Grantspersonship. Beth A. Fischer and Michael J. Zigmond University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,USA

Transcription

1 Grantspersonship Beth A. Fischer and Michael J. Zigmond University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,USA

2 Survival Skills and Ethics Program Topics include Writing research articles Making oral presentations Obtaining advanced training Teaching Job hunting Managing personnel Obtaining funding

3 Acknowledgments Lillian Pubols (NINDS) Miner, Miner & Griffith Proposal Planning and Writing Ogden and Goldberg Research Proposals: A Guide to Success...and many others

4 Types of grants objective training/career fellowship career award research conference equipment infrastructure form investigator-initiated individual groups set-aside grants contracts

5 Types of grants objective training/career fellowship career award research conference equipment infrastructure form investigator-initiated individual groups set-aside grants contracts

6 Availability of grants Other government non-government organizations philanthropic foundations health voluntaries corporations private individuals

7 Why don t people get funded?

8 Why people don t get funded because it is too hard?

9 Why people don t get funded because it is too hard? already accomplished harder tasks

10 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept

11 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept A good idea is necessary, but not sufficient.

12 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept poor presentation

13 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept poor presentation poor understanding of process

14 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept poor presentation poor understanding of process lack of persistence

15 Why people don t get funded inadequate concept poor presentation poor understanding of process lack of persistence Good grants are not funded, excellent ones are

16 Grantspersonship Preparing 1. establish frame of mind 2. develop concept 3. identify funding source 4. inform your institution 5. refine concept Submitting 9. get approvals 10. obtain assignment 11. submit application 12. provide add l material 13. ensure receipt Writing 6. think like a reviewer 7. outline, write, edit 8. get feedback & revise Responding 14. await review 15. study report 16. respond to report

17 Grantspersonship Preparing 1. establish frame of mind 2. develop concept 3. identify funding source 4. inform your institution 5. refine concept Submitting 9. get approvals 10. obtain assignment 11. submit application 12. provide add l material Think ahead and plan backwards 13. ensure receipt Writing 6. think like a reviewer 7. outline, write, edit 8. get feedback & revise Responding 14. await review 15. study report 16. respond to report

18 Grantspersonship >3 m 1. establish frame of mind 2. develop concept 3. identify funding source 4. inform your institution 5. refine concept 9. get approvals 10. obtain assignment 11. submit application 12. provide add l material 13. ensure receipt 2-60d 0 d 2 m 6. think like a reviewer 7. outline, write, edit 8. get feedback & revise 14. await review 15. study report 16. respond to report

19 Phase I: Preparing 1. establish frame of mind 2. develop concept 3. identify funding source 4. inform your institution 5. refine concept

20 Establish frame of mind often: little enthusiasm

21 Establish frame of mind often: little enthusiasm better: a wonderful opportunity

22 General points to keep in mind proposal in contrast to research manuscript read by many fewer likely to have much greater impact material can be recycled from previous ms into future ms

23 Develop a Concept That FITS

24 Develop a concept that FITS Fills a gap in knowledge

25 Develop a concept that FITS Fills a gap in knowledge Important to the field funding agency you

26 Develop a concept that FITS Fills a gap in knowledge Important Tests a hypothesis

27 Develop a concept that FITS Fills a gap in knowledge Important Tests a hypothesis Short-term investment in long-term goals

28 Identify Funding Source

29 Identify funding source select agency

30 Source of information internet reference books colleagues acknowledgements on papers office of research at your institution libraries

31 Identify funding source select agency improve odds: match objectives

32 Identify funding source select agency improve odds: match objectives research interests

33 Identify funding source select agency improve odds: match objectives research interests personal characteristics career phase gender developing nation

34 Identify funding source select agency improve odds: match objectives communicate with program staff

35 Ask program staff is concept relevant

36 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions

37 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews

38 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews what are criteria

39 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews what are criteria funding percentage level (amount, years)

40 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews what are criteria funding percentage level (amount, years) characteristics of strong proposals weak proposals

41 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews what are criteria funding percentage level (amount, years) characteristics strong proposals weak proposals appendix material ok? when, to whom?

