11-3 |
|
L. C. FAUSTMAN, Dept. of Animal Science, Univ. of Connecticut, 3636 Horse Barn Hill Rd. Ext., Unit 4040, Storrs, CT 06269-4040 The pressures to secure extramural funding in food science have continued to intensify for government and academic scientists. The USDA NRI Competitive Grants Program is an excellent source of funds that carries reasonable flexibility in its application. Competition for this limited pool of dollars has increased considerably. A recent trend for larger dollar awards has been a positive step for funding meritorious projects, but this has also made it more challenging to compete successfully. It has also meant that fewer submissions receive funding. Good grants do not get funded and this is frustrating for panelists as well as PIs. Panels are charged with the difficult task of reviewing a considerable number of grants, all of which have taken someone a significant amount of time to write. There is a set process that each panel uses in reviewing grants to ensure a fair hearing for each individual submission. The key factors that emerge consistently as being necessary for funding selection of a grant are (1) an interesting question that addresses an important problem and that permits for a hypothesis-driven approach to answer it; (2) a set of organized objectives; (3) a clearly written proposal that substantiates both the need for the work, and that provides a logical sequence of experiments for addressing the objectives; and (4) a PI publication record that provides the panel with confidence that he/she is capable for accomplishing the proposed work. Often times, what separates the grants qualified for funding from those that actually get funded is the extent to which the PI has followed practices of good grantsmanship. Attention to these details can ensure submission of a grant that will be competitive for funding.
Session 11, Prismatic views of grantsmanship and federal funding opportunities
2005 IFT Annual Meeting, July 15-20 - New Orleans, Louisiana |