Given that it is Halloween week, I thought I'd take the opportunity to regale you with a couple of horror stories from the grants world, along with a grant development moral... you're welcome! ;)
Dr. Warlock had been working on his National Bat and Spider Institute (NBSI) proposal for months. Along with his trusty grants administrator, they had crafted a research proposal that fit the program announcement like a glove. David, the school's grants administrator, had emailed Dr. Warlock asking him to have all of the final submissions materials to him two days before the proposal deadline. Dr. Warlock shrugged off David's suggestion. "Two days in advance," Dr. Warlock thought, "That's ridiculous!"
One week later, the day of the 5:00 deadline was upon them. Dr. Warlock sent David all of the final materials and headed over to David's office. As he turned the corner, he noticed that David was pale and looked like he'd seen a ghost. "What's wrong!?!" Dr. Warlock asked. "The system's d-d-doown!" sputtered David. "What!?! Let me have a look!" screeched Dr. Warlock, hastily shoving David away from his own computer. Warlock stared at the little hourglass that kept turning with no coveted receipt confirmation in sight.
It was David's turn to shove Dr. Warlock out of the way. "To Starbucks!" he shouted, ripping his laptop off its base. Once at Starbucks, Dr. Warlock glanced at his watch seeing there were mere minutes left till the deadline. David booted up, and hit the submit button in a flash. "It's working!" David said in a hushed tone. The two anxiously waited for the receipt confirmation, and finally it popped up on David's computer. As Dr. Warlock breathed a sigh of relief, his breath caught in his throat. There on the screen read, "Thank you for your submission to the NBSI, your proposal was received at 5:01."
Moral: Submit your proposal well in advance of the deadline.
Dr. Frankenstein was exhausted but feeling confident about her recently submitted CAREER award to the National Spells and Cauldrons Foundation (NSCF). This year was her year to receive this prestigious award from NSCF. As she was heading to her noon class, she ran into Naomi, her friendly research development colleague who had reviewed a draft of Dr. Frankenstein's grant proposal early on.
"It's submitted!" Frankenstein told Naomi. "Congratulations!" she beamed back. "Thanks, I feel so relieved!" "I'll bet," said Naomi. "Now, you remembered to title the proposal 'CAREER: Using Frog's Breath in Wart Removal,' right?" The color drained from Dr. Frankenstein's face, "Wait, what?" Naomi's face fell as well. "The NSCF requires that all CAREER proposals be titled starting with 'CAREER:'" Reading Dr. Frankenstein's face, Naomi offered, "Well, I'm sure we can change it! When's it due?"
"YESTERDAY!!!"
Moral: Follow the directions in the program guidelines.
Happy Halloween!!!
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Thursday, October 24, 2019
Grant Development Tips
Last week, we held our fifth annual Grant Writing Symposium out at the CU Anschutz Medical Campus. We learned a lot from seasoned researchers and grant writers, including Dr. Adit Ginde, Professor and Vice-Chair for Research in Emergency Medicine; Dr. Jennifer Kemp, Director of the Research Office for the Department of Medicine; and Dr. Andrew Thorburn, Professor and Chair of Pharmacology.
Below, are some of the key points made by these experts:
Begin your Specific Aims with your goal
Many Specific Aims pages begin by describing the problem they're trying to solve, which is not a bad approach but don't forget to state the goal of your project right at the outset. Your reviewers will start reading your proposal wondering what is the objective of this research, so tell them right away within the first one or two sentences of your Specific Aims.
Your Specific Aims page can make or break your proposal
Most reviewers report that they pretty much know which proposals they like after reading the Specific Aims page. As Dr. Kemp explained, this means that you need to convince them of your project's merits within this crucial page. If you haven't convinced them in the Specific Aims, chances are you won't change their mind later on.
The most common error in the Specific Aims is not showing you're the right person for the job
Too often, PIs get focused on describing their project and the problem it's tackling in the Specific Aims. While this is important to convey, oftentimes PIs don't also show that they are the best-positioned researcher to do the project. Dr. Kemp urged PIs to show how you're the best person to conduct the research your describing.
Seek out Program Officers at scientific and professional meetings
Some POs are difficult to get ahold of. Dr. Ginde suggested seeking out POs at professional meetings. He also recommended finding a PI who already has a relationship with a PO and to ask that PI for an introduction.
Be sure to contact Program Officers after you receive your reviews
PIs often recognize the value of talking to POs as they are developing their proposals to make sure they're a good fit, but sometimes if their proposals are not funded, they throw up their hands. Not getting a grant can feel defeating, but after you've had some time to get over your frustration and have read your reviews with a clear head, reach out to your PO to see if they can give you additional insight into the review conversation. The PO can advise you as to what might make your proposal more competitive for the next go-round.
Reviewers don't want to be reading your proposal in the first place
When we asked Dr. Thorburn, what do reviewers really want, he replied that they don't want to be reading your grant proposal. He explained that reviewers are reading many proposals on top of all their other responsibilities. They might be reading it on the weekend when they'd rather be doing a multitude of other things. Having said that, Dr. Thorburn recommended writing clearly to make sure the process isn't more agonizing than it may be already.
