Not Funded - Now What? Jackie Davis, MA, CRA Associate Director, Pre-Award Operations

advertisement
Not Funded Now What?
Jackie Davis, MA, CRA
Associate Director, Pre-Award Operations
Agenda
 Review Process
 Learning from Reviewer Comments
 Become a Reviewer!
 Questions
(Typical) Review Process
 Orientation Session
 Prior proposal review & comments
 Round 1 (submitted scores & discussion)
 Round 2 (revised scores & discussion)
 Funding decision
It’s not like this…we promise!
Not Funded? First Steps…
 If not initially provided, request reviewers’
comments.
 If still not provided, request debriefing, if at all
possible.
 Share comments and notes with SPA, your Chair,
and others. These comments/conversations will
help as you decide if/how to revise your
proposal.
Learning from Reviewer
Comments
 Note: frequent reviewer comments are
summarized in the following slides. These are
quite usual in revision proposals for resubmission –
and can also be beneficial in preparing a new
proposal.
Learning from Reviewer
Comments
Sponsor Fit
 Did it support both the mission of the sponsor and
the specific program you are applying for?
Tips
 Review the mission of the sponsor and their
purpose for the program – even the legislation on
federal or state opportunities. Contact the
sponsor in regards to suitability.
Learning from Reviewer
Comments
Communication
 Reviewers can be distracted by typos, poor
grammar, or an unclear narrative outline. They also
notice when the proposal language is not clear or
concise.
Tips
 Follow the guidelines!
 Have colleagues review your proposal – both inside
and outside your field. SPA does have funding
available for external reviewers, if requested.
Learning from Reviewer
Comments
Idea / Conceptual Analysis
 Reviewers often cite the PI for not providing
enough the thought process behind the research
plan or for not including potential obstacles and
contingency plans.
Tips
 Conduct a thorough lit review
 Demonstrate how your project fits into the
broader picture.
Learning from Reviewer
Comments
Work Plan / Methodology
 Reviewers are looking for:
 How, when, and by whom the work will be done
 How the data will be analyzed
 The necessary skills and resources are available to
complete the research
Tips
 Review your project, step-by-step, and be realistic
about your timeline.
 Ensure you have the proper expertise
 Be sure your work plan has the proper controls and
analysis.
Additional Tips
 Understand the review criteria
 How are the points/percentages applied?
 What are reviewers look for on each criterion?
 Do your budget and narrative match?
 Are your budget requests addressed and justified in
your narrative? Does your narrative describe needs you
are not requesting?
 Are your other proposal package materials
relevant, beneficial, and complete?
 CV/Biosketch: Does it fully describe your qualifications?
 Letters of support v. Letters of commitment
 Revise and Resubmit!
Become a Reviewer!
Note: you don’t have to have been funded by a sponsor to be
a reviewer!
 Professional association/listserv communications.
 Make connections with sponsor staff and reviewers at
conferences.
 NSF: Email the Program Officer / Program Director who
oversees the Directorate or specific program of interest.
 NIH: [email protected]
 US Dept of Ed / IES: Email Program Officers; G5 system utlized
 Have a short CV or biosketch ready to share that highlights
your qualifications and expertise in that specific area.
Questions?
Jackie Davis
[email protected] | 5-1607
Download