Transcript Intro to Grant

Grantsmanship Basics for
Graduate Study
for McNair Scholars Program
Bess de Farber
UF Libraries Grants Management
Program
NSF-funded I-cubed Program
January 20, 2010
1
Objectives
1.
2.
3.
4.
Provide context
Understand “grantsmanship” processes
Learn basic research activities
Inspire confidence, desire and
participation in grant seeking
2
Questions

What’s your past experience in grants
management activities?

What question do you have about grant
applications or grant processes or grant
awards?
3
Why proposals are important?
Fellowship $ support
 They empower you to do your own
research
 They prove you:




Have good ideas
Can communicate those ideas
Will be able to support your work
IMPORTANT: Size doesn’t matter
4
Practice = Results
5
Road blocks
Fear of failure (If I don’t try, I can’t
fail)
Flip this around:
What is the best predictor of success in
writing grant proposals ?
Number of times you submit
average = 2.7 for NSF
1.
6
Road Blocks
1.
2.
Fear of failure (If I don’t try, I
can’t fail)
It’s too complicated and
overwhelming
7
What’s the question you want the
sponsor to ask?
Will you MARRY ME?
8
What is a grant proposal?

Tells an engaging “story” about an opportunity to
fill a gap, eliminate a need, solve a problem, or
research ways to do these things

Presents business plan

Denotes image

Defines friends and partners

Provides assessment of capacity
9
What is grants management?
The effective administration and oversight of:
 Researching

Matching to a specific grantmaker

Matching a dollar amount to a funder’s history

Learning about reviewers and priorities

Creating the best mental movie

Learning from declinations

Ensuring start-to-finish positive relationship
10
Grant writing is
….. the art and science of developing
granting relationships with funder, by:
1) converting a mental image picture of a
fundable project;
2) using words and financial information to
hook the reviewer on the importance,
legitimacy and creativity of the project
and why it is a good investment for a
specific sponsor;
3) requesting specific funds for specific
purposes, to be used sometime in the
future.
11
Know your sponsor
AKA CUSTOMER
Public
Private
Corporate
12
Public Sponsors











Generally make larger awards
Reliable for long-term
Information available to public
Established process, format, timetable
Large staff
Public meetings, training sessions
Accountable to public officials
Process is very time consuming
Involves more reporting and evaluation
Doesn’t generally take risks with new ideas
Restrictions on use of funds
13
Private Sponsors










Awards generally smaller
Mostly fund one year projects
Info not public
Processes, proposal formats and timetables may
or not be established
Very few staff - sometimes no paid staff
Most have policies that target local community
Process is simpler and more flexible
Reporting/evaluation requirements are lenient
More likely to invest in new or innovative ideas
Likely to be flexible: funding for various expenses
14
Corporate Sponsors







Usually require “give” “get” agreements
Foundations may behave as private
corporations
Funding for fund-raising events
Funding for special events
Funding for marketing
Multiple “buckets” to choose from
In-kind usually part of the package
15
Know the Sponsor










What organizations or programs have been
funded?
What is the range of funding?
What is the funder’s focus now? What was is it
the past?
What language does the funder use to describe
funding practices/interests?
How can you get a copy of what has been
funded?
Who can you talk to? What is their role?
Are you ready to ask your questions?
Who makes the decisions?
What is the funder’s history within the
community?
How does the funder like to be treated?
16
Know Yourself Part I
What are your positive
attributes or assets
17
Know Yourself Part II
What are your negative
attributes or liabilities
18
Assessing Readiness










What is the deadline?
What is the grant period?
Do you have enough time to prepare and
package?
Do you have enough information?
Who needs to approve the proposal?
What’s the cost/benefit analysis?
Can you stay on mission if you get the award?
How will this change the way you operate?
Can you deliver expected results?
What are the benefits if you don’t get funded?
19
Organizing the Process












Read the guidelines, especially evaluation criteria
Create your own checklist
Develop activities list
Develop timeline
Determine involvement to complete project
Determine cost
Decide whether or not to keep going
Request support letters
Finish narrative/other components
Submit to mentor/meet with Linda Isaacs in DSR
Edit; Edit; Edit
Submit proposal (either to DSR or to Sponsor)
20
Grant Stories
Good, Bad, Ugly
A.
B.
C.
Beginnings
In the middle
Endings
21
FAQs in Grant Applications
Scientific merit?
 Broader impacts?
 Evaluation methods?
 Timeline of activities?
 Partners?

