International Environmental Health Conference

1
International Environmental Health Conference

• Presented by
• John S. Petterson, Ph.D.
• Director, Sequoia Foundation
• Sponsored by
• Shanghai Health Bureau
• Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control
  Prevention
• California Department of Health Services
• Environmental Health Investigations Branch
• National Institutes of Health, Fogarty
  International Program
• Sequoia Foundation
• Shanghai, Peoples Republic of China
  April 6-8, 2004

2
Overview of Presentation

• Sources of Money (Tom Kelly)
• Kinds of Requests (RFP, unsol., invited)
• Purpose of the Proposal
• Components of Proposal and Weighting
• Structure of Proposal
• Preparing a Budget
• Proposal Review Process
• Award Process
• Managing and Administering Grant

3
Sources of Money

• Tom Kelly

4
Purpose of the Proposal

• To win

5
Kinds of Requests for Proposal

• Many names for money is available
• Unsolicited Proposals
• Requests for Proposals (RFP)
• Specific Area
• General Areas Quarterly/Annually
• Requests for Applications (RFA)
• Granting Agency or Foundation Areas of Interest
  
• Contracts

6
Components of the Request for Proposals

• Purpose of this RFA
• Research Objectives
• Mechanism of Support
• Funds Available (expected award level)
• Eligible Institutions
• Individuals Eligible to be Principal
  Investigators
• Special Requirements
• Where to Send Inquiries
• Letter of Intent
• Submitting an Application
• Peer Review Process
• Review Criteria
• Award Criteria

7
Components of the Proposal

• Face Page
• Description, Performance Sites, Key Personnel
• Table of Contents
• Detailed Budget (Initial Budget Period)
• Budget for Entire Proposed Period of Support
• Biographical Sketch Format Page ( Sample)
• Resources
• Research Plan
• Human Subjects
• Appendix.
• Checklist.
• Personal Data

• FORM PHS 398 http//grants.nih.gov/grants/fundin
  g/phs398/phs398.htmlforms

8
Components of the Research Plan

• Specific Aims (1 page)
• Background and Significance (2-3 pages)
• Preliminary Studies (6-8 pages)
• Research Design and Methods (remainder of 25
  pages)
• Literature Cited (not counted in
  total pages)
• Appendix (additional materials, not counted in
  total pages)

9
Specific Aims

• Larger long-term goal
• Specific objectives to be accomplished
• Solve a specific problem?
• Test a specific hypothesis?
• Create new methods?
• Develop new technology?

10
Background and Significance

• Background leading to present application
• Critical review of existing knowledge
• Identification of data or analytic gaps to be
  filled
• Importance and health relevance of the proposed
  research

11
Preliminary Studies

• Prior studies of pertinence completed by proposed
  P.I
• Information reflecting experience and competence
  of the specific investigator to pursue the
  proposed project.
• Likelihood of project success (information
  considered essential by Review Committee)

12
Research Design and Methods

• Describe the research design and procedures to be
  used to accomplish the specific aims
• How data will be collected, analyzed, and
  interpreted
• Data sharing plan as appropriate
• Describe any new methodology and its advantage
  over existing methodologies
• Discuss the potential difficulties and
  limitations of the proposed procedures and
  possible alternative approaches
• Schedule or timetable
• Identify any procedures, situations, or materials
  that may be hazardous to staff or subjects
  precautions to be employed

13
Budget Design-1

• PERSONNEL
• Name
• Role on Project
• Type of Appointment/Months
• Percent of Effort on Project
• Institutional Base Salary
• Salary Requested
• Fringe Benefits
• Total

14
Budget Design-2

• CONSULTANT COSTS
• EQUIPMENT (Itemize)
• SUPPLIES (Itemize by category)
• TRAVEL
• OTHER EXPENSES

15
Proposal Review Process

• Who reviews the proposals?
• What are they looking for?
• Preliminary screening
• Reviewer principles finding the most
  important proposal, most likely to succeed
• 50,000 federal grants/year, 4 reviewers (minimum)
  each
• Each reviewer must evaluate many proposals
  really seeking easy or obvious reasons to
  eliminate proposals

16
General Principles-1

• Objective is to WIN
• Assume YOU are doing the evaluation
• Most important component is the so what? --
  why is this project worth funding?
• Make your case clearly, confidently !
• Everything counts attention to detail
  critical all components must function as
  integrated whole
• The first grant is the hardest!

17
General Principles-2

• Funders looking for reason NOT to give you the
  money (i.e., very competitive)
• Is the project important?
• Is it doable as presented?
• Is this team capable of doing it?
• What is the likelihood of success?
• Technical approach methods
• Personnel expertise mix proven ability to
  complete projects
• Management indicators