42 Ask program staff is concept relevant current instructions who reviews what are criteria funding percentage level (amount, years) characteristics strong proposals weak proposals appendix material ok? when, to whom? pre-review possible

43 Contacting program staff in their offices phone letter in person (by appointment) at professional meetings

44 Inform Your Institution

45 Inform your institution departmental chairperson office of research secretarial assistant fiscal assistant people to give feedback

46 Develop Concept

47 Refine Develop Concept

48 Refine your concept review current literature

49 Refine your concept review current literature talk with colleagues

50 Refine your concept review current literature talk with colleagues think hard

51 Refine your concept review current literature talk with colleagues think hard think harder

52 Phase II: Writing the proposal 6. think like a reviewer 7. outline, write, edit 8. get feedback & revise

53 Think like a reviewer

54 What do they want to know?

55 Think like a reviewer

56 What do they want to know?

57 Time spent reading proposal primary reviewer (writes report) reader (no report) discussion at study section 7-8 hr 1 hr 20 min Survey by Janet Rasey Proposals reviewed were NIH R01

58 Write for the reviewer use standard organization provide clear, and very visible answers to review criteria anticipate reviewer's questions and provide answers state relation to funder s mission

59 Write for the reviewer, part 2 use standard organization provide clear, and very visible answers to review criteria anticipate reviewer's questions and provide answers state relation to funder s mission

60 Phase II: Writing the proposal 6. think like a reviewer 7. outline, write, edit 8. get feedback & revise

61 Think like a reviewer

62 Stock the sections Research plan Specific Aims Background and Significance Preliminary Data Research Design and Methods Budget and Justification References

63 Outline, Write, and Edit

64 Outline, Write, and Edit being with a full outline

65 Outline, Write, and Edit being with a full outline write initial draft without editing

66 Outline, Write, and Edit being with a full outline write initial draft without editing edit thoroughly

67 Outline, Write, and Edit being with a full outline write initial draft without editing edit thoroughly

68 Editing avoid vague qualifiers use active voice

69 General organization have a table of contents make it easy to find key points bold face headings and terms cross references some redundancy

70 Appearance

71 Appearance select good type face

72 Appearance select good type face good Times Roman Century Schoolbook

73 Appearance select good type face good never! Times Roman courier Century Schoolbook Helvetica

74 Appearance select good type face good never! Times Roman courier Century Schoolbook Helvetica size > 11 pt

75 Appearance select good type face good never! Times Roman courier Century Schoolbook Helvetica size > 11 pt occasionally use special fonts bold face italics

76 Appearance select good type face write in paragraphs

77 Appearance select good type face write in paragraphs 1 major idea per paragraph topic sentences use headers frequently

78 Appearance select good type face write in paragraphs let your text indent paragraphs skip line between paragraphs

79 A. Background and Significance The importance of training in "survival skills:" Success in science requires a solid background in a specific scientific discipline as well as extensive laboratory experience. However, for individuals to develop into accomplished professionals, they must acquire survival skills, that is, they must be able to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing, obtain employment and funding, manage stress and time, teach, and behave responsibly (1,2,3).This has always been the case and is becoming even more true as our doctoral and postdoctoral trainees need to be prepared for a variety of vocations (3, 4) In addition to traditional jobs in academia, many of our trainees will ultimately find themselves doing research in industry, teaching in 4-year colleges, or serving in some administrative capacity. Others will combine their PhDs with professional degrees in medicine or law and become clinical researchers, patent lawyers, or become involved in the the formulation of public policy. With many of these new vocations, extra-laboratory skills become even more essential (3). Traditionally, higher education in the sciences has focused almost exclusively on the content of the scientific discipline and on research methodology. Indeed, individuals employed in research and related fields often complain that although their academic training provided them with a sound foundation in their

80 A. BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE The importance of training in "survival skills." Success in science requires a solid background in a specific scientific discipline as well as extensive laboratory experience. However, for individuals to develop into accomplished professionals, they must acquire survival skills, that is, they must be able to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing, obtain employment and funding, manage stress and time, teach, and behave responsibly (Bloom 1992; Bird 1994; National Academy of Sciences 1995). This has always been the case and is becoming even more true as our doctoral and postdoctoral trainees need to be prepared for a variety of vocations (National Academy of Sciences 1995; Varmus 1995). In addition to traditional jobs in academia, many of our trainees will ultimately find themselves doing research in industry, teaching in 4-year colleges, or serving in some administrative capacity. Others will combine their PhDs with professional degrees in medicine or law and become clinical researchers, patent lawyers, or become involved in the formulation of public

81 Follow-up survey Participants from our 1995, 1996, and 1997 trainer-of-trainers workshops were recently sent a survey to see what they had done to provide training in survival skills and ethics at their institution. (The 1995 workshop was made possible by an earlier grant.) Thus far, slightly more than half of all former participants have responded. Even if one assumes that none of the non-respondents did not implement any instruction at all (unlikely), the results of this survey still provide a clear indication of the impact of our program. Instruction implemented by participants: The total number of hours of instruction in survival skills and ethics that was provided in by former participants was compared Figure 1 Implementation with the instruction offered in the year prior to their attendance (Figure 1). The number of students taught in new or preexisting (but expanded) courses increased by an average of 25 hr per year among the respondents. instruction provided (hr) before ' Workshop participant

82 Appearance select good type face write in paragraphs let your text b r e a t h conform to instructions! - type size - margins - # pages - sections

