LISTEN: Research Development and Writing Competitive Grants

[00:00] Keith:

So if you hand your proposal to your grandma, given that she’s not a national scientist, and if she understands what you’re proposing to do, you’re in pretty good shape. The end of the day, I love research and being a part of, you know, this process of being able to help faculty get funding for their research. There’s a lot of enjoyment, and that’s why I do this.

[00:22] Intro/Outro:

Welcome to the Arkansas Food, Farms and Forests Podcast, the podcast bringing you the latest on food, fiber and forestry research from the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, the research arm of the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

[00:37] Jenifer:

Welcome to Food, Farms & Forests. I’m Jenifer Fouch. Today we are learning about grants and grant writing. And how do researchers secure the funds needed to conduct their research? To talk to us about this is Keith Berry, Jr. Keith, thank you so much for being here with us.

[00:53] Keith:

Yes. Thank you. Happy to be here.

[00:55] Jenifer:

So, Keith Berry joined the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station earlier this year as its first ever research development specialist. Let’s start from there. Research development specialist. Can you explain to us what exactly that means and what your role is about?

[01:12] Keith:

So my role is predominantly focused on helping faculty secure grant funding by improving the competitiveness of their proposals. So I look more specifically at the content, the structure of the proposal, compare it to the solicitation, make sure that they’re including everything that’s required in the solicitation. Make sure that they are explaining things in a way that a reviewer is going to get excited about, because you can have the best idea in the world, but if you don’t package it the right way, a reviewer is not going to care. And so my job is to make sure that it’s structured in a way that the reviewer cares about it, and they get excited about it, and they’re willing to go to bat for you in the review panels.

[01:56] Jenifer:

I like that you say that you said how to package it, because that’s exactly what I was thinking. So you take that information, you package it to present it in a way that is more digestible or more easily understandable, I guess, for that reviewer.

[02:11] Keith:

Right. So it’s a whole lot different than a research paper. So if you take a research article that you’re working on and then you want to write a proposal about it, you can’t just convert that into a proposal very, very simply. Like, it requires a different type of language. It requires a different structure. You’re going to need to package and restructure it in a way that is not overly technical, because the reviewers in this situation are not going to be content experts. You may have one of the reviewers as a content expert, but of three reviewers, if you only appease one reviewer and then the other two don’t understand what you’re talking about, you’re going to have a low score. You’re not going to get funded. So you have to structure it in a way that is going to be easily digested by all reviewers, and especially packaged in a way that it’s not specifically, full of technical jargon, structured to where only people in your field will understand it. You want to make the proposal read in a way where they’re not having to Google every other word, because if they’re having a Google every other word, they’re going to quit reading your proposal about half a page in because they’re not going to care anymore. It’s not something that they care to spend excess hours, because the reality is they’re usually given anywhere from 10 to 20 proposals per reviewer. And so it’s easier to limit the number of proposals you really care about by figuring out which ones are the easiest to read and which ones are, you know, going to be too difficult to even bother.

[03:56] Jenifer:

Can you give us some examples of a proposal of a topic? What types of grants are these? You know, USDA grants or the smaller or private grants?

[04:07] Keith:

So I can’t give any specifics on proposals that I’ve worked on. But as far as the funding agencies that I’ve been able to help with, it’s a wide range. I’ve helped with a lot of USDA since I’ve taken this position, but I’ve also had the opportunity to work on, just recently, NSF, NIH. I’ve had several NIH, which was kind of a surprise. Recently, there was actually an EPA proposal. And so that was interesting to get an opportunity to review that too.

[04:37] Jenifer:

NSF, the National Science Foundation, and NIH.

[04:41] Keith:

NIH, and National Institutes of Health. And then EPA is the Environmental Protection Agency.

[04:46] Jenifer:

How do these differ?

[04:48] Keith:

There are, agency specific requirements for the different proposals. But all in all, most of them require roughly the same amount of content. They may vary in the length. USDA or much longer proposals. I see most of them anywhere from 15 to 18 pages. NSF is 15 pages, predominantly NIH is 6 to 12 pages. They’re roughly about the same amount of content.

