1 / 15

NEH 102: Peer review and application hints

This presentation provides valuable tips and advice for potential NEH grant applicants, including guidance on peer review criteria, grant writing, budgeting, and application submission. Contact a program officer for more information.

kaitline
Download Presentation

NEH 102: Peer review and application hints

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FEBRUARY 28, 2018 NEH 102: Peer review and application hints Daniel Sack, Division of Research Programs

  2. Disclaimer Disclaimer: The following slides were used to supplement a public oral presentation for potential NEH applicants. They are not intended to provide complete information about the NEH’s programs and they do not constitute an official statement of NEH policy. For current information about NEH programs, including eligibility requirements and the dates of deadlines, please consult the guidelines posted on the NEH website at neh.gov.

  3. Mock Panel

  4. Evaluation Criteria FELLOWSHIPS AND SUMMER STIPENDS The intellectual significance of the proposed project, including its value to humanities scholars, general audiences, or both. The quality or promise of quality of the applicant's work as an interpreter of the humanities. The quality of the conception, definition, organization, and description of the project and the applicant's clarity of expression. The feasibility of the proposed plan of work, including, when appropriate, the soundness of the dissemination and access plans. The likelihood that the applicant will complete the project.

  5. Rating Scale E: Excellent VG: Very good G: Good SM: Some merit NC: Not competitive

  6. The life of your application Award notification Submission Chairman’s decision National Council review Staff recommendations Review panels Panel sort

  7. Mock Peer Review Panel Application 1: “Holy Land Fictions: The Voyage to Jerusalem and Constantinople in the Medieval French Tradition” Application 2: “Cultural Institutions of the Transatlantic World, 1930-1970” Application 3: “Commons Environmentalism: Forest History, Culture, and Politics in the Appalachian South”

  8. Grant-Writing Tips

  9. Prepare early Find the right program Grants.gov Read the guidelines and samples Contact a program officer —Maria Biernik/NEH

  10. Make your case Start with the review criteria Demonstrate your project’s significance Provide context Intrigue the panelists Make it sound interesting Dissertation: What’s new? Develop a clear and realistic work plan —Maria Biernik/NEH

  11. Remember your audience Write for specialists and generalists Avoid jargon Address the criteria Use concrete examples Show them you know what you’re doing Anticipate and answer possible concerns —Alamy

  12. Budget advice Consult budget guidelines and samples Know what is/isn’t allowed Talk to a program officer Talk to your sponsored research office! —Alamy

  13. Pay attention to details Draft early and solicit feedback Check your bibliography Include required supporting materials Proofread! Discuss your application with your letter writers.

  14. Post-announcement Request your reviewers’ comments Contact a program officer Resubmit

  15. Questions? Daniel Sack Program Officer, Division of Research Programs dsack@neh.gov (202) 606-8459 research@neh.gov (202)606-8200

More Related