argument; sell it! • Read the current guidelines • Be Persistent!
  36. Upcoming Activities • Part 2: Advanced Grants Workshop – Spring: Date TBA – Experts on NSF, DOE, NIH, NEH… • Research Enhancement Funds – Incentivize consultation and peer review of proposals as a mechanism for enhancing successful grant proposal submissions and fostering a culture of collaboration within and across departments – Up to $5,000 per proposal per year
  37. Upcoming Activities • Research & Scholarship Communities to foster connections and a culture of collaboration – Grant writing groups – Book writing groups – Book reading/analysis groups • Input?
  38. Good luck with your proposal writing
  39. Committee Contacts Sergio Ulloa ( Julie Owens ( Allan Showalter ( Steve Miner (

Notas do Editor

  1. Bob: Slides 1 – 11 – Please shape these beginning slides how you would like. The committee recommends that the pictures and examples be updated to include greater diversity. Roxanne: Will use handouts instead of slides Remaining slides – covered by the committee (Sergio/Julie/Allan/Steve) Topics of Interest and Upcoming Activities Slides
  2. Zika
  3. Uber
  4. Sergio 18 - 22
  5. Sergio Your idea must be Plausible (does it make sense; easy to follow; sections are well linked), Practical (worth investing), Doable (show evidence that you can pull this off; too you promise too much or be too ambitious) Meaningful (would the impacts be meaningful for research and practice; would the results generalize) Convince them that the topic is important and that you have the skills to pull it off The idea must be compelling (big enough to be important but to too ambitious) with rationale grounded in theory, empirical, and practical justifications “This has never been done before” is not sufficient or compelling rationale. Show a timeline of the work to be complete; If you want the reviewer to read it put it in the proposal – NOT the appendix. A figure or table is worth the space if it helps the reader efficiently digest the point.
  6. Sergio
  7. Sergio
  8. Allan
  9. Allan
  10. Allan
  11. Allan
  12. Julie
  13. Allan
  14. Julie
  15. Julie
  16. Julie
  17. Julie
  18. Julie Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) is a secure, web-based application for building and managing online surveys and databases.
  19. Steve
  20. Steve
  21. Julie
  22. Julie
  23. Julie
  24. Sergio
  25. Julie
  26. Miner, Steven <>; Ulloa, Sergio <>; Showalter, Allan <>