1. Making USDA grant submission more successful: A panelist’s perspective Brian S. Baldwin Dept. of Plant & Soil Sciences bbaldwin@pss.misstate.edu

2. Know where to look and look yourself

3. You must meet the solicitation objectives Is your project relevant to the solicitation? If you don’t know, or even if you think you know, ask Look at the score sheet in the RFP, and devote your time accordingly

4. Get to know the program specialist Email probably best Listen to the program officer Webinar for the RFP? Ask

5. The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria: What is the potential for the proposed activity to advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and 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?

6. A grant submission is like teaching. Tell them what you’re going to talk about Talk about it Tell them what you just said

7. State hypothesis/hypotheses Follow through Structure your document Exactly as the RFP structure it No free-form outline Follow instructions – absolutely Format all supplementary material the same

8. K I S S

9. Explain everything completely While reviewers are peers, their field will probably differ from yours Don’t try to do too much Makes grant difficult to read and understand If you’re up against the page limit, you ARE trying to do too much. Cut the project down.

10. Multiple locations/collaborators Are they necessary? Why are they included? Is the cooperator truly qualified? Is the location valid? Did you tell them why it was?

11. Pre-data Becoming more necessary USDA isn’t going to fund based on blind faith Reviewers want to know you know what you are talking about and there is the potential of successful outcomes NIFA Seed Grant SRI from MAFES/FWRC

12. Explain everything completely While reviewers are peers, their field will probably differ from yours Don’t try to do too much Makes grant difficult to read and understand If you’re up against the page limit, you ARE trying to do too much. Cut the project down.

14. Review Packet returned - negative

15. If at first you don’t succeed... Take the feedback and use it RESUBMIT