Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals

1. Fundamentals of Writing Winning Proposals Soha Hassoun Tufts University Young Faculty Workshop @ DAC, July 2009 Some slides/content are from a handout by David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

2. Overview: The Funding Process • Identify an agency with a mission that matches your interests, and find a relevant CFP • Understand the mechanics of the submission process • Your idea will be presented to the funding agency in the form of a written document, “The Proposal” • A set of reviewers examines your proposal and makes a recommendation to the funding agency (competitive vs. non competitive for NSF; a score for NIH) • The program officer makes final decision about funding and funding amounts

3. You must allot time to: • Develop your ideas, • Write a competitive proposal, and • Get one or more rounds of critical review from your colleagues before you submit David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

4. Ideas: How LARGE? The Levitan Rule “How many PhD theses are expected?” Budget-driven: How many student-years? • Budget is sometimes set by the program. Use that as a starting point Bottom line: Be credible

5. Innovation in Developing Ideas • Ideas cannot be incremental • Ideas must be innovative • Does the project employ novel concepts, methods, or approaches? • Does the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or techniques? • Ideas must be expanded

6. Innovation in Developing Ideas • Based on knowledge • Search the literature thoroughly • Understand what the competition is doing and how your idea/approach is distinguished • Assess funded grant awards related to your idea • Assess what you can/cannot do • Innovation is NOT the only evaluation criteria. Each agency has its own

7. Your Audience:The Mindset of the Reviewers • Who are they? • What is their expertise ? • Can they evaluate your proposal fairly? • What are they looking for ? The key to success in grant writing is to engender enthusiasm in the reviewer – who then becomes an advocate for your proposal. Therefore, always write your application for the reviewer, NOT yourself. --David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

8. What Reviewers Look For First • What’s the title? Is it interesting? • Who is the applicant? • Which institution(s) is the applicant affiliated with? • What’s the basic idea? Is it within my area of expertise? • Is the application “Reviewer-friendly”? David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

9. Reviewer-friendly == Maximally Readable • Readability should take precedence over margin & font guidelines • No distractions: • Spelling & grammar errors • Inconsistent technical terms and formatting • Jargon, equations, tiny footnotes. • Illustrations should be meaningful; worth 1000 words. • Key points and impact are obvious • Use key words: e.g. “This proposal is innovative because…” • Use simple and clear organization More is not better! Make it easy for the reviewers to evaluate your proposal

10. Simple & Clear Organization Title Summary Overview & Objectives (1 page) Significance (1/2 page) Relevant Background Preliminary Work The Narrative (Proposed Research) Timeline, and other agency-specific required sections

11. What Reviewers Look For Second: Necessary Conceptual Ingredients • Identify a problem and establish a “critical need” • Focus on a particular aspect of the problem • Describe how you will uniquely/innovatively contribute to the solution • Provide context and competitive analysis • Explain how you will evaluate your results • Provide compelling preliminary results • Describe impact/ pay off • Establish that you (and your team) are qualified to provide the proposed solution

12. Simple & Clear Organization Title Summary Overview & Objectives (1 page) Significance (1/2 page) Relevant Background Preliminary Work The Narrative (Proposed Research) Timeline, and other agency specific required sections

13. Write this section first Overview and Objectives (1 page) • The “bottleneck” page • The flow of logic must be compelling: Linear progression for a strong Overview Section Critical Need Objective Specific Aims/Tasks/Goals Novelty/Innovation & Expected Outcomes

14. Get an early critique of this page Overview and Objectives Details Facts (known and unknowns) that establish “Critical Need”. Frame the problem Good place to establish your qualification and mention Prelim Work; Not your bio! Conceptual aims; use strong verbs Long range goal. Objective of this proposal. Justify WHY you are solving the critical need Specific Aims/Tasks/Goals Advocate for your proposal: Distinguishing qualities. Not in future tense. “We expect…” Novelty/Innovation & Expected Outcomes David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

15. Example Aim Identify key parental factors responsible for children’s poor transition from preschool to kindergarten. Based upon collected evidence related to the situation, we will evaluate the extent to which parents command of the English language is a predictive factor of their children’s successful transition to kindergarten. David Morrison, www.grantcentral.com

16. Simple & Clear Organization Title Summary Overview & Objectives (1 page) Significance (1/2 page) Relevant Background Preliminary Work The Narrative (Proposed Research) Timeline, and other agency specific required sections

17. “Significance of The Proposed Work” Section (1/2 page) • Follows the Overview & Objective section • Make it easy for all to identify importance of your work • Flow: • Substantiate that there is a critical need • Italicized statement of significance, “This project is therefore significant because ..” • Benefits and impact expected from the critical need having successfully been addressed

18. “Relevant Background” Section • Section provides a critical review of relevant background. Not comprehensive. Section title should be reflective of this: e.g. “Review of Background literature relevant to this project” • Flow • Make sure that each major point discussed allows a conclusion to be reached • Logically build up the stage for the Prelim/Narrative • Cite contributions of possible reviewers

19. “Preliminary Work” Section • What is Preliminary Work? • Could be published prior work (yours or others) Summarize key findings in reference to the problems that you framed; do not cut & paste • Could be your own preliminary data • Preliminary work should provide compelling evidence: • Importance of the problem • Analysis that identifies key issues that need to be addressed • Demonstrate your competence • Set data in context. You should have set the stage in the Overview and background sections • Too much detail will be harmful

20. “Narrative Section” Reviewers expect the flow here to match the aims listed in the Overview & Objectives section: • Parallel Aim Flow • Specific Aim #1 Repeat verbatim • Introduction • Work plan • Expected outcomes/results • Potential Problems/alternatives • …. Repeat for other aims

21. Simple & Clear Organization Title Summary Overview & Objectives (1 page) Significance (1/2 page) Relevant Background Preliminary Work The Narrative (Proposed Research) Timeline, and other agency specific required sections

22. Title Selection Tips • List all key words that convey WHAT you want to do and WHY it is important • Arrange the words into a compelling and informative title that fits the allowed space

23. “Summary” Section • Very important. Widely read. Sometimes basis for reviewers to select their reviewing assignments • Written in plain English • Written last, but not last minute • Include key components from Overview and Significance sections to develop advocacy • Emphasize the relevance/significance to the funding agency (i.e. Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact for NSF)

24. Useful Hints • Do not sweep issues under the rug • Propose alternate plans • Draft your own collaboration letters • Comprehensively craft your “resources” section, including listing of colleagues as intellectual resources • Ask others for sample proposals • Go to a grant-writing workshop • Get a mentor • Team up with more experienced writers and learn form others • On contacting the Program Officer • On recommending reviewers

25. Final Words • DO NOT GET DISCOURAGED!! • The funding agencies cannot fund all “good proposals” • Learn from your mistakes • Be pro-active in identifying funding and collaborating opportunities

26. Questions?