Toolkit for Finding Grants: Elements
for a Successful Grant Search
Office of Sponsored Programs
Raubinger Hall, Room 309
William Paterson University
973-720-2852
November 2015
The Office of Sponsored Programs
Primary Focus:
Proposals to government agencies, public charities
and professional/scholarly organizations
Support for research, teaching, community service,
public programs, creative endeavors, conferences,
other
Three Major Areas of Activity:
Pre-Award Services & Resources
Post-Award Services & Support
Compliance
Pre-award Services & Resources
Training by WPU and outside experts
Idea and project development
Funder identification
Proposal preparation guidance/assistance,
institutional review, submission
Publications:
Web site
Funding Opportunity Announcement emails
Support and encouragement:
University Research & Scholarship “Day”
Conferences, meetings with funding agencies
Step 1: Idea Development
• Develop terms that describe your project
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
Keywords related to your topic, area of interest
Outcomes
Type of activity
Location of activity
Who is involved in the activity
Necessary/obvious expenses
Facility or equipment needed to support activity
Scale of project
Step 2: Hunt!
• Database searches using your terms
▫ PIVOT
▫ GrantSearch
▫ Grants.Gov
• Other sources of information
▫
▫
▫
▫
Professional associations, conferences
ListServs, announcements
Grants Resource Center (GRC)
Agencies related to your discipline or idea
Step 3: Confirm Your Findings
• Talk through your ideas and potential funders
with others, unit leaders, OSP
• Study the sponsor and opportunity
• Contact the Program Officer
 Email introduction then conference call
• Gather support materials
 People/advisors
 Sample winning proposals
 Sponsor guides and “how to” materials
Review Criteria: Content
 The first and most important review issue is
Intellectual Quality/Merit/Significance:
 How will the project advance “knowledge and
understanding in its own field or across different
fields?” (NSF)
 Does it “address an important problem?” & “How will
scientific knowledge or practice be advanced?” (NIH)
 ”Is it “broadly conceived, based on sound scholarship,
and appropriately analytical?” (NEH)
 ” The extent to which the design of the proposed project
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice.” (US Dept of Education)
Review Criteria: Content
 The second most important review issue is
Potential Broader Impact
 On project participants (you, others; direct, indirect)?
 On the service/support environment/infrastructure of
your project, department, the University?
 Of the data or insights to be produced?
 Of how others will use the outcomes?
Dissemination
How will your project inform others doing similar
work?
Review Criteria: Technical
Was a Letter of Intent or Preliminary Proposal
Required?
Forms: Cover sheet, summaries, assurances
Format: Length, margins, font size, attachments
Organization: Specific sections in specific order
Special Requirements: Human Subjects, ADA
Letters of Commitment: Partners, Evaluators
 THESE ARE EASY EXCUSES TO REJECT
PROPOSALS
General Tips for Success
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Follow the directions/answer their
questions
Talk to the Program Officer
Fulfill their review criteria
Ask for what you need
Be thorough in describing the project
Do not do the project or writing alone
Schedule time to write
Start early to insure there is enough time
Everything must “fit together”:
Contact Information
Staff:
Martin Williams, Director
TBH, Assistant Director, Pre-Award Services
Maureen Peters, Program Assistant
Maria Slump, Post Award Coordinator
Stephen Hahn, Associate Provost
Office
Raubinger Hall 309
Fax: 973-720-3573
Webpage:
www.wpunj.edu/osp
EXT 3263
EXT 3794
EXT 2852
EXT 3895
EXT 2565