Researchers sometimes think that it is cheating or inappropriate to reach out to agencies and their POs. Yet, in a poll of former POs at CU, all responding POs emphasized the importance of PIs reaching out to make sure the grant proposals they are developing are in line with the agency's priorities.
Given this importance, below are some tips from POs and research development professionals on initially reaching out to POs.
Start early
POs are busy people, but they get even busier as they approach grant deadlines or as we approach the end of the fiscal year, so make sure that you are preparing early and reaching out at a time when a PO isn't up to his or her ears in questions, requests, and grants.
Do your homework
Before you reach out to an agency in any form, make sure you know about that agency. Be familiar with their website, their mission, how they are organized, and who you should contact. If you are responding to a program announcement (PA), make sure that you've read it several times. Nothing makes you look unprepared as asking a question that is answered in a PA or the website.
Send an email
When you're ready, send an email to who you think is the appropriate PO. Make the email short. Introduce yourself (are you an early career investigator? have you received an award from the agency previously?) and give a quick description of your project (3-5 sentences). Use your subject line to describe why you're reaching out and keep it short. Something like "Scheduling phone call?" or "Request for feedback" let's the PO quickly know why you're contacting them. Lastly, make sure that there is a call-to-action in your email. This is usually a request for a brief phone call to discuss your project.
Send a one/two-pager
Some POs at some agencies are ready for you to send a one-pager in your first email, but if you're unsure about it, you can send the email outlined above, but you want to have that project description in your back pocket. One PI told us about her reaching out to a PO and discussing her project only for the PO to ask her to send along her one-pager. The PI spent the rest of the afternoon and night putting together a project description (she hadn't written it yet).
Schedule a call
Usually, when first emailing, you're trying to schedule a call. But, in doing that, you want to remember that although you are busy, the PO is also busy and you are the one that needs to be flexible. You're asking for their time after all. Give them some times/days and ask if anything would work for a call.
Follow-up
If a week goes by and you haven't heard anything, send another brief email "checking in" on your last note. Be polite and friendly, refer to your previous message, and ask again to schedule a call. Even if a PO is slow to respond to your outreach, do not be slow to respond to them. When they ask for a one-pager, send it within 24 hours, and in your follow-ups, always thank them for their time and note next steps. Anything discussed or agreed to by phone, briefly restate them. For instance, if the PO said they would put you in touch with another PO, in your follow-up email, say something to the effect of "Thank you so much for reaching out to Dr. X on my behalf; I look forward to following up with her."
I want to leave you with a caveat: there are no hard and fast rules to reaching out to POs. You must adjust all of the advice above based on the agency you're reaching out to. When doing your homework on the agency, it's a good idea to find someone at your university who has worked with that agency before to give you some insight on their preferences. But, don't let the unknown keep you from reaching out!
Resources
Can we talk? Contacting a Grant Program Officers - Robert Porter
How do I approach a foundation...? - grantspace.org
Friday, April 26, 2019
Friday, April 19, 2019
Education Foundations
Last week, I attended the American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference and heard from several leaders at prominent education foundations on a panel. The foundations represented were the Spencer Foundation, the William T. Grant Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the Foundation for Child Development. The panelists discussed larger foundation issues and their appropriate role in education research, but each also discussed priorities and directions for their respective foundations, which I highlight below.
Na'ilah Suad Nasir, President, Spencer Foundation:
Dr. Nasir highlighted the directions of Spencer after beginning her presidency last year and listening to education researchers about their needs. Moving forward, Spencer is focused on racial inequality and reducing bias in its processes. Along with these foci, Spencer wants to build capacity and spread the wealth amongst education researchers. One of the ways they plan to build capacity is that they will begin offering feedback/reviewer comments on 100% of their proposals. In the past, some types of proposals submitted to Spencer would only receive a decision to fund or not, and the applicant would not have any sense as to why their proposal was rejected if it was.
Adam Gamoran, President, William T. Grant Foundation:
Dr. Gamoran saw the priorities of his foundation as focused on the three Ms: messaging, mobilizing, and making connections. In terms of messaging, distributing the funded research and getting the word out to policymakers who can use the research to make change. In terms of mobilizing, they were working to build bridges for researchers and funders to collaborate and make the biggest impact. In terms of making connections, again pairing researchers, funders, and policymakers with the right people to make the biggest impact in education.
Kent McGuire, Program Director of Education, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation:
The Hewlett Foundation is focused on research that improves learning outcomes. They are interested in research partnerships with practitioners to ensure the application of research. Lastly, they are interested in diversity within the research community and are developing projects to build diversity within the research pipeline in a variety of ways.