22
Partnerships and Partners
essential grant project
components
23
Making job easier for reviewers



Assume the reviewer is a generalist in your field, who
knows little about your particular topic. Thus …
Job #1 is to convince them your idea is worthwhile. Paint
the big picture first. Then, highlight how your project fits
into the big picture.
Friendly formatting
 Follow exactly the order of sections requested
 Use different fonts to highlight important points
 State hypotheses (or goals)
 Explicitly link anticipated results to your hypotheses.
Or, how will goals be assessed?
 Make sure you’ve addressed all criteria
24
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
J. Resasco - A
A novel twist
The issue
Testing an Ecological Cost of Habitat Corridors: Spread of Invasive
Species
Background: As extensive tracks of habitat become fragmented, populations
in the remaining habitat become isolated and increasingly vulnerable to
extinction. A frequently touted solution is the creation or maintenance of
habitat corridors – strips of habitat that connect otherwise isolated
patches of the same habitat and that presumably increase animal
movement between patches1-3. Although corridors make intuitive sense,
their actual effectiveness remains controversial4,5. The controversy has
arisen because: (1) studies frequently reach opposite conclusions1, (2) the
vast majority of studies are non-experimental, small-scale or poorly
replicated2, (3) confounding factors are often overlooked (e.g., the
additional area and edge habitat that corridors inevitably bring with
them)1, and (4) corridors may facilitate the spread of invasive species6.
I will test the effectiveness of corridors in restoring communities of
native ants in a highly threatened ecosystem, longleaf pine
savanna. I am fortunate to be able to address or overcome many of the
above problems and constraints of previous studies. Specifically …..
25
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
J. Resasco - B
A novel twist
The issue
Testing an Ecological Cost of Habitat Corridors: Spread of Invasive
Species
The Background: As extensive tracks of habitat become fragmented, populations
in the remaining habitat become isolated and increasingly vulnerable to
solutionextinction. A frequently touted solution is the creation or maintenance of
habitat corridors – strips of habitat that connect otherwise isolated
patches of the same habitat and that presumably increase animal
movement between patches1-3. Although corridors make intuitive sense,
their actual effectiveness remains controversial4,5. The controversy has
arisen because: (1) studies frequently reach opposite conclusions1, (2) the
vast majority of studies are non-experimental, small-scale or poorly
replicated2, (3) confounding factors are often overlooked (e.g., the
additional area and edge habitat that corridors inevitably bring with
them)1, and (4) corridors may facilitate the spread of invasive species6.
I will test the effectiveness of corridors in restoring communities of
native ants in a highly threatened ecosystem, longleaf pine
savanna. I am fortunate to be able to address or overcome many of the
above problems and constraints of previous studies. Specifically …..
26
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
J. Resasco - C
A novel twist
The issue
Testing an Ecological Cost of Habitat Corridors: Spread of Invasive
Species
The Background: As extensive tracks of habitat become fragmented, populations
in the remaining habitat become isolated and increasingly vulnerable to
solutionextinction. A frequently touted solution is the creation or maintenance of
habitat corridors – strips of habitat that connect otherwise isolated
patches of the same habitat and that presumably increase animal
movement between patches1-3. Although corridors make intuitive sense,
their actual effectiveness remains controversial4,5. The controversy has
arisen because: (1) studies frequently reach opposite conclusions1, (2) the
The
vast majority of studies are non-experimental, small-scale or poorly
contro- replicated2, (3) confounding factors are often overlooked (e.g., the
area and edge habitat that corridors inevitably bring with
versy additional
1
them) , and (4) corridors may facilitate the spread of invasive species6.
I will test the effectiveness of corridors in restoring communities of
native ants in a highly threatened ecosystem, longleaf pine
savanna. I am fortunate to be able to address or overcome many of the
above problems and constraints of previous studies. Specifically …..
27
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
J. Resasco - D
A novel twist
The issue
Testing an Ecological Cost of Habitat Corridors: Spread of Invasive
Species
The Background: As extensive tracks of habitat become fragmented, populations
