1. MANAGING GRANT OPPORTUNITIES & NURTURING FACULTY NETWORKS MICHELLE MELIN-ROGOVIN NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY MICHELLE SCHOENECKER UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MILWAUKEE April 18, 2012

2. Who We Are  What we bring to this presentation:  Institution roles  Agency expertise  Academic environment and the faculty we serve

3. Overview  Knowing Your Faculty Member  Early-Stage (not tenured)  Experienced (tenured)  Shaping the Idea  Let’s Talk Data  Connecting People and Projects  Targeting the Right Opportunities  Identification strategies  Best practices

4. Challenges We Face  Economic Environment  Department funding to cover faculty salary between grants is scarce  Investigators struggle to fund research personnel  Harder for junior faculty to jump on the research track  Experienced faculty are not renewed  Funding Announcements  “Transformative,” “Significant,” “Revolutionary”  Calls to collaborate and maximize funding

5. Challenges We Face  Early-Stage Faculty jump the shark  Experienced Faculty rely on what works without following changes in practice and policy

6. Total R&D by Federal Agency: 2013 Request DOD: $72.1 Billion NSF: $5.9 Billion HHS (NIH: $31.4 Billion) Source: NSF Grants Conference, 2012 DOE: $11.9 Billion NASA: $9.6 Billion TOTAL: $140.8 Billion

7. Knowing Your Faculty Member

8. Where Do I Start?  Stage of research career  Experience with conducting research studies  Proposal development experience  Research interests  How well developed are these interests?  Keywords  Publications  Research ideas  Data supporting research ideas

9. Faculty Profile Review

10. Other Sources  Literature  PubMed  Biosketch  Important for early stage investigators with few publications  One-on-One Interview  Research and funding goals  Create keyword list  Lab tour

11. Early-Stage Faculty  Inexperienced  Unfamiliarity with funding sources and programs that benefit early-stage investigators  Little to no proposal development experience  Anecdotal knowledge (my colleague/advisor said…)  Highly Motivated  Must get tenure = must apply for everything  Shoot at everything and hope to hit something  Need strategic planning/mentoring

12. Experienced Faculty  Been Around the Block  Established funding track record  Established contacts (colleagues, program officers)  Familiar with federal/private funding sources and programs, but don’t keep up with changes  Seek Sustainability  Sustain current projects  Seed funding for new projects  Leverage expertise in large-scale grant projects

13. Helping Faculty Shape the Idea  Junior Faculty  Type of Data Do you have enough data? Applying in the right place? Is it prelim or more advanced?  Scope of Project Seed funding or other How many aims/objectives vs. years Budget

14. Helping Faculty Shape the Idea  Collaborators What are they contributing Experience level  Effort Current commitments

15. Helping Sr. Faculty Shape the Idea  Senior Faculty  Type of “Data” Are you pushing the envelope? Are you doing the “same old thing”? What’s new and innovative? What are the new questions to examine? Are you publishing?

16. Helping Sr. Faculty Shape the Idea  Finding a Collaborator  Maximizes intellectual capital  Maximizes laboratory/facility resources  Interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary perspectives  Increases competitiveness  Program requirement

17. Connecting People & Projects  Tools  Proposal/sponsor workshops (internal/external)  Faculty referrals  Program officers  Databases

20. Targeting the Right Opportunities

21. Know the Sponsors  Know your faculty members’ primary sponsors and programs  NIH, NSF, NASA, DOE  Early investigator/career; mentored; pilot/seed funding; clinical trials; centers/institutes  Investigate unlikely sponsors  DoD funds medical research  NIH funds polymer research for drug applications  NSF and DoD fund large-scale instrumentation for non-clinical applications

22. Use Data to Plan Submissions to Build Research Portfolio Stage of Project/IdeaExperience of FacultyTarget for Funding Developing Pilot Data to support research idea New to conducting this research study, or new to research in general Internal or foundation funding if PI has experience in conducting research Data supports research idea, ready to apply for preliminary study Some research experience with this idea; early stage investigator Foundation funding, K-award Data supports research idea, ready to apply for preliminary study Some research experience with this idea; more experienced investigator (PI) R-03, R-21 Successful research supports preliminary hypothesis, has a full 5 year study Contact PI leads studyR01, Center grant, U mechanism, etc. Renewal/Multi-site study

23. Opportunities Based on Role, Funding Offered (Type of Grant) Contact Principal Investigator Principal Investigator on a Pilot Study/Early Phase Trial Principal Investigator on a multi-PI plan (not the contact PI) Co-Investigator Opportunity to think strategically about developing the experience of the faculty member in light of the project, the science, and the funding mechanism (dollars).

