What to Consider Before Writing Generalized Suggested Time Frame for Writing Grant Applications Pre-Proposal Agreements: What Your Department Chair Should Know Before You Begin Characteristics of Winning Proposals How to Write Letters of Inquiry Step-by Step: Grant Budget Made Easier Using ORS Budget Forms __________________________________________________________________________________________ What to Consider Before Writing Possible Steps
Source: Applying for Research Funding: Getting Started and Getting
Funded. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Generalized
Suggested Time Frame in Months for Preparing a Grant Application after
Developing Research Idea _______________________________________________________________________________________
Source: Applying for Research Funding: Getting Started and Getting
Funded. __________________________________________________________________________________________ Pre-Proposal Agreement: What Your Department Chair Should Know Before You Begin The pre-proposal agreement is designed to give the potential proposal writer insight into administration’s feelings about the appropriateness of a project, the amount and type of resources that will be committed to it, and an indication of any areas that will need to be addressed to secure final signatures at the time of submittal. No one wants to add to the burden of writing grant applications, but it seems that it would be better to be told earlier rather than later that a project will not be supported by the department, the area, or the College. Time should not be wasted that could be spent on a project that will be supported. It is also possible that if a grant goes forward without proper consideration and thought, the money might have to be returned should the project be funded. At the least, the pre-proposal agreement should be covered verbally with the department coordinators and chairs to serve as protection for all involved. The Agreement should cover all of the following areas: Problem to be Studied: Purpose of Study: Project Participants: Duration of Project: Funding Source to be Approached: Non-personnel Resources Needed:
Personnel Resources Needed:
Matching Requirements/In-Kind Contributions
Date:__________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Winning proposals have clearly defined needs and describe
how those needs were identified. Winning proposals define programs to
meet the identified needs.
2. Winning proposals describe what kids and teachers will do. Create a real-life scenario for the reader. Try to paint a picture with words. The reader must clearly make sense of what you intend to do. 3. Winning proposals present the material in a logical manner. Sections are clearly identified and a parallel structure is maintained. Each need has a stated objective, activity, and evaluation statement. 4. Winning proposals are written in positive terms. Some writers believe that if you describe how bleak a situation is, someone will throw money at you to solve your problems. This is not true. Funders hedge their bets by backing proposals that describe worthwhile programs that will meet identified needs and match the criteria set forth by the grant-maker. 5. Winning proposals do not overuse educational jargon. Terms that are known only to educators are clearly defined. For example, "cooperative learning" has different connotations in different parts of the country. Define what you mean. Will a non-educator understand your proposal? 6. Winning proposals present detailed budgets that match the proposed program. All bases must be covered. If you are going to purchase hardware, have you purchased software? If you are going to buy software, what specific programs do you intend to purchase? If you plan to offer training, how much, and at what cost? 7. Winning proposals give something back. Some projects develop a product. The process you go through can become a product. Funders want others to adopt and adapt what you've learned. Dissemination of information or knowledge to others may give your proposal the winning edge. 8. Winning proposals follow all the guidelines specified in the Request for Proposal. If a scoring rubric or evaluation checklist is given to you, read it and follow those directions! 9. Winning proposals are professional looking. They are word-processed and simply presented. They are not bound in fancy leather covers with 12 different typefaces. Instead, winning proposals are presented according to the directions in the Request for Proposal. Most grant-makers want a signed original and several copies. Sign all materials in blue ink. This way the original can be clearly distinguished from the copies. 