• New proposals
• New proposals - NIH, modular
• Continuations

NEW PROPOSALS
 
The proposal is an application to receive funding for a project. It contains information regarding who plans to do the work, how it will be done, and what it will cost.
 
Follow the guidelines that accompany most application forms; proposals that don't follow the guidelines might not be considered for funding. Pay particular attention to the sponsor's funding interests, average funding levels, and maximum size of awards. Many sponsors also have page limitations for proposal sections as well as the entire document, and specific typesize requirements. If they are not followed, the proposal may not be accepted. A proposal completed in Electronic Grants Management System (EGMS) will be automatically audited by the system to ensure that calculations are correct and justifications are provided where necessary.
 

Common problem:
In the past, some PIs did not always list all active and pending support in the proposal's "other support" section. The University has a database that captures this information. See the EGMS homepage for information (http://www.egms.umn.edu/).

• Title or face page
• Table of contents
• Abstract or description
• Literature review or related studies
• Personnel
• Resources - available facilities and equipment
• Research plan/project description
• Methodology and timing
• Budget (discussed in section 2.5)
• Budget justification (discussed in section 2.5)
• Program income
• Other support
• Regulatory requirements
• Bibliography
• Appendices (if allowed)

  Common problem: PIs do not adhere to application requirements (e.g., font size or page limits). Some agencies, such as the NIH and NSF, will reject proposals that do not meet the requirements.

Title or face page
Many sponsors either provide their own title page forms or prescribe a format that usually contains the following information:

Title

• May be used as a screening device to determine which program office handles the proposal; referral to an inappropriate office could lead to rejection.
• Sponsors may limit its length.
• The first few words will be used in later communications.

• Refer to the Regents' policy on Submitting and Accepting Sponsored Projects for information on who can be a PI.
• The address must be as specific as possible; all later correspondence from the sponsor to the PI will use this address.
• Multi-institutional collaborations:
  See the sponsor's requirements. Often for F&A/indirect cost purposes, these collaborations must designate one institution as the primary facility. The investigator at that location should be the PI. The other institutions, however, must have designated investigators who assume local authority and responsibility for the project's conduct.

Co-PIs

• Co-Principal Investigators (Co-PIs) must all meet the criteria listed in the policy on Submitting and Accepting Sponsored Projects.

Beginning and end dates of the proposed project
To determine the start date, contact the sponsor. The sponsor may indicate how long the project can take and the earliest starting date.
 
Amount of the request
Indicate both direct and total (including indirect) costs.
 
Signatures of authorized organizational representative(s)
Awards are made to the University, not individuals. Therefore the Associate Vice President for Research, or designee, must sign as the "authorized representative." Sponsors may ask the PI to sign in another location.
 
Confidentiality statement (if applicable)
Helps protect the applicant's intellectual property interests. See "Before Writing the Proposal," section 2.2, for the statement's text.
 
Sponsor may require certain information related to the University (see Standard Institutional Information)

Table of contents
The proposal should contain a table of contents.
 
Abstract or description

• Present a short summary of the information detailed in later pages.
• Include a synopsis of the project's objectives and the procedures used to meet them.
• Used by the reviewer to gain a perspective of the study and as a reminder when the project is discussed.
• May be the only part of a proposal read by the reviewing panel or field reader recommendations.
  Note: Because of this distribution, the abstract should not contain any information which enables a person experienced in the field to fully understand and practice any inventions or new processes described in it. Otherwise, intellectual property rights may be jeopardized. See section 2.2 for further information.
• Prepare it carefully and make sure the broad summary statements are accurate.
• Generally limit it to one page, and many sponsors give limits for its length.

• Demonstrate the applicant's grasp of the subject area.
• Establish the current status of the field.
• Indicate how the project will advance knowledge in its area.
• Discuss only a few key studies.
• Present the material in a manner easily grasped by a nonspecialist.

The project director or principal investigator (PI) is usually the person who devised the project and will be responsible for its financial and scientific management.

