1. Program Project & Center Grants – How to Be Competitive The Nuts and Bolts Amy Gantt Office of Proposal Development

2. Multi-Project Proposals: Before you begin to write Decide what mechanism best suits your scientific goals. – NIH Program Project: Supports shared cores and individual research projects. – NIH Center: Supports shared resources for existing and new research projects (but often not new research projects, though that differs by IC). Must ensure that there are sufficient projects for the center to support: Different institutes have different minimum requirements.

3. Multi-Project Proposals: Before you begin to write A non-NIH funding opportunity may suit your needs better and be marginally less competitive: – NSF Centers of Excellence: Provide support of interdisciplinary research and education for specific topics. These are not investigator initiated and are generally for basic science research. – Foundations: Foundations such as the Melanoma Research Alliance sometimes fund team science along the lines of a program project or center. Requirements vary by foundation, but typically address a specific disease or research topic.

4. Multi-Project Proposals: Before you begin to write Contact the relevant program officer well in advance! – The number of funded proposals for program project & center grants is quite low. – Program officers will help to determine if the proposed project is a good fit for your IC. – If requesting a budget of more than $500K in any one year, contacting your program officer is a must. Read the Funding Opportunity Announcement carefully! – Each Institute/Center has specific instructions for program project & center grants.

5. Multi-Project Proposals: Before you begin to write Make certain that you can address all review criteria. – The instructions for reviewers add useful information to the FOA or IC-specific instructions. Begin integrating projects & cores early in the process of developing your proposal. – It’s easier to begin integrating from the beginning than to look for points of synergy late in the writing process. – Demonstrate that a multi-project approach is uniquely advantageous to addressing your theme or research questions.

6. NIH Program Project & Center Grants Many institutes & centers are funding very few program projects and centers, and some are not using these mechanisms at all. Evaluate your scientific goals to determine if your proposal would be competitive using one of these mechanisms, or if another funding source would be more appropriate. Note: The data in the following slides are from NIH’s report “Grants: Applications, awards, success rates, and total funding, by IC, mechanism, activity code, and funding source,” found at http://report.nih.gov/frrs/index.aspx

7. Program Project Grants (P01): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NCI1072624.30% NHLBI913032.97% NIA631117.46% NIAID511631.37% NICHD281035.71% NIDDK21838.10% NIGMS11327.27%

8. Program Project Grants (P01): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NINDS10660.00% NIDA7114.29% NINR300.00% NIBIB200.00% NIDCR200.00% NIMH22100.00% NIAAA11100.00% NHGRI11100.00%

9. Center Grants (P30): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NIDDK412253.66% NIA18950.00% NCRR15746.67% NIMH1516.67% NCI13 100% NEI13861.54% NINDS11218.18%

10. Center Grants (P30): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NIEHS11545.46% NIDA10440.00% NICHD9444.44% NIAID8450.00% NIDCD6350.00% NIAMS100.00% NEI100.00% NHLBI000.00%

11. Specialty Center Grants (P50): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NCI711622.54% NINDS291137.93% NIA151066.67% NIDA15640.00% NIGMS14214.29% NCCAM13538.46%

12. Specialty Center Grants (P50): Funding Rates (FY2010) NIH IC#Reviewed#Awarded Success Rate NIMH12433.33% NHGRI9444.44% NHLBI6583.33% NIDCD200.00% NIAAA100.00% OD000.00%

13. Multi-PI Research Grants (R01) as Potential Alternative to P-Grants Designed to encourage a team science approach when that is the most appropriate way to address a problem In general, multi-PI R01s should include PIs from different fields or with substantially different expertise New investigators will lose new investigator status if they successfully compete as PI on a multi-PI research grant

14. Multi-PI Research Grant (R01) as Potential Alternative to P-Grants? Follows all the requirements of single-PI R01s, including formatting, budget constraints, and breadth of focus May be a good alternative if an investigator is not ready for a program project or center, but would like to establish strong collaborations for future, more extensive proposals Multi-PI Leadership Plan template is available at grantwriting.tufts.edu

15. Review Criteria for Multi-Project Proposals Significance Investigators/Program Leadership Innovation Approach Environment Integration Additional Review Criteria (Human Subjects, Inclusion of Women, Minorities & Children, Vertebrate Animals, Biohazards, Select Agents, Budget, etc.) Cores

16. Significance The overall project must address an important problem or critical barrier to progress in the field The proposed studies must change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive the field. The significance should not only explained for the individual research projects, but also for the overall project. How will the program project or center be more than the sum of its parts?