83 Check photocopy quality

84 Get Feedback

85 Asking for help Yes program staff former reviewer colleague NO! current reviewer

86 Get feedback establish mentors early

87 Get feedback establish mentors early provide clear instructions what when

88 Get feedback establish mentors early provide clear instructions take no for an answer

89 Get feedback establish mentors early provide clear instructions take no for an answer remind gently

90 Get feedback establish mentors early provide clear instructions take no for an answer remind gently show appreciation

91 Get Feedback and Revise

92 Phase III: Submitting 9. get approvals 10. obtain assignment 11. submit application 12. provide additional material 13. ensure receipt

93 Get approvals

94 Get approvals use of subjects human (IRB) animals (IACUC) safety agreements collaborators consultants university administrators

95 Get approvals use of subjects human (IRB) animals (IACUC) Allow safety enough agreements time! collaborators consultants university administrators

96 Obtain Assignment

97 Obtain the right assignment program relevance availability of funds sympathetic review competent reviewers

98 Clues for assignment officer title abstract list of key words specific aims cover letter input from program staff

99 Submit Application

100 Submit application know the deadline postmark versus arrival absolute or flexible

101 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems bad weather equipment failures holidays sickness

102 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems give yourself extra time (everything takes longer than you think)

103 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems give yourself extra time what if you are late?

104 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems give yourself extra time what if you are late? call and ask there often is a grace period

105 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems give yourself extra time what if you are late? call and ask there often is a grace period sometimes there isn t

106 Submit application know the deadline anticipate problems give yourself extra time what if you are late? also send copy to program officer

107 Ensure Receipt

108 Provide Additional Material

109 Phase IV: Responding 14. await review 15. study report 16. respond to report

110 Await Review

111 What will be happening 1. assignment

112 What will be happening 1. assignment 2. evaluation staff peers sitting panel external reviewers site visit (rare)

113 What will be happening 1. assignment 2. evaluation 3. prep of report, which may not be available need to request take 2-3 mo be incomplete contain contradictions

114 Study Report and Respond

115 Possible outcomes scored high gray area low

116 Possible outcomes scored high gray area low rejected

117 Possible outcomes scored high gray area funding? low rejected

118 Reasons for rejection: Research proposals unoriginal ideas diffuse, superficial lack of knowledge uncertain future directions inadequate rationale poor reasoning unrealistic workload lack of expt l detail uncritical approach

119 Reasons for rejection: Fellowships weak candidate productivity letters training poor mentor research funding experience inadequate proposal quality of research relevance to training weak institution colleagues support

120 If budget is reduced estimate what can be accomplished renegotiate objectives experiments save rest for future application

121 If score is in gray zone talk to program officer consider providing additional material rebuttal evidence of feasibility

122 quit If funding is not provided

123 If funding is not provided quit application MUST have merit if you followed previous steps

124 If funding is not provided quit same application with rebuttal

125 If funding is not provided quit same application with rebuttal revised application some changes some rebuttal

126 If funding is not provided quit same application with rebuttal revised application some changes some rebuttal request new reviewers

127 Persistence pays > 50% NIH applicants funded

128 Behave responsibly throughout

129 Behave responsibly source of material text ideas data

130 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods

131 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods collaborations

132 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods collaborations pilot data

133 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods collaborations pilot data budget

134 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods collaborations pilot data budget biosketch

135 Behave responsibly source of material adequacy of methods collaborations pilot data budget biosketch General principle: Do not misrepresent anything.

136 Advice to junior investigators

137 Timeline for NIH proposal: From application to funding Date Step Feb 1, 2001 application Jun Jul, 2001 review Aug Sep, 2001 summary statement Nov 1, 2001 revised application Feb Mar 2002 review May Jun, 2002 council meets July 1, 2002 funding begins Assume approximately 18 months.

138 Advice to junior investigators get funded as soon as possible funding track record helps get more $ jobs, promotions easier with grant proposals often not funded first time

139 Advice to junior investigators get funded ASAP starting small is fine amount time

140 Advice to junior investigators get funded ASAP starting small is fine make sure previous work published

141 Advice to junior investigators get funded ASAP starting small is fine make sure previous work published every proposal should be excellent

142 Advice to junior investigators get funded ASAP starting small is fine make sure previous work published every proposal should be excellent letters from others can help

143 Advice to junior investigators get funded ASAP starting small is fine make sure previous work published every proposal should be excellent letters from others can help don t stop till you have more than enough

144

145 Components of an Application

146 Components title abstract research plan objectives significance preliminary data research design, methods

147 Components title abstract research plan objectives significance preliminary data research design, methods budget budget justification biosketches approvals letters appendix

148 Components title abstract research plan objectives significance preliminary data research design, methods budget budget justification biosketches approvals letters appendix

