Resources: How to Write a Successful Grant Application

By Jean Wyman, Ph.D., R.N., C.S., F.A.A.N.
Professor and Cora Meidl Siehl Endowed Chair in Nursing Research

These guidelines are not rules set in stone!

Each investigator will have to adapt these guidelines to what fits best with the planned study and proposal guidelines.

This document is divided into the following sections:

• Key Preliminary Activities
• Creating a Successful Proposal
• Writing the Sections of the Proposal

Key Preliminary Activities

How to Get Started

• If working on a new project, sketch out the background and the significance.
• Create an outline of the proposal including:
• • specific aims, research questions and/or hypotheses; and
  • brief but detailed overview of research design and methodology.
• Have outline critiqued by researchers within and outside content area.
• Revise, revise, revise!

What to Do Prior to Writing a Proposal

• Know priorities of targeted institute(s).
• Be familiar with related currently funded projects.
• Talk to program officer about the study and maintain contact.
• Complete preliminary/pilot work related to study.
• Have at least two manauscripts in review, in press, or published on preliminary work.

What to Do Before Your Proposal Gets to the Review Panel

• Know the review panel.
  Example: Nursing Science Study Section: (NIH):
• • Composition:
  • • Twenty members plus consultants
    • All have been previously or currently funded
    • Wide range of expertise with mix of scientists from behavioral, social and biological sciences
    • Both genders
    • Culturally diverse
    • Geographically diverse
  • Three reviews per year
• Take steps to get your proposal to the right panel, e.g., title, program announcement, cover letter.
• Familiarize yourself with the panel members' work.
• Talk to scientists familiar with panel's decisions.

Creating a Successful Proposal

Aspects of a Winning Proposal

• Significance of the problem
• Salience to nursing science and relevance to clinical practice
• Theoretical soundness
• Methodological soundness
• Recognition of cultural sensitivity
• Low subject burden
• Justifiable budget and staffing
• Good track record of investigator(s)
• Creative collaboration
• Suitability of facilities

Aspects of a Failing Proposal

• Inconsistency in conceptual formulation
• Lack of attention to details
• No pilot work
• Lack of investigator productivity, i.e., publications
• Inadequate background and significance No clear hypothesis
• No testable hypothesis
• Selection of wrong design or measures
• Inadequate analysis plan
• Overly ambitious or not a do-able project

Do Everything Possible to Help the Reviewer!!

• Select easily legible font and type size.
• Avoid packed applications.
• Use the following:
  • white space
  • bulleted information
  • highlighting through bolding, italicizing
  • summary tables - reviewers love summary tables
  • flowcharts
  • graphs
  • figures
  • clear, concise writing in logical order
• Provide a good roadmap to route the reviewer through the proposal by linking:
• • variables in hypotheses or research questions
  • variables in specific aims to background and significance section by use of headings indicating relationship
  • specific aims to research design and specific methods
  • variables to their measurement
  • specific aims and hypotheses to statistical analysis plans.
• Be consistent in the use of terms for variables.
• Use repetition and reminders, e.g., summary paragraphs, but do not bore reviewer.
• Put critical information into body of the text not appendices - proposal must stand alone.

Review of Proposal Prior to Submission

• Use a minimum of three reviewers who are not part of research team but who have been successful with obtaining grants.
• • Content expert
  • Colleague who understands research but not your specific research
  • Writing expert
• Make use of mock study sections.
• Allow time for multiple revisions.

Writing the Sections of the Proposal

The Title Page

• Title should be descriptive, specific, appropriate, and reflect the study's importance.
• Identify program announcement if appropriate.
• List performance sites (provide justification of sites in proposal if multi-site trial).

The Abstract

• The abstract should serve as a succinct and accurate description of the proposed work even when separated from the application. It should:
• • be a clear, concise description of the study that captures reviewers' interest;
  • identify the broad, long-term objective;
  • state the specific aims;
  • include a brief overview of methodology; and
  • identify the significance of study.
• Write the abstract after the proposal is completed.

Key Personnel

• List all personnel including PI, co-investigators, graduate students and post-doctoral fellows, and support staff (if named) whether or not salaries are requested.
• All personnel must have a clear, defined role on the project.
• Do not pad with big names solely on basis of their names; must have expertise related to specific aims.
• In budget section, describe key personnel expertise (knowledge and/or skills) as related to the application.

Identify Consultants

• Identify expertise and why important to this project.
• Identify their role on project.
• Obtain biosketch and letter of support (may need to provide sample letter for them).

Budget

• Before launching too far into the proposal, identify any stated budget constraints.
• • Establish whether the study can be accomplished within these constraints. This will save a lot of grief later!
  • The project must be economically feasible!
• Identify organizational requirements within your institution for the budget.
• • What are the fringe benefit rates?
  • Will you be given release time to do project or will you budget a portion of your salary?
• Identify in explicit detail all costs associated with:
• • personnel (salary by % effort and fringe benefit - must be able to justify each individual);
  • statistical consultation;
  • consultants;
  • equipment purchases, maintenance, and repair;
  • travel costs associated with data collection or research presentations(mileage, parking, per diem, airfare, hotel, etc.);
  • copying or printing of materials;
  • services needed, e.g., transcription, graphic artist, data entry and management;
  • laboratory or other tests;
  • supplies - be as specific as possible;
  • postage, and
  • telephone (local and long-distance; cellular phone, pagers).
• Provide a justification for each budget item.

