Statewide Professional Development and Grantsmanship Workshop for Louisiana Institutions

1. Statewide Professional Development and Grantsmanship Workshop for Louisiana Institutions of Higher Education “Learning & Teaching, Research and Service Southern University at New Orleans March 9, 2004 RESEARCH WORKSHOP

3. Email: quigg@cs.unc.edu Web page: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~quigg/

4. When did the federal government become involved in funding university research?

5. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Before WWII • Mainly internal sources • Notable exception – Agriculture • Morrill Act of 1862: Land-Grant Colleges • 30,000 acres of federal land/congressional representative to each State

6. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Sold to provide a perpetual endowment fund for: • “at least one college where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies and including military tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts…” • Kentucky (50¢/acre) – Cornell ($5.50/acre)

7. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Second Morrill Act of 1890 • In order to get $, State had to show that race was not a criterion for admission to land-grant institution or • Designate a separate land-grant college for blacks • “1890 land-grants” created all over the then- segregated South

10. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Hatch Act of 1887: Agriculture Experiment Station • Annual appropriation – State match required • Smith-Lever Act of 1914: Cooperative Extension Service • Annual appropriation – State match required • Current federal $ from various acts > $550 million annually

11. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • During WWII • University scientists mobilized to apply expertise to war effort • National Defense Research Council • Formed by FDR in June, 1940 • Forum for bringing university/industry/ government scientists together • 18 month “head-start” on Pearl Harbor

12. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Office of Scientific Research and Defense (OSRD) • May 1941 • Dr. Vannevar Bush, Director • Mission “to explore a possible government role to encourage future scientific progress.” • Civilian, not military, control

13. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • OSRD contracted work to other institutions • Carnegie Institute of Technology – Large Rocket Lab • MIT – Radiation Lab • Western Electric and Bell Labs – Sound Amplification • Emphasis on concentrated, massive rapid development • Production from model to field e.g., Japanese torpedo jammer developed in one week

14. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Three critical secret projects pivotal to allied victory in WWII • Atomic bomb (Manhattan project) • Radar • 1935 – NRL – ship radar • 1942 – MIT – high-frequency, narrow-beam, high-resolution • Manufactured by Sperry, Westinghouse, Philco (for aircraft)

15. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Proximity (variable time) fuze • Prior to WWII – timed fuze or contact fuze • Neither effective against highly maneuverable airplanes • Section T – Applied Physics Lab at Johns Hopkins University assigned task of developing proximity fuze for Navy’s 5” guns

16. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Theory • Fuze contains miniature radio transmitter-receiver • Sends out signal • When signal reflected back from target reaches a certain frequency (caused by proximity to target) a circuit closes firing a small charge which detonates projectile

17. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Problems • Components – tiny glass vacuum tubes • Force of 20,000 g’s when fired (2800 ft./sec. muzzle velocity) • 25,000 revolutions/minute through rifling grooves • Moisture • Self-destruct feature for dudes

18. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Importance to war effort • James V. Forrestal, Secretary of the Navy said, “The proximity fuze has helped me blaze the trail to Japan. Without the protection this ingenious device has given the surface ships of the fleet, our westward push could not have been so swift and the cost in men and ships would have been immeasurably greater” • Prime Minister, Winston S. Churchill was quoted with “These so- called proximity fuzes, made in the United States.., proved potent against the small unmanned aircraft (V-1) with which we were assailed in 1944.” • And Commanding General of the Third Army, George S. Patton said, “The funny fuze won the Battle of the Bulge for us. I think that when all armies get this shell we will have to devise some new method of warfare.”

19. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Bush’s final report The Endless Frontier • Two principles for expanding R & D in U.S. Universities • Federal government as patron of science • Government support should ensure a free rein of investigation by scientists into topics and methods of their choice

20. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • This report lead to the establishment of National Science Foundation (NSF) in 1950 • Independent government agency • National Science Board • 24 members plus director • Appointed by President

21. History: External Support for University Research in U.S. • Responsible for promoting science and engineering • Six priority areas: • Mathematical Sciences • Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences • Biocomplexity in the Environment • Information Technology Research • Nanoscale Science and Engineering • Learning for the 21st Century Workforce

22. Excerpts from the State of the Union Address January 4, 1950 Sound bite Transcript: "The value of our natural resources is constantly being increased by the progress of science. Research is finding new ways of using such natural assets as minerals, sea water, and plant life. In the peaceful development of atomic energy, particularly, we stand on the threshold of new wonders. The first experimental machines for producing useful power from atomic energy are now under construction. We have made truly the first beginnings in this field, but in the perspective of history, they may loom larger than the first airplane, or even the first tools that started man on the road to civilization.” Harry S. Truman

