Chapter019

Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Chapter 19
Writing a Successful Grant
Proposal to Fund Research and
Evidence-Based Practice
Implementation Projects

Strategies for Writing Grant Proposals
• A grant proposal is a written plan for a project that is
requesting funding from a source
• Five qualities that the grant writer must possess—the five
“Ps”
− Passion, planning, persuasion, persistence, and
patience
• Pay attention to details and be as meticulous as possible
to make a good first impression

(cont’d)
• Advanced credentials are usually necessary
• Funding sources for grants
− Federal funding agencies (e.g., National Institutes of
Health [NIH]; Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality [AHRQ])
− Foundations
− Corporations
− Internal sources
− Take careful note of the source’s application criteria

(cont’d)
• Writing the abstract
− Should create a compelling case for why the project
needs to be funded
• Study grant applications that have been successful
• Follow the guidelines for submission meticulously
• Develop a thorough outline prior to application
− Promise neither too much nor too little

Question
• The abstract of a grant proposal should primarily:
a. Present the expecting findings convincingly
b. Identify the academic qualifications of the research team
c. Present the reasons why the project deserves to be
financed
d. Introduce the match between the clinical question and
the methodology

Answer
• c. Present the reasons why the project deserves to be
financed
• Rationale: The abstract of a grant proposal should
succinctly present the case for funding the project.
Researchers’ credentials, the rationale for the
methodology, and expected findings are not standard
components of an abstract.

Steps in Writing a Successful Proposal
• Abstract
• Table of contents
• Budget
• Biosketches
• Introduction and specific aims
− Significance of the problem should be immediately
introduced in the grant proposal

(cont’d)
• Background and significance
− Should convince reviewers that the problem is
worthy of study and that findings can improve clinical
practice and/or health outcomes
− Literature review, hypotheses, and theoretical
framework should be provided
• Applicants’ prior research experience should be identified

Question
• Tell whether the following statement is true or false.
• It is presumptuous to present expected findings and
relationships between variables in a grant proposal.

Answer
• False
• Rationale: When the methodology and context allows, it
is appropriate for grant applicants to present their
expected findings in the form a hypothesis.

Design and Methods
• Should be justified and clearly presented
• Identify
− Sampling strategy
− Measures to enhance validity of the study
− Reliability and validity of instruments
− Procedure of the study
− Data analysis strategy
− Potential limitations
− Timeline

Question
• Which of the following considerations should most inform
the sampling strategy that is chosen for a grant
proposal?
a. Strategies that have been utilized in studies that address
similar research questions
b. The size and expertise of the research team
c. The number of participants necessary to enhance validity
of the study
d. The size of the population that is affected by the study
question

Answer
• c. The number of participants necessary to enhance
validity of the study
• While the strategies of prior researchers and the
workload of the research team may be considered when
choosing a sampling strategy, the primary consideration
is the validity of the study and the demands that this
places on sampling. This factor supersedes the
importance of the size of the population.

(cont’d)
• Human subjects
− Discuss the risks and benefits of study participation
and protection against risks
− Data and safety monitoring plan
• Consultants, references, and appendices

Common Feedback From Grant Reviews
• Judgments regarding the significance of a project
• Comments about the investigator and research team
• Ratings of a project’s innovation
• Feedback regarding a research study’s approach
• Comments on whether the environment is conducive to
support the work

Characteristics of Funded Grant
Proposals
• Creativity and innovation
• High scientific quality
• Clarity
• Excellent technical quality (e.g., organized, easy to read,
and free of grammatical and spelling errors)
• Potential to impact the clinical field
• Greater depth in thinking about conceptual issues

Strategies for Resubmission
• Do not take rejection personally
• Be gracious in your response
• Address reviewers’ comments thoroughly and explicitly

Strategies for Outcomes Management or
Quality Improvement Projects
• Commonly funded by internal sources
• Ensure the project reflects the mission and stated goals
of the organization or foundation
− Review projects that were recently funded

Funding for Evidence-Based Practice
Implementation Projects
• These are typically clinical projects that use research
findings to improve clinical practice, i.e., do not produce
new knowledge
• Applications do not generally require the scientific rigor of
a typical research proposal
• Foundations may fund these projects, but geographic
and/or topical restrictions often apply

Conclusion
• Grant proposals require judicious planning, hard work,
and careful attention to the detail
• Failure often precedes success

Chapter019

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (12)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Chapter019

Similar to Chapter019 (20)

More from stanbridge

More from stanbridge (20)

Chapter019