in the remaining habitat become isolated and increasingly vulnerable to
solutionextinction. A frequently touted solution is the creation or maintenance of
habitat corridors – strips of habitat that connect otherwise isolated
patches of the same habitat and that presumably increase animal
movement between patches1-3. Although corridors make intuitive sense,
their actual effectiveness remains controversial4,5. The controversy has
arisen because: (1) studies frequently reach opposite conclusions1, (2) the
The
vast majority of studies are non-experimental, small-scale or poorly
contro- replicated2, (3) confounding factors are often overlooked (e.g., the
area and edge habitat that corridors inevitably bring with
versy additional
1
them) , and (4) corridors may facilitate the spread of invasive species6.
I will test the effectiveness of corridors in restoring communities of
native ants in a highly threatened ecosystem, longleaf pine
savanna. I am fortunate to be able to address or overcome many of the
above problems and constraints of previous studies. Specifically …..
Statement
of Purpose
28
Clearly articulated hypotheses
Hypotheses: I hypothesize that (H1) Corridors will increase
species richness of longleaf pine savanna ants. (H2)
Corridors will increase abundance of S. invicta. (H3) S.
invicta abundance will be negatively correlated with the
species richness and abundance of native ants. (H4)
Removal of S. invicta will increase the species richness
and abundance of native ants.
Methods: The experimental manipulation required for H 1-3
has already occurred. Testing these hypotheses now
requires data on spatial and temporal variation in ant
abundance. I will census ants…. To test H4, I will ….
Analyses: Tests of H1 and H2 will employ the same Mixed
Linear Model used in previous studies at this site1-3, with
landscape as a random effect and patch type and distance
to edge as fixed effects. Species richness will be
standardized via rarefaction. H3 will be tested via
regression. H4 will be tested as a Before–After-Control–
Impact (BACI) design.
29
Clearly articulated hypotheses
Hypotheses: I hypothesize that (H1) Corridors will increase
species richness of longleaf pine savanna ants. (H2)
Corridors will increase abundance of S. invicta. (H3) S.
invicta abundance will be negatively correlated with the
species richness and abundance of native ants. (H4)
Removal of S. invicta will increase the species richness and
abundance of native ants.
Methods: The experimental manipulation required for H 1-3
has already occurred. Testing these hypotheses now requires
data on spatial and temporal variation in ant abundance. I
will census ants…. To test H4, I will ….
Analyses: Tests of H1 and H2 will employ the a Mixed Linear
Model …. H3 will be tested via regression. H4 will be tested
as a Before–After-Control–Impact (BACI) design.
Methods and Analyses
linked to Hypotheses
30
Integration of theory and
practice
How this study fills a
need in conservation
Broader Impacts: Many conservation plans simply assume that
habitat corridors are effective4. Data are sorely lacking. My
project provides an opportunity to integrate straightforward
Novel tests of corridor theory with restoration of a highly threatened
habitat. Likewise, invasive species are often blindly assumed to
twist
have detrimental effects on native species, but restoring native
biodiversity may not be as simple as removing non-native
species10. My project will test the extent to which this is the
case. Finally, the U.S. Forest Service is keenly interested in
applying our results in their longleaf management plans at SRS
-- I am already collaborating with them, attempting to bridge
research and restoration. Apart from this project’s broader
impacts on conservation, I believe ecologists have a
responsibility to educate the general public about their work.
Such outreach is especially critical for children and youth from
groups under-represented in science. I will use this project to
bring new material to my current and future outreach activities
(STEP and SPICE, respectively; see Personal Statement).
Personal
statement of
conviction
Specific plan and
link to other part
of application
31
Advice
Start small (but above all, start!)
 Proposal writing is a skill, requiring
practice
 Don’t be afraid of failure
 Seek mentoring
 Follow directions
 Know objectives of funding agency in mind
 Put yourself in the shoes of a reviewer

32
Research Funding Opportunities
1.
2.
3.
http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/funding/
http://gradschool.ufl.edu/students/financ
ial-aid-bulletin-board.html
http://i3.institutes.ufl.edu/
33
Homework
1.
2.
3.
Choose 2 workshop videos
Watch videos/take notes
List questions about video content for
future workshop agenda
http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/funding/workshops.
htm
34