Biographical Sketches

• Provide a 3-4-page biographical sketch according to funding agency's requirements.
• List prior funding including role on project, project name, number of years, funding agency, and amount.
• List experience as reviewer on scientific review committees.
• List publications.
• • Reviewers look for data-based papers and authorship position.
  • List all publications in past 3 years, and all those relevant to application, particularly those showing research expertise.
  • If no publications are relevant to application, list those that point to clinical skill or experience.
  • Bold name within authorship list.
  • Include published, in press, and submitted publications (if relevant). (Include copies of all relevant manuscripts in appendices.)
  • If few publications, use more white space and highlight selected experience that shows background in area.

Resources and Environment

• Describe in detail the resources that will be available to you, e.g., lab space, access to clinical site, office space, library resources, computer resources.
• Provide letters granting access to all clinical sites with permission to use resources or clients and letters of support for your project. (Place in proposal according to agency guidelines.)
• If access has not been acquired prior to submission, discuss the procedure that you will use in selecting and recruiting sites. Forward letters of permission to the funding agency within the allowed time frame.

Specific Aims (1 page recommended for NIH grant)

• Briefly describe the problem the study is designed to solve or help solve.
• Provide the broad, long-term objective of research.
• Present theoretical basis for problem-solving approach or laying groundwork for solving the problem.
• Provide specific aims; be sure they are clear, concise, realistic, achievable and measurable.
• Avoid aims that develop a new method unless preliminary work has been completed.
• List hypotheses and/or research questions using short bulleted statements if possible (research questions may take the place of specific aims is some studies).
• Conclude with a brief overview of the significance of the proposed study.

Background and Significance (2 to 3 pages recommended for NIH grant)

• Include what has already been done and why this work is important.
• Section should be clear, condensed and compelling.
• Use stepwise build-up of an argument for the need for this study.
• Identify scope of the problem, e.g., prevalence and impact.
• Summarize theoretical work first then relevant research:
• • Synthesize existing knowledge.
  • Critically analyze literature.
  • • What are the gaps?
    • What are the methodological problems with previous studies or issues?
    • Point to why a new study is needed.
  • DO NOT use the bib card approach, e.g., Smith said this, Jones said that.
• Organize review of literature by key concepts in specific aims or research questions
• • Include all independent and dependent variables.
  • Use road mapping to show linkages.
• Provide theoretical or conceptual framework if not already presented in review of literature.
• • Provide figure to illustrate relationships among constructs or variables if relevant.
  • Identify conceptual and methodological gaps.
• Summarize gaps in knowledge and shortcomings of existing studies.
• • Describe how proposed study will solve problem; it may help to restate key aim(s).
  • Discuss significance to nursing practice and/or future research.

Preliminary Studies - New Applicant (6 to 8 pages recommended for NIH grant)

• Report pilot or preliminary studies relevant to application demonstrating methodological and/or content expertise of the Principal Investigator and Co-Investigator(s).
• If no prior studies, provide description of investigators' backgrounds that demonstrate experience and competence related to the proposed study.
• In describing preliminary studies, provide overview of study, e.g., aims, design, sample, methods, results (actual data tables are always helpful), and conclusions.
• • Give titles and complete references to appropriate publications and manuscripts submitted or accepted for publication.
  • Provide copy of submitted, in press, or published articles in Appendix; refer reader to them for more details.
• It may be necessary to discuss feasibility issues or any area of concern to a reviewer that was learned through preliminary work, e.g., subject burden.

Progress Report - Competitive Renewal and Supplemental Applications (6 to 8 pages recommended for NIH grant)

• Describe what has already been done on this project.
• Use table and graphs to present preliminary findings.
• • Give titles and complete references to appropriate publications and manuscripts submitted or accepted for publication.
  • Provide copy of submitted, in press, or published articles in Appendix; refer reader to them for more details.

Research Design and Methods (13-16 pages)

What? When? Where? How? With whom? In what sequence?

