2. “After years of extensive research, I have conclusively concluded that I need more grants.”

3.  Interest in Education

4.  Opportunities for entrepreneurship

5. Outline  Innovation Ecosystem  NSF  Selected Programs  Preparing NSF proposals Cal State Fullerton March 22, 2013

6. http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/index.html

8. People Resources Knowledge Policies Ideas Products/Markets Institutions

9. Stokes 1997

10.  NSF has programs to support all these stages  Need for integration across the scale e.g. Molecules to Marketplace Interdisciplinary Transformative Use-inspired Customer focused Training Practice Small Business Incubator Technology Transfer

11. Outline  Innovation Ecosystem  NSF  Selected Programs  Preparing NSF proposals Cal State Fullerton March 22, 2013

12. NSF NASA Defense DARPA, ONR, etc. Health and Human Services NIH, CDC, etc. Energy Office of Science, ARPA-E Commerce NIST, NOAA, etc Agriculture NIFA, ARS  An Independent Agency established in 1950  To promote scientific progress in the US by sponsoring scientific research and education in basic sciences and engineering  Current budget $7B  Does not conduct research itself.

14. Outline  Innovation Ecosystem  NSF  Selected Programs for supporting innovation pipeline  Preparing NSF proposals Cal State Fullerton March 22, 2013

15. Core Programs Special Solicitations RUI CAREER Innovation Corps SBIR STTR GOALI IUCRC Educational Grants REU and RET sites Instrumentation Graduate training grants ROA

16.  Core Programs Program announcements and solicitations  CAREER awards CAREER solicitation with deadlines in late July  EAGERs and RAPIDs Contact a program director before submitting  RUI proposals Primarily undergraduate institutions

17.  I-Corps Teams Teams of academic researchers, student entrepreneurs and business mentors--participate in the I Corps curriculum administered via online instruction and on-site activities  I-Corps Nodes Administer I-Corps curriculum  I-Corps Sites catalyze additional groups to explore potential I-Corps Team projects and other entrepreneurial opportunities that build on basic research.

18.  Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Proposals from the small business sector  Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) University researchers join forces with small businesses to spin-off their promising ideas.  Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI) For University-industry linkages

19. Outline  Innovation Ecosystem  NSF  Selected Programs  Preparing NSF proposals Cal State Fullerton March 22, 2013

20. How to change odds in your favor? By knowing the game well

21.  Proposal Review Administrative review Scientific review Funding Decisions  Preparing winning NSF proposals Strengths of highly competitive proposals Weaknesses observed in declined proposals  Concluding thoughts

22. Scientific Review Research & Education Communities Proposal Preparation and Submission Organization submits via: FastLane Or Grants.gov NSF Program Director Program Director Analysis &. Recom. Division Director Concur Via DGA Organization Minimum of 3 Reviews Required DGA Review & Processing of Award Proposal Review and Decisions NSF Proposal Generating Document Returned As Inappropriate/Withdrawn Mail Panel Both Award NSF Proposal & Award Process & Timeline Decline 90 Days6 Months 30Days Proposal Receipt at NSF DD ConcurAward Proposal Processing Unit NSF Administrative Review

23.  What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? encompasses the potential to advance knowledge  What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

24.  What is the potential for the proposed activity to: a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?  To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?  Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well- organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?  How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?  Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

25. Evaluated using the same criteria (review elements) but not equally weighted Science comes first! Relative weighting is very program-dependent

28.  Innovation and Creativity Potentially transformative projects  Breadth of research areas  Priority areas and systems  Demographics and Diversity  Broadening participation  Institutional impact- PUI, EPSCOR, etc.  CAREER Integration of research & education  International collaborations

29. 1.Idea: There is no substitute! Have a cutting edge idea 2.Written for the right audience 3.Written well

31.  What to look for: Goal of program or solicitation Eligibility Special requirements Deadlines  Where: www.nsf.gov Program Directors (phone, email)  NSF does not normally support research on human health and diseases Read the program description or solicitation carefully. MyNSF http://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/

33.  Getting funded  Convince reviewers that your proposal is THE one to support.

34.  “The proposed activity is going to be transformational.”  “The broader impacts are exceptional.”  “I wish I could be as productive and as creative as this PI”  “If you can fund only one proposal in this area, this is it!”  “Wow!”

35.  “Reading this proposal was a sheer torture.”  “This was a ludicrous proposal from a clueless PI.”  “This one put me to sleep every night!”  “My freshman students know better.”  “This PI wants to mow an old lawn, without a problem, originality, or track record of winning races.”  ”No way!”

36.  Know your audience. The reviewer may not be an expert in your specific field.  Think about the reviewers. Make the reviewer’s job easy. Write accurately, concisely, logically, and clearly.

38.  Read: NSF publications Successful proposals  Look before you leap: Serve as a reviewer (ad hoc or on a panel) Read successful proposals  Talk with people: Program Directors- general advice Former “rotators”

40.  Be aware of the scope: “Too ambitious” vs. “Too narrow”  Be honest and up-front: Address issues instead of trying to hide them Acknowledge possible experimental problems and have alternatives

41.  Make the best first impression. You never get a second chance to make a first impression. Project Summary and the first page of Project Description are critical.  Simplify and streamline: Make sure you get your overall idea across! Prepare clear photos, graphs, etc.  Pay attention to details: Spill check and proof-read Make the font size as big as you can

42.  Innovative and creative  Integration with research  Thoughtful plans ‘Will teach a course’ is not enough. Be careful about “will make it available on the web” K-12 educational plans- who will use them?  Evaluation /Assessment Critical component Find a collaborator

43.  Stay calm! Take ten… breaths, hours, days Examine the criticisms carefully  Keep in touch: E-mail, call, or visit your program director  Rapid resubmission does not help! Take time to self-evaluate the proposal and the project

44.  Problems with the Research Plan  Weak Broader Impacts  General Grantsmanship Problems

46.  Where are the notes from my college days? Limit your plans to routine teaching and training activities  And then there will be peace on the Earth. Propose unrealistic and over-ambitious goals  Research and education are apples and oranges. Integration of research and education is weak or uninspired.  Evaluation and Assessment? Foreign words to me!

47.  Poor Presentation Less than rigorous Unrealistic, sloppy or incomplete Unclear Incomplete expression of aims  Chair’s letter generic for CAREER proposals  RUI plans not strategically written  Unrealistic budget

48. What we covered so far  Review and funding decisions  Preparing proposals Proposal writing tips  Concluding thoughts

49.  What determines funding chances? Reviews Panel discussion NSF and Program Priorities Program Portfolio  Contact your program director Cultures, practices, and funding priorities vary across NSF  Solid science alone is not enough. Exciting, cutting edge science Innovative Broader Impacts Program priorities  Some luck and some planning.

50.  “Thou shalt propose a brilliant idea.”  “Thou shalt read Grant Proposal Guide and CAREER Solicitation.”  “Thou shalt strategize, network, and work from thy strengths.”  “Thou shalt address both review criteria!”  “Thou shalt seek help with proposal writing.”  “Thou shalt integrate education and research activities.”  “Thou shalt write for the right audience.”  “Thou shalt not irritate the reviewers.”  "Thou shalt not kill (with some exceptions).“  "Thou shalt not steal."

51. NSF on the web- An indispensable resource www.nsf.gov