149 Title mini-abstract accurate statement of long-term goals conform to guidelines include key words

150 Abstract Contents background specific aims unique features methodology expected results method of evaluation generalizability relation to field broad impact

151 accurate simple interesting not provocative key words Abstract

152 Research plan Specific aims Background & Significance Preliminary Data Research Design & Methods

153 state objectives Research plan

154 Research plan state objectives provide background general literature your work reviewer s work

155 Research plan state objectives provide background be hypothesesdriven

156 Research plan state objectives provide background be hypothesesdriven highlight strengths ideas methods

157 Research plan state objectives provide background be hypothesesdriven highlight strengths emphasize practicality methods preliminary data time & skills

158 Research plan state objectives provide background be hypothesesdriven highlight strengths emphasize practicality methods preliminary data time & skills discuss outcomes, have contingencies

159

160

161

162

163

164

165 Methods tell why your method is best

166 Methods explain why your method is best provide details methodology controls instruments to be used information to be collected: value & limitations precision of data procedures for data analysis interpretation

167 Methods explain why your method is best provide details identify pitfalls, how will overcome

168 Methods explain why your method is best provide details identify pitfalls, how will overcome specify alternative method if yours fails

169 Methods explain why your method is best provide details identify pitfalls, how will overcome specify alternative method list sources of unique materials reagents materials populations

170 Methods explain why your method is best provide details identify pitfalls, how will overcome specify alternative methods list sources of unique materials consider input from statistician methods for data analyses amt data to collect

171 Timeline Approximate Timeline (in years) Experiment Impact of GDNF on cell death Signaling underlying effects of GDNF Molecular basis of neuroprotection

172 Project evaluation (included in proposal) specify who will conduct internal external relate measures to objectives include evaluation instrument if available

173 Personnel

174 Personnel name individual when possible indicate selection procedures

175 Collaborators & consultants add skills, expertise add credibility

176 Biographical sketches include for critical personnel Principal Investigator (PI) Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI) Co-Investigators (Co-I) Collaborators Consultants Research assistants

177 Biographical sketches include for critical personnel highlight relevant accomplishments

178 Biographical sketches include for critical personnel highlight relevant accomplishments ensure accuracy training, experience publications grant support

179 Budget reasonable for the project for the agency inflationary increases new costs in subsequent years

180 Budget service/maintenance costs insurance shipping training to use new equipment

181 justify all equip carefully

182 Budget reasonable justify all requests amounts time

183 Justification personnel % effort on project responsibilities

184 Justification personnel Ben Aster, Ph.D., 20% effort. Dr. Aster is responsible for program evaluation.

185 Justification personnel Ben Aster, Ph.D., 20% effort. Dr. Aster is responsible for program evaluation. He develops evaluation instruments, administers surveys, compiles and analyzes the data, initiates follow-up inquiries, and writes evaluation reports.

186 Justification animals quantity cost at age days housed cost of housing

187 Budget reasonable justify all requests amounts time explain appearance of overlap

188 Budget reasonable justify requests explain appearance of overlap new NIH format: modular budgets cost-share when possible funds services equipment

189 Construction of budget salaries 50,000 supplies 25,000 equipment 15,000

190 Construction of budget fringe benefits salaries 50,000 fringe benefits (20%) 10,000 supplies 25,000 equipment 15,000

191 Construction of budget fringe benefits direct costs salaries 50,000 fringe benefits (20%) 10,000 supplies 25,000 equipment 15,000 DC 100,000

192 Construction of budget fringe benefits direct costs indirect costs salaries 50,000* fringe benefits (20%) 10,000* supplies 25,000* equipment 15,000 DC 100,000 IDC 42,500 Total Award $142,500

193 Resources and environment to document resources available equipment space facilities support staff

194 Equipment grants relation to existing resources value added to research in your research unit outside research unit benefits for students implications of not having equipment

195 Subject welfare know, adhere to guidelines get appropriate approvals

196 Human subjects characteristics of subjects, population recruiting methods criteria for selection consent procedures potential risks how risks will be minimized benefits to subjects and community inclusion of women and minorities

197 Vertebrate animals detail proposed use justify species and number veterinary care minimizing stress, discomfort justification for method of euthanasia

198 Letters letters of agreement obtain from collaborators, consultants to document type, level of involvement access to special reagents, equipment methods populations improve by providing sample

199 Letters letters of agreement letters of recommendation may be required could be optional could be inconspicuous

200 Supplementary materials: Some examples coloror enlarged figures reprints of your work updated information results other accomplishments

201 Supplementary material find out if, when, where never use to circumvent page limits!!

202 Summary there is money available

203 Summary there is money available getting it takes a good idea a proper match good grantspersonship persistence

204 Summary there is money available getting it takes a good idea a proper match good grantspersonship persistence it is hard work

205 Summary there is money available getting it takes a good idea a proper match good grantspersonship persistence it is hard work it is so worth it!

206