There's no way you can make a grant proposal too simple
Speaking to Dr. Thorburn's last point, he emphasized that when it comes to grant writing, it's impossible to make your proposal too simple or too easy to read. This is why you should not hesitate to rid your proposal of as much jargon as possible and always connect the dots for your reviewer. Never let the reviewer guess at what you're doing or why it's important - tell them clearly, early on, and often throughout the proposal.
Resources:
Can We Talk? Contacting Program Officers - Robert Porter
What do Reviewers Really Want Anyway? - Robert Porter
Below, are some of the key points made by these experts:
Begin your Specific Aims with your goal
Many Specific Aims pages begin by describing the problem they're trying to solve, which is not a bad approach but don't forget to state the goal of your project right at the outset. Your reviewers will start reading your proposal wondering what is the objective of this research, so tell them right away within the first one or two sentences of your Specific Aims.
Your Specific Aims page can make or break your proposal
Most reviewers report that they pretty much know which proposals they like after reading the Specific Aims page. As Dr. Kemp explained, this means that you need to convince them of your project's merits within this crucial page. If you haven't convinced them in the Specific Aims, chances are you won't change their mind later on.
The most common error in the Specific Aims is not showing you're the right person for the job
Too often, PIs get focused on describing their project and the problem it's tackling in the Specific Aims. While this is important to convey, oftentimes PIs don't also show that they are the best-positioned researcher to do the project. Dr. Kemp urged PIs to show how you're the best person to conduct the research your describing.
Seek out Program Officers at scientific and professional meetings
Some POs are difficult to get ahold of. Dr. Ginde suggested seeking out POs at professional meetings. He also recommended finding a PI who already has a relationship with a PO and to ask that PI for an introduction.
Be sure to contact Program Officers after you receive your reviews
PIs often recognize the value of talking to POs as they are developing their proposals to make sure they're a good fit, but sometimes if their proposals are not funded, they throw up their hands. Not getting a grant can feel defeating, but after you've had some time to get over your frustration and have read your reviews with a clear head, reach out to your PO to see if they can give you additional insight into the review conversation. The PO can advise you as to what might make your proposal more competitive for the next go-round.
Reviewers don't want to be reading your proposal in the first place
When we asked Dr. Thorburn, what do reviewers really want, he replied that they don't want to be reading your grant proposal. He explained that reviewers are reading many proposals on top of all their other responsibilities. They might be reading it on the weekend when they'd rather be doing a multitude of other things. Having said that, Dr. Thorburn recommended writing clearly to make sure the process isn't more agonizing than it may be already.
There's no way you can make a grant proposal too simple
Speaking to Dr. Thorburn's last point, he emphasized that when it comes to grant writing, it's impossible to make your proposal too simple or too easy to read. This is why you should not hesitate to rid your proposal of as much jargon as possible and always connect the dots for your reviewer. Never let the reviewer guess at what you're doing or why it's important - tell them clearly, early on, and often throughout the proposal.
Resources:
Can We Talk? Contacting Program Officers - Robert Porter
What do Reviewers Really Want Anyway? - Robert Porter
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
Applying to the DoD
A couple of weeks ago, we hosted a Know Your Agency lunch on the DoD, hosting Dr. Travis Taylor of Strategic Marketing Innovations (SMI), focusing largely on health research funding opportunities. Dr. Taylor has previously worked with the DoD and the NIH and offered great insight into how to apply to the DoD. Here were some of his key points!
The DoD is a unique funder with a unique mission and approach to research, so it can be a big shift for researchers who are used to applying to the NIH or other federal agencies. However, once you've figured out how to talk to the DoD and had some success getting funding, it gets easier to apply to and be funded by them.
Resources:
Grants.gov: Department of Defense
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
Coming soon: Video of the DoD talk
- The DoD is focused on the Warfighter: The DoD includes all of the military branches and it funds research that benefits troops in the field, not veterans (that's the VA). So any health research you propose to the DoD must clearly focus on this population.
- The DoD is most interested in a product that works and is safe: They're less likely to fund exploratory research. They want research that is further along and close to implementation.
- Focus on the immediate benefits: The DoD is most interested in funding research where they will see benefits for troops very quickly.
- Attend conferences where DoD Program Officers will be: Make connections/discuss your research with POs to get advice and better hone your research for their needs.
- Write your proposal for a non-expert audience: Certain branches of the DoD will include patients or non-expert stakeholders in their review process, so you need to write your proposal for a lay audience.
The DoD is a unique funder with a unique mission and approach to research, so it can be a big shift for researchers who are used to applying to the NIH or other federal agencies. However, once you've figured out how to talk to the DoD and had some success getting funding, it gets easier to apply to and be funded by them.
Resources:
Grants.gov: Department of Defense
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
Coming soon: Video of the DoD talk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)