23. KEY HISTORICAL DATES APRIL 27, 1950 Final passage by House of Representatives of bill creating the National Science Foundation. House passed the original bill, H.R. 4846, on March 1 by 247-126 vote. APRIL 28, 1950 Final passage of science bill by the Senate. Original Senate bill, S.247, was passed on March 18. MAY 10, 1950 President Harry S. Truman signed the bill creating the National Science Foundation. Truman announced this signing in the morning from the rear platform of a train in Pocatello, Idaho. SEPTEMBER 27, 1950 NSF's first budget of $225,000 was approved by President Truman. NOVEMBER 2, 1950 President Truman announced his appointments to The National Science Board. DECEMBER 12, 1950 The first meeting took place of the National Science Board in the White House.

24. NSF by the Numbers • NSF annual budget: $4.789 billion (in Year 2002) • NSF's share of total annual federal spending for R&D: 4% • NSF's share of federal funding for all basic research done at academic institutions: 23% • NSF's share of federal funding for basic academic research in: physical sciences (36%); environmental sciences (49%); engineering (50%); mathematics (72%); computer science research (78%); and anthropology (100%). • Number of organizations (colleges and universities, schools, nonprofit institutions, and small businesses) receiving NSF funds each year: nearly 2,000 • Number of proposals that NSF competitively reviews each year: 32,000 • Approx. number of total awards funded each year: 20,000 • Approx. number of new awards funded each year: 10,000 • Number of reviewers (scientists and engineers) who evaluate proposals for NSF each year: 50,000 • Number of reviews done each year: 250,000 • Number of students supported through NSF's Graduate Research Fellowship Program since 1952: 36,000 • Number of people (teachers, students, researchers, post-doctorates and trainees) that NSF directly supports: nearly 200,000

25. “The Art of Grantsmanship” By: Jacob Kraicer • “Grantsmanship is the art of acquiring peer- reviewed research funding.” • “Good writing will not save bad ideas, but bad writing can kill good ones.” • “Quality of science in applications 10% below cutoff for funding is not significantly different from that in the 10% just above the cutoff.”

26. “Zen in the Art of Grantsmanship” By: L. Wade Black “If you want to live with grants, you have to live with rejection – over and over and over again. If you equate rejection with failure, or if your belief in your project is weak enough that a rejection can shake your faith in it or in yourself, you’re going to have an emotionally rough and rocky grant seeking experience.”

27. “Zen in the Art of Grantsmanship” By: L. Wade Black “When I’m on a grants panel, the first thing I look at is the ‘one paragraph’ summary of the project, then I look at the budget, then I look at the individual’s (organization’s) history. These three things strongly influence how I look at the rest of the proposal. They aren’t all I consider, but they’re very important!”

28. TNT Tim’s Ten No-Nonsense Tips for Successful Proposal Writing

29. TNT 1: Think, plan, think again, then write a description of your project • Title and abstract • Set first impression • Used to route to appropriate reviewers • Write them last • In abstract • Hypothesis (es) to be tested • Describe how the proposal is directly related to the agency’s mission/objectives • Tell why the proposal is unique, important, significant and worth supporting • Briefly describe research plan

30. Proposed research • Focused, original, novel, innovative and feasible • Balance (“sure” and “innovative/risky”) • State what is known, what is not known and why it is essential to find out • Preliminary data/studies • Research design and methods • Put aims in logical/sequential order • Brief rationale for each aim • Outline the design/method to accomplish each aim (Why was proposed approach chosen?) • Explain process for data collection, analysis and interpretation

31. Provide tentative sequence/timeline for project (use diagrams or tables where appropriate) • Document collaboration arrangements • Letters – confirming specific roles (PI/Institution) • Biographic sketches

32. “A genius is a talented person who does his/her homework.” Thomas Edison TNT 2: Learn as much as you can about the agency, the program and the program officer. • Search web sites, ask senior faculty, read • Be sensitive to “Agency Culture” • Terminology • Accepted norms • Methods of communication • Different agencies interpret rules differently

33. TNT 2: Learn as much as you can about the agency, the program and the program officer. • Communicate with Program Officer • Face-to-face is best (phone/e-mail is ok) • Always make an appointment • Many federal buildings locked • Good way to start meeting • Describe your project • Ask if it fits within goals/budget of the program • If no, does it fit elsewhere? • Seek feedback • Integrate feedback into proposal

34. TNT 2: Learn as much as you can about the agency, the program and the program officer. • GOAL: Target your proposal to agency objectives and put your face on it!