[05:19] Jenifer:

How are you packaging this content?

[05:22] Keith:

It depends on what the topics of interest are. For instance, USDA, one of the ones that I helped with not too long ago was focused on small farms. You know, they want most of the content to be geared towards small farms. And so if you’re putting together a proposal and you’re not really taking into consideration the small farmers and the the different farms of across Arkansas specifically, then you’re not following the instructions of, of the actual opportunity. You know, being able to focus your proposal to fit the narrative around what they’re actually wanting is key.

[06:02] Jenifer:

what have been some of the things you have noticed that faculty are doing right, things that that are working.

[06:06] Keith:

So since I’ve been here, one of the things that I’ve really liked is the fact that a lot of faculty have reached out to me very quickly, like I had a faculty member start working with me the very next week that I started. The faculty here seem to be very eager to learn as much as they can on how to improve their success rate on proposals, and so they are open to suggestions. Open the door to comments and stuff that I provide. And so that’s been good. I’ve helped so far since starting have been the April, I’ve been able to help with 22 different proposals.

[06:43] Jenifer:

That’s a lot of proposals. So it sounds like faculty they’re, they’re really good about using the resources that the experiment station has provided them. Tell me a little bit more about that in the feedback you have received.

[06:56] Keith:

Faculty so far have been really excited, you know, really excited that the experiment station has invested in a role like this. And then also just really excited that, you know, there’s someone here with the knowledge that I have to to be able to provide them. And so it’s been exciting to get to work with faculty. I’ve had a couple of faculty that said that had I not been able to work with them on their proposal, they likely would not have been able to submit it on time.

[07:22] Jenifer:

So with your position being new this year, what was that like of creating something from scratch?

[07:29] Keith:

For me, it was exciting. That was one of the real drawing points for for me, accepting the position was getting to build it from scratch. It has its challenges because there is no, guidelines on what that looks like. From that, I’m just drawing from resources online. Other research development offices, my experience from main campus and research development. The difference has been trying to take time when I have open time and I’m not working on proposals to build out what the review structure is going to look like for the future for the experiment station. What I envision research development being long term, as opposed to just the everyday reviewing proposals.

[08:13] Jenifer:

In addition to helping with the proposal process. Do you also help faculty find a different grant and opportunities?

[08:20] Keith:

I do. So if there are projects the faculty are looking to find funding for, they can send me a quick one page document that describes what their project is, what kind of funding they’re looking for. If I’ve worked with faculty in the past and I know what their projects are or what their research interests are, then when I stumble across funding opportunities, when I’m going through looking for things, I forward those to the faculty members like, ‘Hey, I don’t know if you’re interested in this or not, but here’s an opportunity I think that matches your project.”

[08:55] Jenifer:

How do you measure success for your role?

[08:58] Keith:

So that’s actually a really difficult question, because if you look nationally at research development, that is a ongoing issue that there’s a lot of publications about. There’s a lot of proposals about they’re constantly trying to figure out how do you measure success for research development, because it’s not just about how great the proposal looks coming out of research development. It’s also about how much funding is available at the national agencies that you’re submitting to. It’s about how competitive other project ideas are. It’s about who the reviewers are. You know, there’s just so many different things that can affect whether or not a proposal gets funded. I think at the end of the day, it it should really be focused on how competitive and how well-structured the proposal is once it leaves the institution. And so, if it’s in really good shape, it’s competitive, it gets a decent score. I think that’s more of a success than if it’s submitted. It’s not as competitive. It’s not even considered for funding.

So I think you’ve got to take into consideration, you know, whether it’s even being discussed for funding, not just whether it’s funded or not. Yeah, there’s too many variables to really account for, to, to really be able to say whether or not something was successful. I think, you know, again, at the end of the day, it’s whether it was competitive, whether the faculty were satisfied. You know, faculty satisfaction is a big deal. And so if you know, the faculty are not satisfied with the effort that was put into reviewing the proposal, then I think you failed. But if you know you’ve done a good job of appeasing the faculty members, as well as making the proposal look as competitive as possible coming out, then I think you’ve done what you were put here to do.