• Use headers, e.g., Design, Sample, Independent Variables, Dependent Variables, Procedures, Data Management, Data Analysis, Study Limitations.
• Use outline format to save space. Be focused, detailed, and clear.
• Be sure to show links among specific aims, research design and methods.
• Review study aims, research questions and hypotheses initially including a 1-2 sentence rationale for each aim.
• Describe research design for each aim using standard terminology.
• • Indicate if there are specific phases to the study and how the phases link to the specific aims.
  • If deviating from standard design, explain why.
• Describe the setting, e.g., type, size, location, urban vs. rural (if relevant), and other relevant characteristics.
• Include letters of support and assurance of access to the population in appropriate sections; refer the reviewer to these.
• Describe the sample selection.
• • State the sample selection criteria, both for inclusion and exclusion.
  • Provide ample size justification (power analysis, what it is based upon and justification of assumptions).
  • Adjust for refusals and attrition.
  • Describe recruitment methods and feasibility of obtaining sample; describe alternative recruitment plans if proposed sample size not reached.
  • Describe method of assigning subjects to groups (if relevant).
• Provide a detailed description of the intervention (if relevant).
• • Give rationale for selection of treatment - why chosen, why important, what it will do.
  • Describe pilot-testing already done or to be done.
  • If control or comparison group is used, provide a detailed description of what will happen to it.
  • Be as detailed as possible within overall space constraints.
• Describe variables and their measurement.
• • Provide overview of measures/instruments, e.g., five instruments will be used. Use a table format to save space.
  • Describe each instrument, e.g., method of administration, scoring, interpretation of scores, reliability, validity, and responsivity (if relevant); and whether pilot-testing will be needed and how it will be accomplished.
  • If observational measures will be used, describe the raters, their training, establishment of inter-rater reliability, and how these measures will be coded.
  • If qualitative data will be collected, provide as much detail as possible for how this will be done, and where and when data will be recorded.
  • If new methods are to be used, explain why they are better than existing methods.
  • If space permits, provide a table [add link to example table] outlining variables and their measurement.
  • Be as detailed as possible, within overall space constraints.
• Describe procedures in chronological order.
• • Give description of how potential subjects will be identified and approached.
  • Be sure to describe that consent will be obtained and how. (Some of this may fit better in the Human Subjects section of the NIH application but assurance that consent will be obtained is critical here.)
  • Describe each point of contact with subjects, who will collect data, where will it be collected, and in what order instruments will be used or procedures done.
  • If intervention will be implemented, describe when, who will do it, how it will be carried out, training, and details of maintaining treatment integrity.
  • Consider use of table to summarize procedure if complex. (This might be part of the table that shows variables and instruments.)
• Provide a detailed description of the data management and analysis plans including how data will be interpreted.
• • Describe how data will be collated, coded, keyed or scanned, and verified.
  • Describe quality control procedures.
  • Discuss general approach to first look at data. How will the data be refined and reduced (if quantitative) or coded and organized (if qualitative)?
  • What methods, including statistical tests, will be used to check on reliability and validity of instruments (if quantitative) or to check for accuracy, reproducibility, and stability of quantitative data.
  • Describe descriptive and inferential statistical analyses according to aims and hypotheses or research questions.
  • If qualitative data will be collected, give any a priori plans for categorization or classification of data; otherwise, outline the general rules and guidelines to be followed in as much detail as possible. (It is helpful to give specific examples from types of data that might be collected in the study rather than giving the textbook description of the analytic techniques.)
  • Provide justification of why particular procedures will be used.
• Discuss difficulties and limitations of the proposed procedures and alternative approaches to achieve the aims.
• Provide a tentative time-line for implementation of the study including hiring staff, developing an operations manual (if relevant), training staff, pilot-testing, actual implementation, data analysis, and report writing. No more than 1/2 to 3/4 page in diagrammatic or tabular form should be used.

Human Subjects (required in NIH applications)

• Provide details regarding characteristics of the sample, methods to identity and recruit subjects, procedures for obtaining informed consent including caregiver and institutional consents if appropriate, interventions or procedures, and measurements to be obtained.
• Identify potential risks, their expected occurrence, seriousness, and what procedures will be done to minimize risk.
• Identify subject burden, e.g., time involvement, invasive or uncomfortable procedures (includes psychological tests).
• Discuss potential benefits to subjects or society; if benefits do not outweigh risks, explain why the risks are reasonable relative to the anticipated benefits.

Women and Minorities

• Provide the demographic breakdown of the study population from which the subjects will be selected.
• • This might include the larger community setting as well as the specific setting, e.g., outpatient clinic, nursing home, acute care hospital.
  • Depending on the study's aims, this might be the number of patients seen in the past year with this problem, e.g., heart transplants done in specific hospital setting.
• State whom you expect to include in your sample. Are there plans to oversample for minorities, and if so, how will this be done.
• Justify why you expect to use the sample you plan if it does not include a representative sample of women or minorities.
• Do not skip this section - it is very important!!

References

• Include all references cited in the proposal.
• There is a trade off between using author and date citation versus a numbering system.
• • APA may take up too much room. Thus, you may need to use a numbering system although this causes too much flipping back and forth for the reviewer.
  • An alternative is to cite author and year in the text, and use the AMA style in the references.
• For multiple authors, you might use only 3 authors and et al.

Appendices

• Follow agency guidelines carefully, including only items that are allowed in appendices, e.g., instruments, and articles that are published, in press, and submitted.

References

• Tornquist, E. & Funk, S. (1990). How to write a research grant proposal. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 44(1), 44-51.
• Reif-Lehrer, L. (1995). Grant application writer's handbook. Boston: Jones and Bartlett.

Acknowledgments

This information was presented by Jean Wyman at the University of Minnesota School of Nursing on May 22, 1997, and prepared for World Wide Web publication by Joan Dodgson, M.N., R.N., Ph.D. Candidate in Nursing, Laura Duckett, Ph.D., R.N., Associate Professor and Director of Research, and Adrienne Lawrence, Principal Secretary, University of Minnesota School of Nursing.