Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Bernard Appiah, B.Pharm (Hons.) AuthorAID Graduate Assistant Texas A&M University Sri Lanka, March 2010 WRITING GRANT PROPOSALS: ADVICE.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Bernard Appiah, B.Pharm (Hons.) AuthorAID Graduate Assistant Texas A&M University Sri Lanka, March 2010 WRITING GRANT PROPOSALS: ADVICE."— Presentation transcript:

1 Bernard Appiah, B.Pharm (Hons.) AuthorAID Graduate Assistant Texas A&M University Sri Lanka, March 2010 WRITING GRANT PROPOSALS: ADVICE FROM A GRANT REVIEWER

2 OUTLINE  “ Anatomy” of a Grant Reviewer  “Physiology” of a Grant Reviewer  Some “Bitter Pills” From Grant Reviews  Summary and Conclusion

3 “ANATOMY” OF A REVIEWER Employment?  A reviewer is typically not employed to review grants.  Grant review is just a voluntary exercise. Time:  Reviewers “squeeze” their time.  I review grants after a day’s work, sometimes when I am relaxing on my bed!  A very poor grant proposal makes me sleep faster (Good for my body?)  An excellent grant proposal makes me stay awake (Bad for my body?)

4 “PHYSIOLOGY” OF A REVIEWER Proposal Summary  It’s my door: I enter the application through it. Proposal Goals Vrs Funders’ Goals  I make these goals face each other. I judge your goals on a SMART scale: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time- bound.  If they don’t match, an application is in trouble.  If they slightly match, an application begs me.  If they very much match, an application commands me.

5 “PHYSIOLOGY” OF A REVIEWER CONT’D Sitting in a Grant Application “Chair”  I look for background information that has more context (s). An application that makes claims without evidence (references) doesn’t help me.  I then evaluate ways applicants intend to achieve their objectives (methods), measure the objectives (evaluation), allocate money to meet the objectives (budget), and disseminate the findings.  A good application makes me sit comfortably.  A bad application makes me extra alert!

6 SOME “BITTER PILLS” FROM GRANT REVIEWS  CVs: Some CVs don’t fit in well with the application. Don’t give me a CV you wrote without this proposal in mind!  Lack of specific roles of applicants: Don’t tell me “X” is a team member. Oh yes! I already know from the application.  Not singing a funder’s song well: Good you know the funder’s song. But sing it well by introducing something special and “new”.  Goals that are not SMART

7 SOME “BITTER PILLS” FROM GRANT REVIEWS CONT’D  Budget: Some applicants do not match the budget and the activities together.  Collaboration: Effective collaboration with other researchers (or even students!) or stakeholders is often lacking.  Lack of research design: If you’d collect data—as measurement indicators—know that your proposal is a research. Know your research ethics!  Lack of editing: I don’t mark English, but poor English gives me more work!

8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION  A grant reviewer “squeezes” time and effort to help you and a funder, so help them too.  Know the song of the funder, and sing it well, so a reviewer could dance to your version.  Pay particular attention to the proposal summary.  Know that your proposal is research as long as you intend to collect some data to measure it.  Edit the application well before submission.  Command reviewers! Don’t beg them!

9 THANK YOU


Download ppt "Bernard Appiah, B.Pharm (Hons.) AuthorAID Graduate Assistant Texas A&M University Sri Lanka, March 2010 WRITING GRANT PROPOSALS: ADVICE."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google