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