Jacqueline Jones, President and CEO, Foundation for Child Development:
The Foundation for Child Development is focused on children, infant - eight-year-olds. They are interested in research that can inform policy and practice related to children. They are especially interested in the implementation of research, where they can see results.
Kent McGuire in the panel session compared individual research projects to "a flea biting the elephant; where to bite matters." The key to finding a fit with any funding organization is to be in agreement as to where to bite.
Resources:
Spencer Foundation
William T. Grant Foundation
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
Foundation for Child Development
Na'ilah Suad Nasir, President, Spencer Foundation:
Dr. Nasir highlighted the directions of Spencer after beginning her presidency last year and listening to education researchers about their needs. Moving forward, Spencer is focused on racial inequality and reducing bias in its processes. Along with these foci, Spencer wants to build capacity and spread the wealth amongst education researchers. One of the ways they plan to build capacity is that they will begin offering feedback/reviewer comments on 100% of their proposals. In the past, some types of proposals submitted to Spencer would only receive a decision to fund or not, and the applicant would not have any sense as to why their proposal was rejected if it was.
Adam Gamoran, President, William T. Grant Foundation:
Dr. Gamoran saw the priorities of his foundation as focused on the three Ms: messaging, mobilizing, and making connections. In terms of messaging, distributing the funded research and getting the word out to policymakers who can use the research to make change. In terms of mobilizing, they were working to build bridges for researchers and funders to collaborate and make the biggest impact. In terms of making connections, again pairing researchers, funders, and policymakers with the right people to make the biggest impact in education.
Kent McGuire, Program Director of Education, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation:
The Hewlett Foundation is focused on research that improves learning outcomes. They are interested in research partnerships with practitioners to ensure the application of research. Lastly, they are interested in diversity within the research community and are developing projects to build diversity within the research pipeline in a variety of ways.
Jacqueline Jones, President and CEO, Foundation for Child Development:
The Foundation for Child Development is focused on children, infant - eight-year-olds. They are interested in research that can inform policy and practice related to children. They are especially interested in the implementation of research, where they can see results.
Kent McGuire in the panel session compared individual research projects to "a flea biting the elephant; where to bite matters." The key to finding a fit with any funding organization is to be in agreement as to where to bite.
Resources:
Spencer Foundation
William T. Grant Foundation
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
Foundation for Child Development
Thursday, April 11, 2019
The National Science Foundation
OVERVIEW
The National Science Foundation (NSF) was one of several agencies created after World War II to help preserve the federal government/academic research alliance that had developed during the War. Legislation to create NSF turned into a five-year process of negotiations between Congress and two Presidents, and was finally signed by Harry Truman in 1950. (Source: NSF: A Brief History, George Mazuzan)
NSF is an independent federal agency – meaning that while it resides within the Executive Branch, it is not a Cabinet-level department or part of the Executive Office of the President. Rather, NSF is responsible to the President; but Congress provides yearly appropriations for the agency, has oversight authority, and confirms all Presidential appointments of agency personnel.
Specific Interests
NSF funds research across a variety of disciplines – natural, physical, and social/behavioral sciences; computer science; engineering; and education. NSF also supports educational improvement efforts in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education.
Approach
The agency mission “includes support for all fields of fundamental science and engineering, except for medical sciences” (Source: NSF What We Do Website). To meet this mission, NSF supports external research efforts in academia and industry; the agency does not maintain laboratories or perform in-house research. A valued tradition at NSF is that, in addition to permanent program officers (POs), the agency also brings in academic scientists and engineers who serve as POs on a temporary basis (known as rotators), bringing fresh perspective to the agency and serving as NSF ambassadors when they return to their home institutions. (Source: NSF FY2018 Agency Financial Report, MD&A – p. 7)
AGENCY ORGANIZATION
The NSF Director and Deputy Director are charged with overseeing agency operations. Another key component of NSF is the National Science Board (NSB), consisting of 24 members drawn from both industry and academia. The NSB is responsible for establishing policies for the agency, and also makes recommendations concerning research and education policies for the President and Congress. All these leadership positions are six-year Presidential appointments confirmed by Congress. (Source: NSF FY2018 Agency Financial Report, MD&A – p. 7)
NSF has seven Directorates supporting research and education efforts, each headed by an Assistant Director:
- Biological Sciences
- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
- Education and Human Resources
- Engineering
- Geosciences
- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
- Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences
NSF GRANTS PROCESS
Proposals may be submitted in response to NSF program solicitations and announcements (solicited proposals) or may be generated by researchers in areas responsive to agency interests (unsolicited proposals). NSF’s Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG), updated yearly, is the main source of information for those preparing and submitting proposals as well as for subsequent award management.
