Logan D. A. Williams
  • Home
    • Navigate Website
    • Contact Logan
  • Research
    • Research Projects
    • Publication Repository
    • Photovoice Projects >
      • Photovoice Project - North Carolina
    • Research Assistants >
      • Recent Work with RAs
  • Consultancy Services
  • Recent News
  • Logan's Blog
  • Teaching
  • Knowledge from the Margins

Perfecting the Pitch for Research Funding

9/6/2015

0 Comments

 
On Wednesday June 3rd I attended the Michigan State University Academy for Global Engagement Fellowship Program public session (see http://vprgs.msu.edu/event/academy-global-engagement-fellowship-program-0). This public session was open to non-fellows (such as myself), and had two parts. In the first part, panelists discussed “Understanding Federal Funding, Congressional Appropriations, and Agency Priorities”, while in the second part they discussed “Establishing Relationships with Funders: How Do You Talk about Your Work in a Compelling and Intriguing Way so that Funders Listen and Remember?”

I wanted to take some time to process what I learned about grant writing so I decided to write about what I learned.

(1) Federal grants are driven by US governmental policy on different time scales. For grants from the Department of Defense’s Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency, the time-scale is long where presidential administrations come and go. However, DoD research agencies are unique in that their appropriations by the Executive branch’s Office of Management and Budget tend to be steady. For all other federal agencies, the time-scale is short (perhaps 2-3 years) and the appropriations are usually much more sensitive to various presidential administrations. This is why every couple of years you will see news articles about politicians attacking the research results of various social, behavioral and economic scientists funded through the National Science Foundation (see http://news.sciencemag.org/2013/04/nsf-peer-review-under-scrutiny-house-science-panel), or temporarily disabling programs such as political science at the NSF (conflict of interest anyone?, see http://www.nature.com/news/nsf-cancels-political-science-grant-cycle-1.13501) by taking away their funds. Why do these politicians feel as if they have the right to oversight of federally funded research – because that is a fact. (Although, I would definitely argue, as does the presidential science adviser John Holdren, that oversight is not equivalent to peer review; peer-review is much better at distinguishing the value of ‘basic science’ research projects, which as far as I know is still part of the mandate of NSF.)

(2) Most federal granting agencies are fulfilling policy objectives; thus your research must also fulfill these same objectives. John Albrecht (MSU) and Kitty Cardwell (USDA NIFA)  explain that at DARPA and the US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the projects attempt to ‘pull’ new innovations along exciting and novel directions. This means structured long-term technology innovation plans at DARPA. At USDA, Eric Trachtenberg (McLarty Associates) explains, the projects are market-driven by agricultural economics (is this cyclical I wonder?). In contrast, other federal funding agencies (e.g., the State Department’s US Agency for International Development, the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Institutes of Health Fogarty International Center, and the National Science Foundation’s Office of International Science and Engineering) are VERY responsive to the policy directions of the current administration.

(3) Considering that these agencies must demonstrate their relevance and value to the American public through Congressional oversight, they are very interested in research projects that clearly and explicitly articulate this relevance and value. That is not to say that they do not fund basic research. All of the above federal agencies emphasize basic research except for USAID says Lara Campbell (NSF OISE) and Michelle Jones (USAID). But the “broader impacts” statement at NSF (and its equivalent at the other agencies) is the necessary “icing” that makes the ingredients of the entire cake worth buying.

You will see the influence of governmental policy on the call for proposals (e.g., USDA’s grand challenges), but what is the next step to figure out the fit between what you want to do, and the solicitation? Some of the program officers suggested that a great next step is to actually contact them and give them a “15 minute pitch”. In the interest of conserving the time of the program officers and your own, instead of wandering through a vague exploration of your past research disappointments and future research fantasies, you might start with a clear cut outline of your proposed work.

(4) Communicating with the program officer for the solicitation is key to writing a good proposal. For those working on global research projects, a “clear cut pitch” is one that has realistic outcomes and tells a compelling story about what the agency will gain. Lara Campbell at the NSF OISE explains that such proposals have a viable timeline, are responsive to client needs (the country, institution, or project), and additionally are responsive to funder objectives including an emphasis on the uniqueness of your project. Michael Roth (Tetra Tech ARD) agrees that being responsive to client needs is very important and adds that any proposed innovations should be economically sustainable if being implemented in a poorly resourced region. Laura K. Povlich (NIH Fogarty) explains that being responsive to funder objectives means explaining the connection between your research and the solicitation clearly.

Let’s say you have done all of these things: you have picked a federal agency with a relevant solicitation that matches your research project; you understand the current political priorities that are driving the solicitation creation and have drafted your broader impacts statement accordingly; you have spoken with a program officer for 15 minutes about a feasible project that has unique data (and/or methods) and will incrementally build upon scientific knowledge, technology innovation, or international development. Certainly you will have to be more entrepreneurial than applying to just one funding agency. Time to do all of these steps over again for internal collaborative partners at your research institution and external non-governmental funders!

0 Comments
    Picture

    Author

    Logan primarily uses this blog to: reflect on policy and professionalization issues in STS (e.g. research funding, discipline formation, skill building, job-hunting, policy applications of STS theory) and to disseminate her own scholarship.


    Archives

    January 2021
    June 2017
    June 2015
    September 2013
    July 2013
    February 2013
    December 2012
    July 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    August 2010

    Categories

    All
    4s
    Adapt Science And Technology
    Agra-Alliance
    Arguing Better
    Asa
    ASA-SKAT
    Blogging
    Call For Papers
    Caorc Multi Country Fellowship
    CAORC Multi-country Fellowship
    Cleveland Oh
    Conference
    Coordination
    Creativity
    Crime
    Critical Thinking
    Cwwl Graduate Fellowship
    Dialogue
    Dublin
    Engagement
    Engineering Co-op
    Engineers
    Environment
    Environmental Economic Social Sustainability
    Environmental-Economic-Social Sustainability
    Federal Funding
    Gigiri Nairobi Kenya
    Gordon Research Seminar
    Graduate Programs In Sts
    Graduate Students
    Health
    Ibm
    India
    Information And Communications Technologies
    Innovation
    Institutions
    International
    Ireland
    Junior Professionals
    Kathmandu Nepal
    Kenya
    Knowledge From The Margins
    Laico Internship
    Learning As Process
    Local Global
    Local-global
    Low Income Communities
    Low-income Communities
    Madurai India
    Media Arts
    Mexico City Mexico
    Middle School
    National Science Foundation
    Natural Scientists
    Nepal
    New Delhi India
    New Haven Connecticut
    Open Spaces
    Periphery-center
    Planning
    Point Of View
    Policy Makers
    Policy-makers
    Post Docs
    Post-docs
    Poverty
    Publication
    Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
    Rpi
    Science And Technology Policy
    Science And Technology Studies
    Science From Below
    Sleeping
    Social Scientists
    Socoiology
    Sts
    Survey
    Teaching As Process
    Terminal 3
    Top Universities In The World
    Travel
    Triple Bottom Line
    Triple Helix
    Unep Internship
    Urban Development
    User As Producer
    U.S. House Of Representatives Committee On Appropriations
    Woods Hole Massachusetts
    Workshop
    Writing Faster
    Yale University

    Contributor For

    CWWL Graduate Fellows
    Passage International

    Academic Professionalism Blogs

    Get a Life, PhD
    Female Science Professor
    Savage Minds

    Women, Minorities & K-12 STEM Blogs

    RIFE
    Schooling Science
    3Helix

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly