# Presentation: 247766

## SBIR/ STTR Grant Writing for Success  Anthony M. Coelho, Jr., Ph.D.Review Policy OfficerOffice of the Director, NIHOffice of Extramural Research

## The handout material is a reference resource 

**The handout contains more information than I will cover **
**Information that is important is repeated to remind you that it is important**

## Good Grantsmanship

**Understand Peer Review**
**Secure collaborators for areas in which**
**	****	****you lack experience and training **
**There are no competitors in science,****	****there are only potential collaborators.**
**Grant writing is a learned skill**
**Grantsmanship is a full time job**
_**You are in control of your life**_

**Good Grantsmanship**
**Principles for Success:**

## Understanding the Agency Mission

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Slide 8

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## Identify NIH Staff who can help you

**Identify NIH Staff who can help you**

## Identify NIH Staff who can help you

**Identify NIH Staff who can help you**

## Identify Mission Priorities

**Identify Mission Priorities**

## Slide 16

## NIH GRANT$

-  =

- +

- +

- +

- +

- +

**Formula for Grant Success**

**NIH GRANT****$**

## Elements of Grant Success

**Elements of Grant Success**

**Good Ideas**

**Good Timing**

**Good Presentations**

**Good Reviewers**

**Good Luck**

**Good Grantsmanship**

## Good Idea

**Good Idea**

**SIGNIFICANT?**
**Does it address an important problem?**
**How will scientific knowledge be advanced**?
**INNOVATIVE?**
**Builds upon or expands knowledge base**
**Capable of making a difference**
**UNDERSTANDABLE?**

## Are These Good Ideas?

**Are These Good Ideas?**

**Develop a vaccine to prevent HIV infection**
**Develop a method to prevent HIV from replicating or mutating**
**Produce a drug that will raise HDL and lower LDL without any toxic side effects**
**Produce a drug that will lower blood pressure without any side effects**

## Good Timing

**Good Timing**

**  ****Will the idea be understood by others?**
**  ****Does it build upon existing knowledge?**
**  ****Does it build upon similar ideas?**
**  ****Do you have preliminary data? **
**  ****How will the idea be received?**

## Good Presentation

**Organize the Application**
**  ****What do you want to do?**
**  ****Why do you want to do it ?**
**  ****How are you going to do it?**
**  ****What is the expected outcome?**
**  ****Why is it a good thing?**

**Good Presentation**

## Good Presentation: Organize the Application

**  ****Develop a logical outline (presentation sequence) **
**  ****Use Section Heading**** -  help reviewers “find things” **
**  ****Use both major and minor section headings**
**  ****Make it easy for reviewers**** - Don’t make them work **
**  ****Use a detailed table of contents**
**  ****Do everything to help reviewers:**
**	****Understand your idea, **
**	****Why it is important and **
**	****Why it is reasonable and feasible**

## Good Presentation

**Address Review Criteria:**** **
**	****	****Significance**
**	****	****Approach**
**	****	****Innovation**
**	****	****Investigator**
**	****	****Environment**

## Good Presentation: Address Review Criteria

**(1) SIGNIFICANCE:**
**Does the proposed project have commercial potential to lead to a marketable product or process? **
**What may be the anticipated commercial and societal benefits of the proposed activity?**
**If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?**
**Does the proposal lead to enabling technologies (e.g., instrumentation, software) for further discoveries?**
**Will the technology have a competitive advantage over existing/alternate technologies that can meet the market needs?**

## (2) APPROACH
Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project?
Is the proposed plan a sound approach for establishing technical and commercial feasibility?
Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative strategies?
Are the milestones and evaluation procedures appropriate?

**Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project?**
**Is the proposed plan a sound approach for establishing technical and commercial feasibility?**
**Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative strategies?**
**Are the milestones and evaluation procedures appropriate?**

**Good Presentation:**** ****Address Review Criteria**

## Good Presentation: Address Review Criteria

**(3) INNOVATION:****  **
**Does the project challenge existing paradigms or employ novel technologies, approaches or methodologies?**
**Are the aims original and innovative?**

## (4) INVESTIGATOR:  
Is the Principal Investigator capable of coordinating and managing the proposed SBIR/STTR ? 
Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the Principal Investigator and other researchers, including consultants and subcontractors (if any)?
Are the relationships of the key personnel to the small business and to other institutions appropriate for the work proposed?”  

**Is the Principal Investigator capable of coordinating and managing the proposed SBIR/STTR ? **
**Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the Principal Investigator and other researchers, including consultants and subcontractors (if any)?**
**Are the relationships of the key personnel to the small business and to other institutions appropriate for the work proposed?”**

**Good Presentation:**** ****Address Review Criteria**

## Good Presentation: Address Review Criteria

**(5) ENVIRONMENT:****  **
**Is there sufficient access to resources (e.g., equipment, facilities)? **
**Does the scientific and technological environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success?**
**Do the proposed experiments take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful collaborative arrangements?**

## Good Reviewers

**Good Reviewers**

**Reviewer****        ****Good Reviewer**
** ****Organize and make reviewers “Happy”**
** ****Make it easy for them to understand things**
** ****Make it easy for them to find things**
** ****Make it easy for them to be your advocate**
** ****Don’t make them “work hard”**

## Good Luck

**The consequence of:**
** ****Good Ideas**
** ****Good Presentation **
** ****Good Timing**
** ****Good Reviewers**
** ****Good Grantsmanship**

## COMMUNICATE WITH NIH

**Program Staff **
**Review Staff**
**Grants Management Staff**

## COMMUNICATING WITH NIH

**Before Submitting, Call Institute Program Staff**
**Assess scientific interest and match**
**What do they want to fund?**
**Submit Your Application With a Cover Letter**
**Institute interest**

## COMMUNICATING WITH NIH

**CONTACTS WITH REVIEW STAFF****  **
**Scientific Review Administrator**** answers**
**Questions about the review process **
**Format and structure of application**
**“****Oops” missing material or late material**

## AFTER REVIEW, CONTACT PROGRAM STAFF
Institute Program Administrator
Questions about the discussion of your application (after you have summary statement)
Scores and percentiles
Questions about the fundability of application

**Institute Program Administrator**
**Questions about the discussion of your application (after you have summary statement)**
**Scores and percentiles**
**Questions about the fundability of application**

_**COMMUNICATING WITH NIH**_

## COVER LETTER

**Suggest Institute(s) For Potential Funding**
**Suggest Key Areas of Expertise Required**
_**Do Not**_** Suggest Specific Reviewer Names**

## COVER LETTER

**For Revisions, Indicate Review History**
**Request Same Or Different Study Section**
**Provide Justification for your request**
**Don’t be Argumentative ! **
**Don’t be Abrasive !**

## REVISING & RESUBMITTING

**Write A Clear Introduction Section**
**Address All Criticisms Thoroughly**
**Respond Constructively**
**Accept the Help of Reviewer Comments**
**Don’t Be Argumentative !**
**Don’t be Abrasive !**

## REVISING & RESUBMITTING

**Update Preliminary Results**
**Remember that Properly Revised**
**	****    ****applications can received**
**	****    ****fundable scores and subsequent ****$$**
**Maintain communications with **
**       ****Scientific Review Administrator**
**       ****and Program Administrator**

## DO’S AND DON’TS

**Do**** Pursue original science.  This is an area that study sections are most concerned about.  **
**Do**** Provide a well focused research plan.  **
**Do not****  let your ideas wander from the main theme.**

##  DO’S AND DON’TS (2)

**Provide a critical approach to project. **
**Discuss potential problem areas and alternative approaches. **
**Never assume that the reviewers will know what you mean.**
**Be explicit. **

## DO’S AND DON’TS (3)

** ****Read the application instructions carefully.**
** ****Read the application instructions carefully.**
** ****Read the application instructions carefully.**

## DO’S AND DON’TS (4)

**Read the application instructions carefully.**
**They may seem overwhelming but the effort is worth it and could spell the difference between success and failure. **
**Supply sufficient detail.  **
**Stay within the page limitations.**
**If you don’t understand something in the instructions ask for help .**
**Call the SRA call the PA.**

## DO’S AND DON’TS (5)

**Do Secure collaborators for areas of research in which you lack experience and training. **

## Point of View

**There are no competitors in science,**
**There are only potential collaborators.**

## BEFORE YOU SUBMIT AN APPLICATION

**Show your application to a colleague**
**Show you application to a colleague who knows little to nothing about your area of research and ask them if they understand**
**What you are proposing to do?**
**How you are proposing to do it? **
**Why you are proposing to do it?**** **
_**If they do not understand Revise until they do**_** **
**Get feedback on clarity **
**Get feedback on scientific merit**

## AFTER REVIEW IS OVER

**The Program Administrator at the Institute to which your proposal was assigned is the new contact point. ****Wait for the Summary Statement**
**Address any concerns on review to them.**
**Appeal letters are appropriate only if review was flawed (legal and procedural). **
_**More constructive**_** use of your energy is amending and resubmitting the application and incorporating reviewer comments.**
_**Do not take the review comments personally.**_

## IF YOU RESUBMIT

**Answer previous critiques completely**
**Supply an introduction section which explains the changes you have made**
**Leave your irritations with the review out of your resubmission **
**Don’t argue or be hostile**
**You will not be help yourself if you force the study section into a defensive posture**
**Accept Reviewers helpful comments and suggestions**

## IF YOU RESUBMIT

**Remember that the study section will have the previous summary statement, but not the previous application. **
**Do not refer to the previous application for details**.
**Remember that reviewers are generally trying to help you become a better research scientist**

## Resources

## Slide 51

## Hints for Writing Successful NIH grants

**Prof. Ellen Barrett**
**Department of Physiology and Biophysics**
**University of Miami School of Medicine**
**October, 1995**
- http://chroma.med.miami.edu/research/Ellens_how_to.html

## Slide 53

## Slide 54

## Sites with important information:

**Sites with important information:**
- _[http://grants.nih.gov/grants/index.cfm](http://grants.nih.gov/grants/index.cfm)_
- _http://grants.nih.gov/grants/welcome.htm#introduction_
- _[http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/funding.htm](http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/funding.htm)_
- _[http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/extra/extdocs/grantrevprocess.htm](http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/extra/extdocs/grantrevprocess.htm)_
- _http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm_
- _[http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/charts/default.htm](http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/charts/default.htm)_
- _http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/glossary/default.htm_

## How to Write a Grant Application

_**http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/**_
_**http://www.nnlm.nlm.nih.gov/scr/edn/grants-resources.htm**_
_**http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/grant_tips.htm**_
_**http://www.nigms.nih.gov/funding/tips.html**_
- _[http://www.nigms.nih.gov/funding/moregrant_tips.html](http://www.nigms.nih.gov/funding/moregrant_tips.html)_
_**http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/EXTRA/EXTDOCS/gntapp.htm**_
- _[http://chroma.med.miami.edu/research/Ellens_how_to.html](http://chroma.med.miami.edu/research/Ellens_how_to.html)_
- _[http://www.cfda.gov/public/cat-writing.htm](http://www.cfda.gov/public/cat-writing.htm)_
- _[http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/research/writing.htm](http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/research/writing.htm)_

## How to Write a Grant Application

**How to Write a Grant Application**

## Slide 58

## Slide 59

## Slide 60

## The “Other” Ten Commandments

**The “Other” Ten Commandments**

## STUDY SECTIONS DO NOT FUND !

_**INSTITUTES FUND!**_

**Rule #1 **

## You must satisfy the needs of reviewers and the needs of the funding agency

**Rule #2 **

## Rule #3 

**Rule #3 **

## Rule #4 

**Rule #4 **

## Rule #5 

**Rule #5 **

## Rule #6 

**Rule #6 **

## DO NOT write the application for the “Specialist”You MUST convince the entire review committee

**Rule #7 **

## DO NOT write the application for Yourself unless you are going to fund it yourselfYou MUST convince the entire review committeeand the funding agency

**Rule #8 **

## Secure collaborators for areas of research in which you lack experience and training and who can complement your skills.Let them help you prepare the best possible application

**Rule #9 **

## Secure a mentor or mentors who can help you succeed

**Rule #10 **

## NIH GRANT$

-  =

- +

- +

- +

- +

- +

**Formula for Grant Success**

**NIH GRANT****$**

## Grantsmanship

*******Knowing + Understanding**
-  What to do
-   How to do it
-   When to do it
-   What to do when things don’t go as planned
*******Being willing to do what is needed**
*******Doing it- doing what is needed**

**Grantsmanship**

**Understanding Peer Review**

## NIH GRANT$

-  =

- +

- +

- +

- +

- +

**Formula for Grant Success**

**NIH GRANT****$**

## Thank You