10. Winning proposals are not too short or too long. They tend to be as long as necessary to answer each and every question in the Request for Proposal. As a rule of thumb, use the scoring guidelines to determine length. For example, let's say the grant-maker wants the finished proposal to be no longer than ten pages. How long do you make each section? The guidelines may suggest you include an abstract, needs, activities, expected outcomes, evaluation plan, and a budget. If the scoring guidelines weight the evaluation section to be 20 percent of the final score, take that to mean that 20 percent, or two of the ten pages, should be devoted to evaluation. _________________________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Ernest M. Allen, Chief of the Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, published an article in which he discussed the short-comings of proposals rejected by his office. These, along with the percent of time a particular short-coming was the problem, are listed below (Percentages may total more than 100 because more than one item may have been cited for a particular program.) While this list is not very recent and does not specifically apply to foundation grants or Department of Education grants, almost all lists of shortcomings cite these same problems. A. Problem (58) percent 1. The problem is not of sufficient importance or is unlikely to produce any new or useful information. 33.1% 2. The proposed research is based on a hypothesis that rests on insufficient evidence, is doubtful, or is unsound. 8.9% 3. The problem is more complex than investigator appears to realize. 8.1% 4. The problem has only local significance or is one of production or control. . . . 4.8% 5. The problem is scientifically premature and warrants, at most, only a pilot study. 3.1% 6. The research involved as proposed is overly involved, with too many elements under simultaneous investigation. 3.0% 7. The description of the nature of the research and of its significance leaves the proposal nebulous and diffuse and without a clear research aim. 2.6% B. Approach (73 percent) 1. The proposed tests, or methods, or scientific procedures are unsuited to the stated objective. 34.7% 2. The description of the approach is too nebulous, diffuse, and lacking in clarity to permit adequate evaluation. 28.8 3. The overall design of the study has not been carefully thought out.14.7% 4. The statistical aspects of the approach have not been given sufficient consideration. 8.1% 5. The approach lacks scientific imagination. 7.4% 6. Controls are either inadequately conceived or inadequately described. 7. The material the investigator proposes to us is unsuited to the objective of the study or is difficult to obtain. 3.8% 8. The number of observations is unsuitable. 2.5% 9. The equipment contemplated is outmoded or otherwise unsuitable. 1.0% 4. Investigator (55 percent) 1. The investigator does not have adequate experience or training for this research. 32.6% 2. The investigator appears to be unfamiliar with recent pertinent literature or methods. 13.7% 3. The investigator's previously published work in this field does not inspire confidence. 12.6% 4. The investigator proposes to rely too heavily on insufficiently experienced associates. 5.0% 5. The investigator is spreading himself too thin; he will be more productive if he concentrates on fewer projects. 3.8% 6. The investigator needs more liaison with colleagues in this field or in collateral fields. 1.7% D. Other (16 percent) 1. The requirements for equipment or personnel are unrealistic. 10.1% 2. It appears that other responsibilities would prevent devotion of sufficient time and attention to this research. 3.0% 3. The institutional setting is unfavorable. 2.3% 4. Research grants to the investigator, now in force, are adequate in scope and amount to cover the purposed research. 1.5% _____________________________________________________________________________________________ How to Write Letters of Inquiry What should be included in a letter of inquiry? In recent years, letters of inquiry have become an important part of the fundraising process. Many foundations now prefer that funding requests be submitted first in letter format instead of a full proposal. Others are using preliminary letters of inquiry to determine if they have an interest in a project before accepting a full proposal. In either instance, it is important to recognize that a well-written letter of inquiry is crucial to securing funding for your project. An effective letter of inquiry is often more difficult to write than a full proposal. The letter of inquiry should be brief-no more than three pages-and must be a succinct but thorough presentation of the need or problem you have identified, the proposed solution, and your organization's qualifications for implementing that solution. The letter of inquiry should be addressed to the appropriate contact person at a foundation or to its CEO and should be sent by regular mail. Not unlike a grant proposal, the letter of inquiry should include: an introduction, a description of your organization, a statement of need, your methodology, a brief discussion of other funding sources, and a final summary. The introduction serves as the executive summary for the letter of inquiry and includes the name of your organization, the amount needed or requested, and a description of the project. The qualifications of project staff, a brief description of evaluative methodology, and a timetable are also included here. This should not exceed one paragraph. The organization description should be concise and focus on the ability of your organization to meet the stated need. Provide a very brief history and description of your current programs while demonstrating a direct connection between