24. Identification Strategies  Go to the well (manual searching) or turn on the faucet (auto-aggregation/notification services)?  Benefits of the well Allows for very refined/granular search May find links/references to new sources Increased knowledge/familiarity with sponsor Better organization  Drawbacks of the well Can be very time-consuming Difficult for busy offices/departments

25. Identification Strategies  Benefits of the faucet  Receive notices from the agencies/orgs of your choice  Set parameters once and change as needed  Faster and easier to sift through a collection of opportunities  Repetition can help make sure you didn’t miss important opportunities  Drawbacks of the faucet  Easy to put aside; easy to scan through too fast  Can be easy to miss a good match  Deadlines can be too close

26. Dissemination Strategies  Do not waste faculty members’ time  Send only relevant opportunities  Do not send too many, too often  Briefly summarize the most important information  Create a format that is easy to skim  Include links to full solicitation, program Web page, and other relevant sources  Solicit feedback often – are you providing the right kinds of opportunities?

27. Dissemination Strategies  Entice faculty members to read your information  Determine how they prefer to receive opportunities Visit a Web site? Receive an email or e-newsletter? All of the above?  Use language and formatting strategies (keywords, headers, boldface, underline, bulleted lists, numbering)  Use lots of white space to increase readability  Maintain standard format for consistency, familiarity

28. Dissemination Strategies  Provide ample lead time before the deadline  Keep track of deadlines Create a database, Excel spreadsheet, or other system  Keep a record of distributions E-mail folders Organize by faculty member, sponsor, month, etc.  Send Reminders Determine preferred frequency Remind yourself!

29. Mentoring Faculty

30. Using NIH RePORTER

31. Pinpointing Topics and Sponsors  Helping faculty pare down ideas to target sponsors  Use the RFA/guidelines to identify aims that are most responsive  Formulate budget to determine what’s doable  Ask the faculty member to consult mentor or peer to ask their opinion

32. Using NSF Award Search

33. Develop Strategic Plan UWM and UW System Grants National Science Foundation (NSF) National Institutes of Health (NIH) Other Federal Government Agencies Other Research Growth Initiative Due October 4, 2010 Fall Submission Windows: Aug. 15 – Sept. 23, 2010 Sept. 1 – Oct. 31, 2010 Sept. 7 – Oct. 7, 2010 R01 Submissions Oct. 5, 2010 Feb. 5, 2011 June 5, 2011 R01 Resubmissions Nov. 5, 2010 March 5, 2011 July 5, 2011 U.S. Dept. of Defense Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP) Note: 2011 deadlines TBD  CTSA October 29, 2010  CTSI K12 Mentoring December 1, 2010 Catalyst Grants  Announced in Jan. 2011  Pre-proposals due in March  Invited full proposals due in April  Fall 2011 dates not yet determined UW System Applied Research Program  Announced Sept.-Oct. 2010  Full proposal due Jan. 14, 2011 Spring Submission Windows: Jan. 7 to Feb. 7, 2011 Jan. 15 to Feb. 15, 2011 Feb. 1 – March 3, 2011 R21 Submissions Oct. 16, 2010 Feb. 16, 2011 June 16, 2011 R21 Resubmissions Nov. 16, 2010 March 16, 2011 July 16, 2011 Corporate Support Meet with Mike Krauski, Director of Corporate Relations krauski@uwm.edu 414-229-6772 krauski@uwm.edu Private Foundations (non-research grants): Meet with Anne Panter, UWM Development Office anpanter@uwm.edu or 414-229-3296 anpanter@uwm.edu CAREER Program Due July 20-23, 2011

34. Resources  Gathering Ideas  NIH Reporter  NSF Awards  Proposal Writing  Templates  Web sites  Collaborators

35. Thank you! Questions? Michelle Melin-Rogovin, M.A. Northwestern University m-melin-rogovin@northwestern.edu or 312-503-2856 Michelle Schoenecker, M.A. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee schoene7@uwm.edu or 414-229-4421