1. Identifying Strengths and Weaknesses in Your Proposal
Angela V. Klaus, PhD
Proposal Consultant
Office of Research and Project Administration
Feb. 8th 2010

2. Strengths and Weaknesses
A strength is any quality of your proposal that catches the reviewers’ attention in a positive way
A weakness is any quality of your proposal that catches the reviewers’ attention in a negative way

3. Good vs. Competitive A Competitive Proposal is…
A good proposal is a good idea, well expressed, with a clear indication of methods for pursuing the idea, evaluating the findings, and making them known to all who need to know.
A Competitive Proposal is…
All of the above
Appropriate for the Program
Responsive to the PA or RFA

4. NIH Standard Review Criteria
1. Significance . Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
2. Approach . Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?
3. Innovation . Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
4. Investigators . Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
5. Environment . Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?

5. Additional Review Criteria
Some RFAs and PAs will have specific review criteria in addition to the standard criteria
Mechanisms other than R01 will have different additional criteria
READ THE ANNOUNCEMENT CAREFULLY

6. Review Criteria at a Glance

7. Never forget Your proposal is being read and judged by human beings
Make their job as easy as possible

8. Center for Scientific Review
If you are new to the peer
review process
Take time to read these
sections

9. Your proposal is being read and judged by human beings
Never forget
Your proposal is being read and judged by human beings
This is a good place to
check that your proposal
is being read by the
correct human beings

10. Easy things to address Avoid hyperbole Use good organization
Include hypothesis in your specific aims
(this might seem obvious, but I often see this mistake)
Proofread – sloppiness will count against you
Have a friend (a brutally honest one) read your proposal

11. Avoid hyperbole But don’t sell yourself short, either
Use language that indicates confidence,
but not arrogance, overconfidence or bravado
And on the opposite end of the scale
(Avoid the word “hope” when describing your expectations. Use “expect” or
“anticipate”)

12. Organize your proposal
Use section numbers/letters and bold headings
Your proposal should have a logical flow
You are telling a story, as well as articulating your science

13. Specific Aims
Include your hypothesis (be specific for each aim: “We hypothesize that…”
Spend a lot of time on the Specific Aims – this may be the only section most reviewers have time to read with full attention.
There is a good chance the bulk of the proposal will be scanned rather than read in detail

14. Specific Aims Think of the specific aims as the Executive
Summary of your proposal
Think of the reviewers as the very busy
executives with only enough time to read the summary.
The reviewers are the ones who decide to (a) score you or not, (b) what scores to give

15. Have an honest friend read your proposal
Reviewers are not going to try to spare your feelings
Better to hear negative comments from a friend first
Don’t be defensive when hearing negative comments

16. Learn Good “Grantsmanship”
If you are inexperienced: Consult those who have been successful in the past Consult as many references as possible on grant-writing (and good writing, in general)

17. Reminder
Never forget - Your proposal is being read and judged by human beings
The people who are reading and
reviewing your proposal are
busy people (just like you)
It’s your job to make your writing as concise and lucid as possible

18. New 12-page limit In order to be competitive your writing must be:
Clear
Concise
Lucid
Mistake: Important ideas are buried in muddy, convoluted sentences

19. New 12-page limit In order to be competitive your writing must be
Clear
Concise
Lucid
“improvement would be to include a bit more “white space” in pages 2-4. This section is
very densely written, and thus a bit overwhelming to read. Breaking this section up by
paragraphing with a space between paragraphs would alleviate the visual monotony
and make it more appealing to reviewers.”
Mistake: Too much information is crammed into too little space

20. Provide summary statements
At the end of sections -
Provide summary paragraphs for the reviewers
At the end of the
Specific Aims
Introduction
Etc
Provide as much summary and conclusion to the reviewers as possible

21. Specifically call out --
Significance
Innovation
Be specific: “Our approach is innovative because...”
Do this early in the proposal, not towards the end
Point out important highlights right up front
Provide as much summary and conclusion to the reviewers as possible

22. Don’t bury a key or main point in the middle of a paragraph
Buried Alive
Don’t bury a key or main point in the middle of a paragraph
with no emphasis
If you must put key info in the middle of a paragraph,
use bold and underline for emphasis

23. Language is important
Any language that is potentially unclear or confusing to a reviewer is a WEAKNESS
Remember: some reviewers will only scan the body of your proposal. Don’t
take for granted that each reviewer will have time or energy to interpret complexities

24. Very often -- Reviewers are probing for weaknesses, rather
than looking at strengths
It may be cynical, but it’s true

25. Reminder of NIH Review Criteria
Significance: Is the problem important? Approach: Is the experimental design appropriate? Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? Investigators: Are they trained/experienced enough to carry out this work? Environment: Support, subject populations, collaborative colleagues available to make success more likely?

26. For instrumentation, servers and databases
Avoid the “If we build it, users will come” angle, this almost never works
Describe a known user base
Describe competing instrumentation, justify your choice
Describe adequate institutional support (people and $$)

27. If your proposal is not funded
Read your reviews
Take a few days to cool off (they are not personal)
Go back and read your reviews again, very carefully

28. Pay careful attention to each reviewer’s critique
Did your proposal go to the correct study section?
Did the reviewer become confused because of
unclear writing?

29. Don’t let reviewer comments hurt your confidence
More often than not, reviewers are probing for weaknesses, rather than
looking at strengths.
They may want to mentor you, but they most likely won’t have time
Seek mentorship from experienced PIs at your institution
Seek advice from variable personality types, because this is what you
will encounter during the review process

30. Pay special attention to Study Section Summary Statement
This statement represents the consensus view
of the study section participants
Look for a possible “fatal flaw” in this statement

31. Never forget Your proposal is being read and judged by human beings
Make their job as easy as possible
Try to write and proofread your proposal with the above image in mind