what is currently being done and what you wish to accomplish with the requested funding. You will flesh this section out in greater detail if you are invited to submit a full proposal. The statement of need is an essential element of the letter of inquiry and must convince the reader that there is an important need that can be met by your project. The statement of need includes: a description of the target population and geographical area, appropriate statistical data in abbreviated form, and several concrete examples. The methodology should be appropriate to your statement of need and present a clear, logical and achievable solution to the stated need. Describe the project briefly, including major activities, names and titles of key project staff, and your desired objectives. As with the organization description, this will be presented in far greater detail in a full proposal. Other funding sources being approached for support of this project should be listed in a brief sentence or paragraph. The final summary restates the intent of the project, affirms your readiness to answer further questions, and thanks the potential funder for its consideration. Note: attachments should be included only at the direction of the potential funder and should be specific to its application guidelines. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Step-by-Step: Grant Budgets Made Easier Step 1: Go to the Office of Research Services (ORS) web page. Step 2: Click on “Info for Proposals.” Step 3: Click on “Budget Info.” Step 4: Click on “Budget Calculations Sheets.” Step 5: Click on “Five Year Project Budget” and save to
a personal file. Step 6: When you are asked about the macros on the first sheet, answer YES! Step 7: You will begin filling out the form on the “Personnel, Equipment, Travel” page, which should be open. If the sheet isn’t open, click on the tab to open it. ________________________________________________________________ Step 8: Enter Project Name, Principal Investigator, and Unit through which the Proposal is submitted. Step 9: Select the Facilities and Administrative Costs basis from the pull-down list. Important General Information Total Direct Costs: all costs related directly to your project Facilities and Administration (F&A)/Indirect Costs: F&A costs
cover use of space, equipment, electricity, library, campus maintenance,
etc., Although not directly related to the completion of your project,
Facilities and Administrative costs represent real expenditures and
costs paid by the university. However, if anything less than 46% is recovered in Indirect Costs,
the reduced rate generally is calculated on Total Direct Costs, unless
the funding agency stipulates otherwise. • If you propose to receive funds from a business or for-profit entity, the university will expect to receive 46% of Modified Total Direct Costs in F&A. If the for-profit sponsor will not pay full indirect costs, the project will be classified as “Voluntary Reduction of F&A,” and the research incentive award to the college will be penalized. The current penalty is 25% of the difference between F&A received and what total F&A should have been. Please be aware that typical F&A costs in business and industry exceed 200%. Step 10: Fill in the On-Campus and Off-Campus cells as necessary, changing them as needed. (Off-campus work is COMPLETED at a location NOT considered Texas Tech Property.) See READ ME page for more details. Step 11: Enter the budget period start and end dates. The end date is one day before the next year begins: 09/01/03 through 08/31/04. Step 12: Fill out the Fringe Rates, Insurance and Tuition and Fees cells and change the figures that are provided if necessary. Call either the Office of Grant Development or Research Services for any rate changes For example, FY 2004 projections for insurance costs are $424 per month and $3,408 for tuition and fees, not the figures given at the time this document was completed. Also, rates are always subject to change. Please call Grant Development or Research Services for confirmation. Step 13: Enter the names, positions and titles of personnel, one per line; the amount of time to be spent on the project; and the percentage of time to be spent on the project. ______________________________________________________________________ In order to complete Step 13, you will need to fill in the following: ________________________________________________________________ Step 14: For personnel working on the grant but getting no salary, enter 0% in all spaces. Step 15: If graduate students or other students are to work on the project, fill in those spaces. ________________________________________________________________ Step 16: Complete the capital acquisitions section if applicable. Step17: Complete the travel section, being as specific as possible.
The Feds require this. Call OGD for per diem rates.
________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Step 19: Check all sums carefully as sometimes gremlins interfere with correct calculations. Step 20: Check both your yearly summary pages and your project “Summary” page carefully. Step 21: If calculations are not correct, screech for help!
|
|||||
| Home|
Newsletter| Resource
Faculty |Services| Policies
| |