17. Investigators & Program Leadership Investigators must have a demonstrated record of accomplishments that have advanced their fields (if established), or demonstrate appropriate experience and training (if New or Early Stage). Investigators must have complementary and integrated expertise. The project team should have some record of collaboration. Program director and project leaders should not be perceived as overcommitted. The leadership approach, governance and organizational structure should be appropriate and well-explained.

18. Innovation Both the overall project and the individual research projects must use innovative approaches or seek to shift current paradigms. When discussing the overall project, demonstrate how the program differs from previous approaches, and how that will allow it to address gaps, discrepancies or roadblocks in the field.

19. Approach Combined with “Significance,” “Approach” is the primary driver of the overall impact score (according to data provided by NIH. Provide sufficient preliminary data. Ensure that the overall strategy, methods, and analyses are well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the aims. Discuss potential problems and alternative strategies, particularly in cases where individual projects are linked.

20. Environment Demonstrate how the institution(s) will support the proposed program. Discuss only those resources that are relevant to the proposed program. Demonstrate that there is adequate equipment, space, and support staff to conduct the research.

21. Integration Evidence of coordination, interrelationships, and synergy among the projects and cores. – Interrelated specific aims – Shared study participant population – Shared resources/equipment/etc. Clearly explain the relationship of all projects and cores to the overall theme.

22. Integration Demonstrate the advantages of the program as a program project or center over individual research projects. – Ask yourself why you want to submit a multi- project grant over individual grants. – Develop the overall specific aims and hypotheses carefully, and demonstrate how the individual parts will help to accomplish these aims. Discuss how the team will interact over the course of the project period. – Be concrete and realistic. Even if the entire team is in one building, this should be carefully addressed.

23. Integration Discuss what mechanisms will be used for quality control of the research. – How will the project leader ensure that the aims are accomplished in a timely way? – How will adjustments be made if unanticipated problems occur? Address each PI’s roles and responsibilities, team governance, and organizational structure. – Include an organizational chart.

24. Additional Review Criteria Human Subjects; Inclusion of Women, Minorities & Children; Vertebrate Animals; Biohazards; Select Agents, Resource Sharing Plans, Budget, etc. will all be evaluated and must be addressed (if applicable). Budgets should be realistic in terms of the work to be completed, level of effort, and methodology. Note that reviews of Program Project Grants are performed by Special Emphasis Panels (SEPs) convened by the individual institutes and centers (IC’s); they are not reviewed by standing CSR study sections.

25. Shared Resource Cores Core Units should be designated by a letter (A, B, C) and a title (e.g., Administrative Core, Imaging Core, etc.). A full description of each Core should be provided following the format provided in the most up-t0-date Form PHS-398 and any additional instructions in the FOA. – Note: FOA instructions supersede PHS-398 instructions.

26. Shared Resource Cores Cores must provide services required for the completion of the project goals – Choose your cores carefully! For program project grants, cores must provide services to at least two – or for some ICs, three – of the individual research projects in the program (unless otherwise specified). For center grants, cores must provide services to the number of federally-funded research projects specified by the IC.

27. Shared Resource Cores Excellent cores should: Provide services to the program efficiently. Have well-defined plans for prioritizing the cores’ services. Have highly experienced leadership, a clearly-defined management structure, and sufficient personnel. Provide exceptional services encompassing unique, innovative approaches and cutting-edge technology.

