Guidance for Research Grant Applicants

1. Guidance for Research Grant Applicants Updated March 10, 2011

2. Everything you need to apply is on our website, www.wtgrantfdn.org

3. Contents 4 Before You Start5 Letters of Inquiry 7 Full Proposals 9 Criteria for Funding10 Grant Award and Commencement11 Resources for Applicants16 Tips for Preparing Your Application

4. Before You Start • Please review our: • Current Research Interests, • Funding Guidelines and Application Procedures for Research Grants, and • Resources for studying settings and studying the use of research evidence. • If you have questions: • Read our Frequently Asked Questions for Research Grants. • If you need more help, email info@wtgrantfdn.org.

5. Letter of Inquiry Stage • All research grants begin with a letter of inquiry. • A letter of inquiry functions as a mini-proposal. It should include sufficient detail about the project’s theoretical background, research questions, design, methods, and analyses, so that reviewers can make an initial evaluation. • Letters of inquiry are reviewed by internal reviewers with social science expertise, but their expertise may not be in an applicant’s specific area of work. Write your letter with this audience in mind. • Due dates for letters of inquiry are available on our website. Due dates are usually in early January, April, and August.

6. Letter of Inquiry Reviews • The Foundation will invite a full proposal* if we determine that a letter of inquiry: • Fits the Foundation’s Current Research Interests; • Potentially meets the Foundation’s General Criteria for Funding, listed in the Funding Guidelines and Application Procedures document; and • Demonstrates that the proposed project is beyond the planning phase of literature review and pilot work. • *Note: Officers’ Research grants do not require full proposals. Funding decisions for Officers’ Research grants are made on the basis of the letter of inquiry.

7. Full Proposal Reviews • Full proposals are reviewed using a rigorous, scientific, peer review process involving two or more external reviewers. • The Foundation chooses reviewers who collectively have content, methodological, and disciplinary expertise in the proposed work. • Each reviewer may not have expertise in all areas of the proposed work, so write your proposal with this audience in mind.

8. Full Proposal Reviews • Applicants who receive generally positive reviews are given an opportunity to provide written responses to external reviewers’ critiques. • The Foundation does not necessarily look for applicants to agree with reviewers’concerns. Instead, applicants should show serious consideration of reviewers’ critiques and offer a frank and thorough response. If warranted, applicants can propose to alter their proposed studies to address reviewers’ concerns. • Full proposals, external reviews, and applicants’ responses to the reviews then receive further appraisal from the Foundation’s Senior Program Team. The Team makes funding recommendations to the Board of Trustees during triannual Board meetings. Funding is allocated shortly after these meetings.

9. Criteria for Funding • Reviewers will look for applications that meet the following criteria: • Research questions and/or hypotheses fit with the Foundation’s Current Research Interests. • Project potentially meets the Foundation’s General Criteria for Funding, which are outlined below and described fully in our Funding Guidelines and Application Procedures: • Research area is consistent with Foundation’s Current Research Interests; • Project addresses questions or issues that can inform policy and/or practice; • Project complements and extends prior and concurrent efforts and advances theory; • Project reflects high standards of evidence and rigorous methods, commensurate with the proposal’s goals; • Project demonstrates adequate consideration of the gender, ethnic, and cultural appropriateness of concepts, methods, and measures; and • Project is feasible given the team’s expertise and the proposed resources and timeline.

10. Grant Award and Commencement • Full proposals are reviewed by our Board of Trustees at the March, June, and October meetings. Funding for approved awards is allocated soon after the Board makes its decision, but the release of funds is dependent on the start date of the project.

11. Resources for Applicants • Foundation staff have written a series of Annual Reportessays discussing our research interests in detail. We encourage applicants to review them. Doing so usually clarifies points of confusion. • The Resources section of our website has helpful information on Studying Settings and the Use of Research Evidence

12. Social Setting Resources for Applicants • Recommended readings for applicants studying settings: • “Social Setting Theory and Measurement” • Foundation staff discuss their early thoughts about strengthening setting theory and setting measurement in order to better understand and improve. • “A Systems Framework for Understanding Social Settings” • Foundation staff present a systems framework for understanding youth social settings, focusing on the social processes, resources, and organization of resources in settings. The paper elaborates on the conceptual framework discussed in the above essay.

