Securing External Federal Funding

1. Securing External Federal Funding Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D. Carol Lee Robertson Endowed Professor of Literacy University of Kentucky Janice.almasi@uky.edu

2. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Institute of Education Sciences 2 Grant Competitions per year

3. Current Funding Opportunities 14 Long-term Programs of Research

5. Be Informed Subscribe to Newsflash at ies.ed.gov/newsflash

6. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky IES Research Goals • Goal 1: Identification • Identifying programs and practices associated with better educational outcomes (secondary data analysis) • Goal 2: Development Projects • Developing educational interventions • Goal 3: Efficacy and Replication Projects • Determine if fully-developed interventions are effective • Goal 4: Scale-Up • Goal 5: Measurement Projects

7. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Prior to Peer Review Meeting

8. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Criteria • Significance • Research Plan • Personnel • Resources

9. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Review Criterion Ratings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Poor Excellent

10. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky What Reviewers Look For Where Applications Tend to be Weak

11. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Significance

12. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Significance in Goals 2 and 3 • Context for Proposed Interventions • Provide context for the proposed intervention by including data on, or reviewing research describing, the attributes of typical existing practices. • Identify shortcomings of current practice and how they contribute to the rationale for the proposed intervention. • Provide context for understanding how much of a change the proposed intervention is intended to achieve.

13. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Significance in Goals 2 and 3 • Intervention, Theory of Change, Empirical/Theoretical Rationale • Clearly describe the intervention • Clearly describe the theory of change for the intervention • How do the features or components of the intervention relate to each other temporally (or operationally), pedagogically, and theoretically (e.g., why A leads to B)? • Provide a strong theoretical and empirical justification for the design and sequencing of the features or components of the intervention. Enables evaluation of: • Relation between the intervention and its theoretical and empirical foundation (e.g., is the proposed intervention a reasonable operationalization of the theory?) • Relation between the intervention and the outcome measures (e.g., do the proposed measures tap the constructs that the intervention is intended to address?) Include a Logic Model

14. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Significance in Goals 2 and 3 • Practical Importance of Intervention • When the proposed intervention is fully developed will it have the potential to improve student outcomes in educationally meaningful increments, if it were implemented over the course of a semester or school year? • Would the proposed intervention be both affordable for and easily implemented by schools (e.g., not involve major adjustments to normal school schedules)?

15. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Research Plan: Goal 2 What data will be gathered to determine how intervention is operating? What criteria will be used to determine if the intervention operates as intended? How will the data gathered be used to revise the intervention? How do you define “operating as intended?”

16. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Research Plan:Goal 2

17. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Research Plan:Goal 2

18. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Reearch Plan:Goal 3

19. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Reearch Plan:Goal 3

20. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Research Plan:Goal 3

21. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Research Plan:Goal 3

22. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Personnel • What role will each individual have in the project? • What qualifications, training, and experience do key personnel possess? • How will qualifications be used on the research? • Are key personnel dedicating sufficient time to competently implement proposed research?

23. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Resources • Are the resources adequate to support the proposed activities in terms of: • Facilities • Equipment • Supplies • Institutional Support for Managing/Directing Grants and Supporting Scholarship • Have partners shown support for implementation and support of the project?

24. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Scientist Reviewer Critiques • Abrief description of the overall application. • Identify each application’s key strengths and weaknesses in each of the evaluation areas and prepare critical, evaluative comments. • Integrated summary of the overall assessment of the application, including the main strengths and weaknesses of the application.

25. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Overall Score

26. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Peer Review Meeting Process

27. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Peer Review Meeting Process