Why Read Abstracts of Funded
Proposals?
from Research Development and Grant Writing News,
Volume 1, Issue 3: November 15, 2010
Reviewing abstracts (aka project summary or executive summary) of recently funded
projects gives researchers yet another source of information about the interests of a funding
agency by presenting review panels’ and program officers’ selections of successful proposals.
Reading the abstracts of funded projects will give you a more nuanced understanding
of the funding agency culture and expectations specific to a solicitation,
or cluster of solicitations, within a disciplinary domain. Abstracts from the two most current
past funding cycles are typically the most informative because annual grant solicitations
often evolve over time. This is particularly true when reading abstracts of research, educational,
and institutional initiatives funded by programs with long-running annual solicitations,
for example, NIH and NSF.
The abstracts serve as an excellent complement to the program solicitation by giving
examples of successful applicant responses to the research goals and objectives defined in the
RFP. In some cases, particularly on institutional and educational initiatives, reviewing the abstracts
of projects funded during the past two years reveals a core of programmatic elements
and activities common to all successful proposals. In other cases, again most often for educational
and institutional grants, or hybrid research and educational grants (e.g., NIH
Bridges
or NSF IGERT), reading ten or twenty abstracts of recently funded projects may reveal common
program models or programmatic components viewed by program officers and reviewers
as effective models for achieving the goals and objectives of the particular solicitations. For instance,
the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program is a very longstanding
annual solicitation. The mentoring plan will comprise a core component to a successful
proposal. Effective mentoring plans include proven mentoring activities. Reviewing the
REU abstracts, along with the REU literature, will help the new applicant understand those
models the agency favors, and equally important, gain insight into the models the agency program
officers might not favor.
In some cases, abstracts include contact information on the principal investigators,
including email addresses. On educational and institutional grants, in particular, the PI may be
willing to share observations related to developing a competitive proposal to the particular program,
and may even agree to share a copy of the funded proposal, reviewers comments, and
outcomes of annual performance reviews. PIs are more often willing to share information
about educational and institutional grants than about a research grant. In many cases, e.g.,
NSF educational grants, the funding agency expects those funded to disseminate results related
to “best practices” in such areas as K-12 education and undergraduate research (e.g.,
MSPnet
Useful Websites).
Development Research News
Check out the Academic Research Funding
Strategies Newsletter on the Grants Office Website!
www.aug.edu/grants
|