13. Social Setting Resources for Applicants • Recommended readings for applicants studying settings: • “Doing Social Setting Research” • Foundation staff highlight examples of funded research studies on youth settings, including research questions of interest and promising research designs and methods for addressing them. • “Measuring Social Settings” • Foundation staff discuss our interest in generating more studies that focus on developing and improving measures of various youth settings.

14. Use of Research Evidence Resources for Applicants • Recommended readings for applicants studying the use of research evidence in policy and practice affecting youth: • In these recent Annual Report essays, Foundation staff discuss our Research Use RFP and our interest in and growing understanding of the use of research evidence in policy and practice: • “Learning About the Use of Research to Inform Evidence-Based Policy and Practice” • “Focusing on Demand: Study Research Use in Policy and Practice Affecting Youth “ • “Studying the Use of Research Evidence in Policy and Practice” • Foundation staff have compiled a brief list of conceptual and empirical work related to studying the use of research evidence: • Annotated bibliography

15. Use of Research Evidence Resources for Applicants • Recommended readings for applicants studying the use of research evidence in policy and practice affecting youth: • Using Evidence (2007) • Sandra Nutley, Isabel Walters, and Huw T.O. Davies review research on how evidence is used in policy and practice and how its use can be improved. • “Learning More about How Research-Based Knowledge Gets Used: Guidance in the Development of New Empirical Research” (2008) • In a commissioned paper aimed at researchers, Huw Davies and Sandra Nutley draw upon their prior review work to offer insight and guidance to researchers interested in studying research use.

16. Tips for Preparing Your Application • Focus on tackling a few important research questions or hypotheses well. • Reviewers often read applications that try to tackle too many questions in one study, or questions that do not fit together cohesively. • We believe it is more valuable for a study to address a few research questions well than to address many research questions and/or hypotheses with less rigor.

17. Tips for Preparing Your Application • All studies have their strengths and weaknesses. A strong application includes convincing arguments about its strengths, but it also demonstrates an understanding of the study’s limits. • Reviewers recognize that some research designs and methods are better suited than others for addressing certain research questions. Make a convincing case that your proposed design and methods would provide strong evidence on your particular questions. • At the same time, also demonstrate your understanding of the limits of your research methods and analyses and the conclusions that can be drawn from them. This provides reviewers with assurances that you understand the nuances and challenges of the work.

18. Tips for Preparing Your Application • Provide enough information about your research design, methods, and analysis plan for reviewers to evaluate whether they meet the General Criteria for Funding, found in the Funding Guidelines and Application Procedures for Research Grants. • In a letter of inquiry, provide enough information for reviewers to gauge the fit of your methods and analyses with the research questions and the likely rigor of the proposed work. Convince them that the project is ready to move to the full proposal stage. • In a full proposal, you will have more space to describe your project. Include sufficient details about your design, methods, and analysis plan for reviewers to evaluate their rigor and appropriateness for addressing each of the research questions and/or hypotheses.

19. Tips for Writing Your Application • If you are proposing to use an existing dataset, provide assurances about the quality of the data for addressing the research questions. • If your study fits our interest in settings, make a convincing case that the data on key setting constructs was collected using strong measures.

20. Tips for Writing Your Application • Take the time to review the writing and organization of your application • Consider using headings and sub-headings to help reviewers find sections and topics. • Consider whether the application is understandable to reviewers who do not have expertise in all areas of the proposed work. Avoid unnecessary jargon. • Review the Foundation’s General Criteria for Funding in the Funding Guidelines and Application Procedures and ensure you have made a strong case that the study meets those criteria. • Leave enough time to have trusted colleagues review and provide feedback on your application, multiple times if necessary.

21. If you do notreceive funding . . . You may apply again with a new letter of inquiry, but in it you will need to convincingly address prior concerns expressed by reviewers and the Foundation.