Enhancing Competitiveness of Research Grants - Natural Sciences and Engineering Dr. Franceso Leri, Department of Psychology Dr. Monica Cojocaru, Department of Mathematics & Statistics  Dr. Cezar Khursigara, Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology 

BASIC GRANT WRITING: STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS GRAHAM TAYLOR SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING and MERRITT TURETSKY BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH HOW TO

Getting Ready (Pre-Writing) Reach out to the program officer. Most of them like to help junior researchers Read all the guidelines for the solicitation carefully Look at other people’s grants Ask peers (if you’re comfortable) to share their grant applications Participate in review panels (NSERC Discovery, NSF) Know your audience. Who is likely to review your proposal? Gather info related to budgeting (specific to U of G) Especially calculating benefits, etc. OK, so now you know what to apply for; you’ve talked to some partners and secured some matching funds. Now it’s time to sit down and work on the grant. But wait… what does a successful grant actually look like? Looking at other people’s (successful) grants will be much more informative than anything I can tell you in the next 10 minutes. Once you’ve written a few grants and prepared a few budgets, you can fall back to these as templates But getting started is not easy; a lot of the numbers are specific to the University of Guelph Information is often squirrelled away (e.g. benefit rates)

Additional Suggestions Know your due dates Know the Merit Indicators

Excellence of Researcher Assessment based on achievements demonstrated over the past six years Knowledge, expertise, and experience Grants, awards, invited talks, review articles, editorial/advisory boards, outreach, etc. Quality and impact of contributions to natural sciences and engineering (NSE) research Publications, conference presentations, patents, etc. Importance of contributions to researchers and end-users the extent to which the applicant’s work has advanced the field the extent of contributions to the development of standards or codes of practice

Excellence of Researcher In Most Significant Contributions All types of research contributions (from 2012-2018) including papers, posters, outreach, etc. Explain your role in collaborative research activities In CCV Recognitions including honors, prizes and awards, etc. Activities (international collaborations, administration, editorial, organizational review, KTT, etc.) Memberships including professional societies and service Contributions (publications, books, patents, etc.) Samples of research contributions Up to 4 attached with application

Merit of Proposal Know the guidelines and HIT all of them - from NSERC MANUAL Originality and innovation Significance and expected contributions to NSE research; - potential for policy- and/or technology-related impact: Clarity and scope of objectives Clarity and appropriateness of methodology Feasibility Extent to which the scope of the proposal addresses all relevant issues, including the need for varied expertise within or across disciplines: summary of recent progress in research activities related to the proposal; framing of the research with appropriate reference(s) to other relevant work in the field; consideration of relevant areas of knowledge and the applicant’s proposed approach to addressing research questions Gender and diversity, budget justification, potential overlap with currently held grants

Merit of Proposal – my view Originality and innovation Extent to which the scope of the proposal addresses all relevant issues, including the need for varied expertise within or across disciplines: summary of recent progress in research activities related to the proposal; framing of the research with appropriate reference(s) to other relevant work in the field; consideration of relevant areas of knowledge and the applicant’s proposed approach to addressing research questions Clarity and scope of objectives Clarity and appropriateness of methodology Feasibility Significance and expected contributions to NSE research; potential for policy- and/or technology-related impact: Gender and diversity, budget justification, potential overlap with currently held grants

Merit of proposal The Proposal should read like a paper Avoid overloading the objectives: Clear, fewer, but longer term ones, better than a cluttered list of many shorter term ones. Design a research program in your head before writing it on paper – if you could get the funds, it should take you 5 years to complete; Put your bibliography together first, before you start writing the proposal A well-designed program has related branches that advance one or two related larger ideas; the trainees’ projects should be woven into the design of objectives Avoid all typos, phrases that are too long, and overly repeating of certain words such as “novel”, “ exciting” and “extraordinary”

Merit of proposal Fine tune the amount of specialized details vs. writing to a broader scientific audience – YOU NEED BOTH The starting 2 paragraphs of your proposal should make clear What subarea you are a specialist in; What is the main idea(s) of your research plan Why is it novel How it contributes to advancing the field The total of trainees you plan to have over the grant If appropriate, job skills they gain on this research. The absolute top contributions you have that directly relate to your proposal. This gives a good clear foundation for the rest of the content, while optimizing the attention of the reader on the most important details of the proposal. The Proposal should read like a paper Avoid overloading the objectives: Clear, fewer, but longer term ones, better than a cluttered list of many shorter term ones. Design a research program in your head before writing it on paper – if you could get the funds, it should take you 5 years to complete; Put your bibliography together first, before you start writing the proposal A well-designed program has related branches that advance one or two related larger ideas; the trainees’ projects should be woven into the design of objectives Avoid all typos, phrases that are too long, and overly repeating of certain words such as “novel”, “ exciting” and “extraordinary”

Training of HQP Assessment is based on training over the past six years both: Past contributions to training Training environment HQP awards and research contributions Outcomes and skills gained by HQP Future plans for training Training Philosophy HQP Research Training Plan

Past contributions to the training of HQP Training environment participation and involvement of HQP in science outreach activities, interdisciplinary research, collaborations, and/or interaction with the private and public sectors (e.g., industry, government agencies, etc.) considerations of equity, diversity and inclusion in the training environment, refer to the Guide for Applicants: Considering equity, diversity and inclusion in your application. http://www.nserc- crsng.gc.ca/_doc/EDI/Guide_for_Applicants_EN.pdf

Past contributions to the training of HQP HQP awards and research contributions HQP collaboration in the applicant’s research contributions awards, scholarships and fellowships won by HQP Outcomes and skills gained by HQP progression of HQP into further studies or careers that have impact (in the NSE or not in the NSE) HQP completion of degree requirements within a reasonable amount of time

Future Plans for Training Training philosophy interactions with research personnel to ensure success intellectual involvement of HQP promotion of HQP participation in science outreach activities/professional development workshops, etc. promoting the participation of a diverse group of HQP HQP research training plan appropriateness of the level and mix of HQP how the work will contribute to the development of new skills/knowledge capacity of the researcher to supervise the proposed number and type of HQP

Other Important Considerations Budget justification Budget requested in DG is for different expenses than the ones supported (or to be supported) by other sources The DG proposal is distinct conceptually from research supported (or to be supported) by CIHR and/or SSHRC CCV Important to all sections of DG application Review, review, review Expert and non-expert