NSF supports a variety of proposal types including standard research grants, two small grants programs (one designed to respond to unanticipated events and the other to support research at earlier stages), an interdisciplinary research grant option, and the Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Awards supporting early career faculty in their dual roles as researchers and educators. (Source: 2019 PAPPG, pp. II 34-46)
FY 2018 Awards/Success Rates
This past year, NSF reviewed more than 48,300 grant proposals and made over 11,700 new awards, resulting in a 24% overall funding rate. The average award size in FY2018 was $189,418 (total costs). NSF has over 54,000 active awards in its portfolio. (Source: NSF FY2018 Agency Financial Report, MD&A – p. 15) Resources:
National Science Foundation
NSF Know Your Agency Brief - ORDE
Wednesday, April 3, 2019
Making the most of conferences
Well, conference season is upon us. It's a busy time with travel and simply preparing your own presentations, but make sure that you take a bit of time to strategize about your networking. Conferences are an ideal place to meet with colleagues (new and old) and meet with program officers. All of these connections are valuable. Below are some tips to help you make the best of them.
Prepare
Before you attend any conference, find some time to identify who you want to meet. Are there agencies you're planning to apply to? See if a Program Officer will be there. Looking for a new collaborator with a certain type of expertise? Identify folks who might fit the bill.
Seek them out
After you've figured out who you want to meet, look at the conference program to figure out where they'll be, whether they'll be presenting or in a round table. Sometimes, round tables or alternative sessions can be a better place to catch up with people instead of panel sessions that can get very large and make it difficult to talk to folks. Also, consider emailing folks beforehand to set up time to meet for coffee or a brief chat.
Name drop
When meeting someone new, bring up any connections you might have. Do you share a mutual colleague? Do you know someone who went to or worked at their institution? Once you've identified a connection, name drop. People are much more likely to meaningfully engage with you and your research if they have a mutual friend or colleague that serves as a sort of validation for you and your work. Name dropping also works when you're using their name. For instance, I've had success starting conversations with colleagues by bringing their latest book to a conference and asking if they'd sign it. This is flattering and lets the person know that you are truly interested in their work.
Follow-up
Always follow-up with people. If a Program Officer is interested in your work and asks you to send an abstract on your project, email that to them, preferably within 24 hours while you're still top of mind for them. Also, follow-up with notes to folks after the conference. Consider sending "nice to meet you" notes via snail mail to add a personal touch. Although a follow-up email is fine, a hand-written note can be especially effective when folks are sifting through mass amounts of email after having been out of the office for the conference.
These tips can help you get the most out of your conference experience and networks, and can help you to grow and enrich your network effectively.
Resources:
Pro tip: How to maximize networking at conferences - Forbes
How to network at a conference - Wikihow
Prepare
Before you attend any conference, find some time to identify who you want to meet. Are there agencies you're planning to apply to? See if a Program Officer will be there. Looking for a new collaborator with a certain type of expertise? Identify folks who might fit the bill.
Seek them out
After you've figured out who you want to meet, look at the conference program to figure out where they'll be, whether they'll be presenting or in a round table. Sometimes, round tables or alternative sessions can be a better place to catch up with people instead of panel sessions that can get very large and make it difficult to talk to folks. Also, consider emailing folks beforehand to set up time to meet for coffee or a brief chat.
Name drop
When meeting someone new, bring up any connections you might have. Do you share a mutual colleague? Do you know someone who went to or worked at their institution? Once you've identified a connection, name drop. People are much more likely to meaningfully engage with you and your research if they have a mutual friend or colleague that serves as a sort of validation for you and your work. Name dropping also works when you're using their name. For instance, I've had success starting conversations with colleagues by bringing their latest book to a conference and asking if they'd sign it. This is flattering and lets the person know that you are truly interested in their work.
Follow-up
Always follow-up with people. If a Program Officer is interested in your work and asks you to send an abstract on your project, email that to them, preferably within 24 hours while you're still top of mind for them. Also, follow-up with notes to folks after the conference. Consider sending "nice to meet you" notes via snail mail to add a personal touch. Although a follow-up email is fine, a hand-written note can be especially effective when folks are sifting through mass amounts of email after having been out of the office for the conference.
These tips can help you get the most out of your conference experience and networks, and can help you to grow and enrich your network effectively.
Resources:
Pro tip: How to maximize networking at conferences - Forbes
How to network at a conference - Wikihow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)