1. Strategies for Grant Applying Chris Wekerle, Ph.D. (cwekerle@uwo.ca)cwekerle@uwo.ca Faculty of Education August 25, 2008

2. Page 2 Perspective Points “PI-ing” has to start at some point and persistence in applying is one of the most important factors Future success is predicted by past success – creating a track record (travel grant, seed grants and more; collaborator status; co-investigatorship) and working with some established researchers are valuable There are specific calls for new researchers and a commitment to support a new generation of researchers There are more resources and people to support success – everyone wants you to succeed in getting, executing, publishing, and translating research – Reference: Smith, N.B. & Works, E. G. (2006). The Complete Book of Grant Writing. Naperville, IL: Sourcebook. Research is one way of knowledge creation and transmission and there are grant streams for all types - important to think process – feasibility study; pilot study; full- scale research study; model program; program development; literature reviews; partnering; field knowledge uptake, workshop and conference funding etc. Every researcher has defeat and victory stories; “good ideas will out” but there are “currency” and “chance” issues (i.e., topical trends; nature of review committee compilation etc.)

3. Page 3 Sweating the Big Stuff What is the research question? And what type is it? Theory-building/bootstrapping (PAR; framework) versus “mainstream”? Theory-driven? (Frameworks aren’t theory in reviewers’ world; theories often mean diagram to reviewers) Exploratory versus hypothesis-testing Stream-lined question is huge advantage – the simplest version of an addressable question – keeping it “simple & smart” Critical literature review, with some reference to area “classics” but also showing up-to-date, 2008 references; if area is under-developed still need to review in logical connector areas Literature review -  Theoretical and Empirical rationale for this study (“Thank God these researchers have come along to try to address this very question!) Any hard numbers pilot-type information is a huge advantage Label your study design Have a clear statistical/analytic plan even in Letters of Intent, with Power Analyses if doing quantitative work Measurement model flows from conceptual model with appropriateness to population/psychometrics Feasibility issues need to be addressed explicitly (can you get access to these Ss?; how many Ss are likely to consent? To respond?; do you have expertise on the team for all major aspects of the research? --  Can this research get done in the timelines identified?) Ethics is an important area to deal with whenever youth are Ss or dealing with privacy issues – get input in advance from your local ethics experts Knowledge translation is an important area; Partnering is important to demonstrate (Letters of Support – no “canned” template, specific reference to nature and level of commitment and where in process)

4. Page 4 Sweating the Small Stuff Typos & grammar (seriously!) Page ordering (checking multiple hard copies if that’s required) and page checking (some requirements are outside of on-line forms) Get onto the job of your cv for particular grant agency (it is a bigger job than you might imagine!) Format – sticking to guidelines (many reviewers will not read past page limit or appendices that aren’t allowed) Be “easy” on the reader (spacing, no jargon, any construct defined; LOA Formal writing style Signature page with right signatories (grants require institutional signatory; Letters of Intent may be different) Keeping everyone in the loop (the ROLA form)

5. Page 5 Potentially Useful Tips Read before, re-read during, and have everyone read Research Call For Proposals (RFPs) Study-developed measures should never be the means of capturing your main or primary outcomes Acquire a template of successful grant for targeted granting agency (Karen may have some available) Seek input from colleagues and resources (Karen helpful in research reviewing & ethics questions!) Do not hesitate to clarify any questions with your local research services (they process a lot of grants and appreciate the heads up for applying), as well as the agency Project Officer Use sub-headings that match grants call & guidelines of “how to apply” Use superscript for referencing to give you more space Have someone not in your area give you feedback for the outside perspective on understanding the logic and flow of your application Nothing should be new in the measurement section (i.e., prefaced in the introduction) Get active as a journal reviewer – many journals seek out graduate student reviewers – send an email to the editor/managing editor etc. Being a grant reviewer is helpful in developing your own grantspersonship Positive affirmations – “You can do it!” THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION – ANY COMMENTS/QUERIES…cwekerle@uwo.ca