[11:00] Jenifer:

What are some of your quick tips? Maybe your top three tips of when you’re putting in a proposal? What are some things you should absolutely do or not do? Keep in mind.

[11:11] Keith:

First and foremost, read the solicitation. If you do not read the solicitation thoroughly and make sure that your proposal is structured the way that the solicitation requires, it’s not going to get funded, period. Then second, I would say is make sure that you are not using a lot of technical jargon. Make sure it’s readable. One of the funniest ways that I’ve heard someone say it is make sure your grandma can read it and understand it. So if you hand your proposal to your grandma and, given that she’s not a national scientist, if she understands what you’re proposing to do, you’re in pretty good shape. Third, make sure that your proposal is budgeted correctly and at the time, like the project idea that you’re proposing is feasible to do within the budget and the time frame. If you’re proposing to do too much, it’s going to be considered too ambitious and seeing too ambitious. And your reviewer comments is never a good thing, because it usually means that it’s not going to be funded because they don’t think you can do it.

[12:21] Jenifer:

Interesting. So don’t be too ambitious. What is that like for you to be a part of this process? Someone received a grant they applied for. What is that like for you?

[12:31] Keith:

It’s exciting because at the end of the day, I love research and being a part of, you know, this process of being able to help faculty get funding for their research. There’s a lot of enjoyment in that. You know, at the end of the day, that’s why I do this.

[12:48] Jenifer:

You mentioned earlier a little bit about your experience and what that has prepared you for this role. Can you tell us a little bit more, on your background?

[12:59] Keith:

I did both my undergrad and my graduate degree in chemical engineering from the University of Arkansas. Then I went and did a post-doc at Baylor University, where I first got introduced to writing proposals. As a postdoc, I’m not able to put my name as a Pi. And so, yeah, I was able to to write two proposals there. One state, one federal. That was a good introduction and what that was like. And then after I left my postdoc position, I came back here to Fayetteville and started a startup company where I wrote and submitted several SBIR proposals to the USDA, the NSF, and the NIH. So I had a lot of experience. Doing that as a Pi, actually writing everything from scratch. Eventually, I saw a position at the University of Arkansas open up for a research development specialist, and that’s where I got introduced to what research development does, how it works, and why it’s important. Gave me a lot of expertise working with different faculty from different backgrounds, getting introduced to new research areas that I’ve never helped with, and being able to use my technical expertise in research and the knowledge that I have in creating experimental designs, putting together research papers and proposals, be able to look at a proposal from that perspective, from a scientific perspective of, okay, does the experimental plan make sense? Does it follow what it should? And then I can take that look at the budget and say, okay, does the budget match what the proposal is actually proposing? And then you can also look at the time frame. So if it’s a two year project and you’re proposing to do five years’ worth of experiments and that two years is not feasible, it’s not going to get funded. So I can go in and I can look at those things, make sure everything makes sense. It’s feasible to accomplish in the time frame in the budget. Those are some of the things that I learned from from campus. And now, you know, here I am working with faculty here, getting a lot more familiarity with, USDA. And so I was able to really dig in and learn a lot about USDA over the last several months.

[15:21] Jenifer:

Keith, thank you so much for being here and explaining this process to us. And, the behind the scenes of how our researchers acquire funding for a lot of the research we talk about here on the podcast.

[15:33] Keith:

Yeah. Thank you.

[15:34] Jenifer:

That was Keith Berry, Jr. talking to us about grant writing and his position here at the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station as its first ever research development specialist. Thanks for listening. I’m Jenifer Fouch. Don’t forget to subscribe.

[15:51] Intro/Outro:

The Arkansas Food, Farms & Forests Podcast is produced by the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, the research arm of the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture. Visit aaes.uada.edu for more information.