35. “Goals are dreams with deadlines.” Diana Scharf Hunt TNT 3: Prepare a written proposal development timeline and follow it. • Work backward from the required mail date • Assume that things will go wrong • Key people go out of town • FastLane gets clogged and slows down • So – Build time for the inevitable disasters into your timeline

36. TNT 3: Prepare and follow a written proposal development timeline. • Set deadlines for each component (budget, narrative) • Assign responsibilities • Be specific (who, what, when?) • Pay special attention to items needed from outside your group • Letters of support • Subcontractor information

37. TNT 3: Prepare and follow a written proposal development timeline. • Information needed from subcontractor • “Intent to participate” letter (co-signed by PI and institution) • Work scope • Budget • Other (NICRA, current and pending support) • Include subcontractor information in the package routed through your university

38. “Everybody is ignorant only on different subjects.” Will Rogers TNT 3: Prepare and follow a written proposal development timeline. • Schedule on-campus review • Call ahead • Send complicated budgets for early review • Discuss any potential “pit-falls” • Are you in FastLane? • Is cost-sharing documented? • Are there any non-standard university commitments? • If you are new (or old and need it) ask for help.

39. Scientists are taught to “think outside the box.” Right? TNT 4: When dealing with the mechanics of developing a proposal, “think inside the box.” • Follow the rules for format, forms and presentation precisely • If they ask for “project goals” don’t give them “research aims.”

40. “Think inside the box” • Follow instructions exactly: • Page limit • Type size, font, spacing • Don’t include appendices if not allowed • Avoid abbreviations, acronyms and jargon • Free of mechanical errors (spelling, typos, grammar) • “If you can’t get the spelling right, how are you expected to get the research right.” • “A sloppy application = a sloppy scientist!”

41. “Think inside the box” • Be creative with the science • Be a “good bureaucrat” with the format of the proposal

42. “A man who qualifies himself well for his calling, never fails of employment.” Thomas Jefferson TNT 5: Agencies fund people, not just ideas. • Of course the science is important, but ultimately people fund people they know and trust • Key personnel section is vital • Highlight recent training/experience of team • Be honest, but this is not the place to be modest

43. “I not only use all the brains I have, but all I can borrow.” Woodrow Wilson • If you are inexperienced, team up with more experienced faculty • Be Co-PI • “Tell me what company thou keepest, and I’ll tell you what thou art.”Cervantes • Work to develop dynamic collaborations • Warning – you may be a junior partner, but are still a partner, not an employee

44. TNT 5: Agencies fund people, not just ideas. • Work to become better known • Professional organizations • Publications in journals • Serve as proposal reviewer • Become known by the people doing the “cutting edge” research • Letters of support • Future collaborators – subcontracting opportunities

45. TNT 5: Agencies fund people, not just ideas. • Develop a reputation for doing what you said you would do • Periodic and final reports • But also with the conduct of your research • Example: Senior faculty – completed research obligation without funding before submitting next proposal

46. TNT 5: Agencies fund people, not just ideas. Don’t let this be said of you: “The President has kept all of the promises he intended to keep.” Clinton aide George Stephanopolous

47. “He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.” Abraham Lincoln TNT 6: Quality Trumps Quantity Every Time • Don’t attach “filler information” not relevant to evaluation criteria • Remember, some poor reviewer has to wade through it and • Many agencies now allow reviewers the option of not looking at information in appendices

48. TNT 6: Quality Trumps Quantity Every Time • Always consider the reviewer • Assume reviewer is in a somewhat related field, not an expert directly in your area • Often unpaid • Reviews are over and above normal job duties • Reviews done in “bits-and-pieces” (evenings, weekends, etc.) • Put yourself in the role of the reviewer • Make his/her job easier • Information should be where it is expected to be and in the expected format

49. “Too much of a good thing is wonderful.” Mae West (Except with proposal budgets) TNT 7: Budget should be the “right size”, neither too large nor too small. • Agencies/Program officers want to use their funds wisely • Budget novices may ask for: • Too little – believing that they have a better chance to be funded or • Too much – anticipating cuts by “padding” • Both can (and often do) backfire!

50. TNT 7: Budget should be the “right size”, neither too large nor too small. • Reviewers expect realistic, well-documented budgets that relate directly to the “scope of work” • Common mistake: many PI’s don’t pay enough attention to the budget justification! • Allocable – related to the project and necessary to accomplish the work scope • Allowable – permitted under the various rules governing this award