Top 5 grant-killers

As you may have guessed from today's ominous title, inspired by one of the blog resources I gave you last week, I decided I would offer my top five grant-killers. This is based on my work with PIs on our Denver and Anschutz Medical Campuses. I've heard some stories and seen some heart-breakers, so in an attempt at prevention, here you go!

5. It's shoe-horned
Researchers are wise to submit to different funding agencies, but it's certainly easier said than done. Each grant application has a unique angle and format. What the NSF wants is quite different than what the NIH wants, so your framing of the same or similar research must be dramatically different. This means that cutting and pasting a proposal intended for one into the format for the other rarely works. For instance, I've seen PIs write up "specific aims" for an NSF proposal, not realizing that NSF has a project overview that is formatted to focus on intellectual merit and broader impacts along with an overview of your project. So, instead of shoe-horning, get to know your target agencies early on as you're developing your project. That way you'll be able to pivot your research to effectively respond to multiple calls.

4. It's rushed
You've had a fund search conducted for you by ORDE, and in your search results, you see a grant program that seems like a fit for your research. The catch? The due date is in two weeks. What do you do? What...Do...You...Do? (Speed fans?) Well, I've seen many just go for it. They spend the next week of their life doing nothing but getting their proposal together (cause don't forget it takes time to go through the Office of Grants and Contracts). They get their proposal in by the deadline but there was not time to get other eyes on it or even proofread. The PI then waits for 3-6 months to find out that their proposal was triaged or rejected with a low score. What should they have done? They should have looked to see when the next deadline was and begun researching the agency and developing their project to align with the call. They should have taken time to contact a Program Officer and get feedback.

3. It's unclear
Long-time reviewers/funded researchers consistently urge their early career colleagues to write clearly and simply, to write so that an educated lay audience can follow the argument, to avoid jargon and technical-speak wherever possible. Yet many PIs do not heed this advice, in part because they are confident their reviewers will be able to interpret their prose but also because they are so steeped in their expertise that it's hard to see the forest from the trees. It's hard to break down something they understand so intimately into everyday lingo. Yet, we must remember that even if your reviewers can wade through your complicated proposal to get the gist of what you're saying, they won't enjoy the extra work you've provided by not bothering to simplify. So, take the time to have colleagues and even a layperson review your proposal and seriously consider their feedback.

2. It breaks the rules
Approximately 60% of grant proposals are rejected without review because they are either not a good fit for the agency outright or they break the rules laid out in the submission guidelines. And it's understandable, with grants being as competitive as they ever are, some agencies are looking to pare down the number of proposals that they must have reviewed, and one of the easiest ways to do this is to target those proposals where the PI didn't bother to understand what the agency funds or didn't read or follow the guidelines. Even if a proposal is written hastily without attention to detail, it takes significant time and attention. So, go the extra mile to make sure that your work isn't for naught.

1. It's submitted at the last minute
Last minute submissions I've slotted into the #1 grant killer because this results in the most heart-breaking of stories. Say you've done your homework; you've spent months honing your grant proposal for a particular agency. You've gotten feedback from a PO and artfully integrated it into your proposal. Things get busy, you get your beautiful proposal to the Office of Grants and Contracts late. They point out something that you missed and next thing you know, you're racing to finish a required piece and you're three hours out from the deadline. At one hour before the deadline, you're ready and your grant administrator is submitting, but why is everything so slow!?! The agency's site goes down under the heavy traffic. The university's server is super slow today!!! It's finally submitted and your "received receipt" reads 5:02 pm... 2 minutes after the deadline!!! Now, maybe the agency accepts it; their system was part of the problem after all, or maybe they say, sorry, try again next time. The point is do you really want to hang your months of blood, sweat, tears, and your best shot at funding on the line like that? We've heard these stories at ORDE and they are awful. So, do yourself a favor, submit your proposal a day before the deadline at least!

Unfortunately, I feel that even when PIs hear these pitfalls, many will decide they are the exception and will learn the hard way. But when you come tell us your sad story afterward, now we can say, "I told you so!" Just kidding, we would never say that, but we'll be thinking it. ;)

Resources:
Ten Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Grant - Grant Training Center
Five Pitfalls of Grant Writing - Grants.com