28. Shared Resource Cores: Structure SectionTo Include Page Limit Core Unit Cover Page Title of Core unit Core director name, title, affiliation Other investigators’ names, titles, affiliations 1 page Core Unit Abstract/ Summary (if applicable – check the FOA) Summary that identifies & describes the purpose of the Core Summary of Core’s overall objectives Highlight the decision-making process for use of Core services and plans for cost- effectiveness and quality control 1 page IntroductionResubmission or Revision applications only1 page

29. Shared Resource Cores: Structure SectionTo Include Page Limit Core Services Aims (if applicable – check the FOA) Summary of resources & facilities the Core provides that are essential for multiple projects Check FOA – Some require each Core to serve a minimum of 3 projects, while others require a minimum of 2. 1 page Core Services Plan (or Core Unit Structure, Administration & Services Provided) Should also indicate the anticipated usage by each research project 6 pages Progress Report/Publication List Renewal applications only Most relevant for scientific cores (rather than administrative cores) References/ Literature Cited

30. Administrative Core Not all institutes and centers allow administrative cores – be sure to read the FOA carefully! Following is a general outline for administrative cores. Be certain to use the appropriate subheadings listed in the FOA.

31. Administrative Core: Potential Outline Overview & Objectives: Overview of plans for: – Organizational & administrative management of the overall program. – Coordination & communication within the program. – Employing appropriate methods to monitor progress of the projects & effective use of shared resource cores.

32. Administrative Core: Potential Outline Personnel: In addition to PI, could include an Administrative Core director, business manager, internal steering committee, & external advisory board. – Provide a short bio for the PI stressing scientific skills, research record & administrative qualifications, particularly leadership skills. – Organizational chart with clear lines of authority.

33. Administrative Core: Potential Outline Resources: Provide description of space & physical resources of the Administrative Core. Services Provided: Examples include: – Financial & Grant Management Support – Oversight of Scientific Cores – Oversight of Research Projects – Activities to Foster Multidisciplinary Interactions – Evaluation of Cores

34. Administrative Core: Potential Outline Administration: – Regular meetings of participating investigators are essential to the consolidation of the research projects into a cohesive program. – Investigators are expected to assist the PD/PI in making administrative & scientific decisions. – Oversight committees: Internal & external advisory boards can be included. Discuss plans for meetings and use of recommendations. Milestones & Core Integration: Discuss concrete milestones and expected accomplishments.

35. What can OPD do for you? Depending on time in advance of the deadline, existing commitments, and the needs of the project team, OPD offers the following services for multidisciplinary proposals: Project management of submission Extra-narrative elements Templates & outlines “Standard” institutional text Grantsmanship advice & editing of narrative elements Note: Due to limited resources, OPD is typically only able to offer these resources for proposals submitted through Tufts University, though there are exceptions.

36. OPD Services: Project Management Checklist: OPD creates customized checklists of proposal requirements based on the specific FOA. These include: – All required elements of the overall proposal and individual projects/cores – Instructions & page limits for each section – Person(s) responsible – Internal deadline(s)

37. OPD Services: Project Management Timeline: With the PI/project team, OPD develops a week-by-week timeline of what needs to be accomplished for a competitive submission. – Iterative drafts of all narrative pieces – Coordination of biosketches & letters of support – Budget & justification development – Tufts internal forms

38. Sample Timeline Week 1 (Nov. 7-11)Internal Deadline - Provide OPD with a list of participating faculty/key personnelNov. 8 - Determine any external collaborators or subcontractsNov. 8 - Initial draft of overall Specific Aims, Significance & Innovation to OPD for review Nov. 10 - OPD to begin grants.gov package data entry/formsNov. 11 Week 2 (Nov. 14-18) - Contact department manager(s) to begin working on budgetNov. 14 - Send OPD CVs for participating external faculty; OPD to request biosketches from Tufts faculty Nov. 14 - OPD to edit initial draft of letters of supportNov. 15 - OPD to provide feedback on Aims/Significance/InnovationNov. 16

39. Timeline for Working with OPD We do our best to support all teams who request our help with proposal submissions, particularly for large, multi-investigator proposals. As soon as you decide to pursue a grant and you think you will need our help, please let us know so we can get you on our calendar. The earlier we can plan for your proposal, the more resources we can have available for you.

