Tag Archives: Grant writing

Recommended: Statistical Issues Seen in Non-Statistics Proposals

If you are writing a research grant, there are a lot of statistical issues that you need to consider. This guide, prepared by the American Statistical Association, highlights three areas: framing the problem, designing the study, and specifying the data analysis plan. It doesn’t talk enough about data management, but otherwise it is an excellent resource. Continue reading

PMean: The problem with incentivizing

I came across a question, “How does your institution incentivize researchers to write more grants?” that was posted a while ago. I felt it was too late to respond directly, but I did want to mention something in my blog about this. “Incentivize” is one of those awful words that used to be a noun (incentive) but has been changed to a verb to make it sound more trendy. That’s something to dislike from the very start, but I have an even greater gripe about incentivizing. Continue reading

Recommended: A Grant Submission New Year’s Resolution

Michael Lauer, the Deputy Director for Extramural Research at the United States National Institutes for Health shows some interesting statistics on when people submit grants and shows that grants submitted earlier than the day of the deadline tend to fare slightly better in the review process. There’s one gross miscalculation on this page, but the message is still interesting. Continue reading

Recommended: Developing Grant Proposals: Guidelines for Statisticians Collaborating Under Limited Resources

This article provides guidance for developing the “statistical considerations” section of a research grant. I normally do not use that term, and suggest separate sections on statistical methods, sample size justification, data management plan, etc. But that’s a quibble. This is very good practical advice, such as reminding you that you need to write both for the statistical reviewer and the non-statistician who is also reviewing the proposal. Continue reading

Recommended: Training on how to write a grant

I usually do not recommend commercial products, as I know most of you have very limited funds. But when it comes to grants, you should consider paying for good training. The best grant writing class I ever took was from David Morrison, who is part of Grant Writers Seminars and Workshops. Also good are the seminars produced by the Grant Training Center. Details on both groups are listed below. Continue reading

Recommended: Requiring fuel gauges. A pitch for justifying impact evaluation sample size assumptions

This blog entry from the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation talks about the deficiency in many research proposals sent to that organization. They rely too much on standardized effect sizes, which are impossible to interpret and often misleading. The authors also criticize the Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) that are included in the sample size justification for many cluster based or hierarchical research designs. The ICCs, they say, often seem to be pulled out of thin air. It is a hard number to get sometimes and they suggest that you consider a range of ICCs in your calculations or that you run a pilot study. Continue reading

PMean: Who is your authorized official?

Writing your own grant is an exercise in crisis management. I had a last minute crisis this afternoon, because I had to fill out a form on very short notice. One piece of information I needed for the form was the name of the “authorized official” at Kansas University Medical Center (KUMC). I didn’t even know what an authorized official does. It took a quick google search, but here is the information, in case I need to write another grant. Continue reading