40. Timeline for Working with OPD Service Requested Minimum Time Required* - Assistance with identification of areas of synergy within the various projects/cores; project management; grantsmanship & editing; coordination of extra-narrative elements; etc. Earlier the better – this service requires meeting with the project team and learning how the projects are integrated - Project management; grantsmanship & editing of all narrative elements; coordination of extra- narrative elements; grants.gov package forms 10 weeks - Grantsmanship & editing of all individual projects/cores (multiple drafts); coordination of select extra-narrative elements 4 weeks - Grantsmanship & editing of select individual projects/cores (single draft) 2 weeks - Copyediting for ESL or typographical errors1 week * Note: This minimum time requirement is the time between receiving materials or scheduling initial meetings with project team and the Tufts ORA internal deadline.

41. OPD Services: Extra-Narrative Elements Biographical sketches Facilities & other resources Budget justification Letters of support Grants.gov package

42. Extra-Narrative Elements: Biographical Sketches Request and gather biosketches from all members of the project team. Ensure that formatting and included information are compliant with regulations. Grantsmanship edit of personal statement to ensure role is adequately described and integration of team is apparent.

43. Extra-Narrative Elements: Facilities & Other Resources Ensure that Facilities & Other Resources sections are received from internal and external collaborators. Grantsmanship edit to demonstrate that the environment will contribute to the success of the program. Provide “standard” institutional text if required.

44. Extra-Narrative Elements: Budget Justification Provide initial draft of budget justification based on text. Grantsmanship edit to ensure that all necessary costs are justified (depending on requirements and budget type.) Edit to ensure that numbers in the justification match those in the budget. Note: OPD does not have the capacity to develop budgets. However, we can offer advice on the justification and on the way funds will be used.

45. Extra-Narrative Elements: Letters of Support Upon request, draft unique letters of support to be sent to external collaborators/consultants. Edit letters of support to ensure they indicate the roles & responsibilities of each collaborator/consultant.

46. Extra-Narrative Elements: Grants.gov Package Enter appropriate data into form fields. Attach final documents to the package. Ensure that all elements of the proposal are complete. Provide completed grants.gov package to the PI for review.

47. OPD Services: Templates & Outlines Grantwriting.tufts.edu has a number of NIH templates & outlines available for download: NIH biographical sketch (template & sample) NIH Major Equipment NIH Personnel Justification NIH Resources NIH Multiple PI Leadership Plan NIH Responsible Conduct of Research

48. OPD Services: Templates & Outlines Grantwriting.tufts.edu also has NSF templates available, and upon request, we can provide: Outlines & templates for other funding agencies or specific FOAs Outline & instructions for Specific Aims section Outline/template for the Administrative Core

49. OPD Services: Standard Institutional Text The OPD has text about the institution, schools, departments, and a number of institutes & centers available upon request. Because much of this text has been collected from previously submitted proposals, it must be updated and customized for your particular proposal!

50. OPD Services: Grantsmanship Advice & Editing Ensure that the review criteria are clearly addressed. Note and provide suggestions for sections that seem incomplete or unclear. Highlight areas in which synergies among projects/cores could be discussed. Assist with organization of ideas as well as overall structural organization of the proposal.

51. Wrapping Up Multi-project grants are highly competitive, but these mechanisms allow for multidisciplinary, integrated teams of scientists to accomplish more and answer bigger questions than they could on their own. Submitting a program project or center grant takes a lot of preparation and groundwork, trust among the team members, and organization. The Office of Proposal Development has extensive resources to support your proposal submission. Our early involvement in your grant writing efforts will help your submission go smoothly!

52. Contact Us! Office of Proposal Development 75 Kneeland St, Suite 950 Phone: 617-636-2480 Email: proposaldevelopment@tufts.edu Website: grantwriting.tufts.edu Twitter: @TuftsOPD