There may be a co-principal investigator. Use of this category varies among agencies. Check the sponsor's guidelines to determine if this title can be used and how it is defined.

The co-investigator is usually a faculty member who has the scientific qualifications to conduct at least part of the project. A co-investigator can also be from another institution.
 
Key personnel information usually consists of two parts that may be found in different parts of the proposal:

• a list of key personnel and their roles in the project, and
• biographical data sheets.
   
  List of personnel
• Specify who will work on the project, in what capacity they will participate (PI, faculty associate, research assistant, etc.), and how much effort or time they will spend on the work.
• List by name (if possible) all personnel who will be working on the project, whether budgeted or cost- shared.
• Check any specific requirements for a person's identification and associated responsibilities.
   
  Note: Administrative and clerical costs cannot normally be charged as a direct cost. See the University's academic/administrative policy on Charging of Direct and Facilities and Administrative (Indirect) Costs.

  Biographical data sheets

• Establish the participant's expertise and unique capabilities for participation in the project.
• Use a common format.
• Include only relevant information.
• Do not exceed sponsor's limits.
• Include research experience, other related background information, and pertinent publications.
• Include curriculum vitae in the appendix.

• Describe in detail what work will be undertaken.
• Justify why the research should be funded.
• If contractual, consortium, or subaward are included: the PI assesses the potential subrecipient's ability to perform the work successfully based on a) past performance b) technical/financial resources c) proposed scope of work d) reasonableness of proposed costs. The PI then: 1) integrates the subrecipient's statement of work into the UM proposal narrative 2) includes the subrecipient's budget as a direct cost item in the UM budget and 3) forwards subrecipient's institutional approval form to SPA.
• State the major objectives clearly and specifically so they may be easily understood by the reviewer.

• Explain in detail how the project will be carried out.
• Demonstrate to the reviewer that the project is feasible and has a reasonable plan.
• Describe what variables were chosen and why, control methods, and data collection.
• Describe the nature of the data analysis and the method of this analysis.
• If the mode of analysis is to be determined after the data are collected, indicate the anticipated methods.
• Include copies of questionnaires or other means of data collection in the appendix.
• Acknowledge error factors and outline the means for controlling them.
• If the methodology is new, novel to the field, or interdisciplinary, explain it carefully because it might be unfamiliar to reviewers.
• Allow enough time in the proposed project period for data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
• If necessary, describe the project in phases:
  • It helps the proposal's clarity.
  • If a sponsor is unable to fund an entire proposal, it may fund certain phases.
  • A re-application to the same or another sponsor can be made for phases the sponsor does not fund.

• Income from fees for services performed such as laboratory tests.
• Income from the use or rental of equipment purchased under the project.
• Income from the sale of software or tapes.
• Registration fees from participants at conferences or symposia.
• Income from the sale of research materials such as tissue cultures or research animals.

It is appropriate to discuss with SPA whether funded activities might generate program income.

If the sponsor's application form does not provide information on where to include program income, list it in the budget or in a separate section after the budget (budget justification.)

Other support
 
The Public Health Service defines "other support" as all financial resources available in direct support of an individual's research endeavors. Federal agency proposal reviewers use this information to consider how the applicants spend their time, if their plans are viable, and whether research projects overlap in any way. Other support includes all active and pending funds from local, state, and federal agencies; private associations, nonfederal agencies, foundations, and companies; and institutional resources such as graduate school and deans office awards.

• Funded projects for which the applicant receives no salary must be listed (some agencies, including the National Institutes of Health, do not require training awards, prizes, and gifts to be reported as other support).
• To report "other support" on applications, list each of the key personnel in the proposal, excluding consultants, and provide the following information for each person:
  • title and project number of "other support" projects,
  • project period,
  • direct funding level,
  • source of funding,
  • brief description of the project and its goals,
  • percentage of time spent on the project, and
  • summarize for each individual any potential overlap (if requested).
• Do not rely on memory when completing this section. The Other Support database in EGMS has this information. See the EGMS homepage (http://www.egms.umn.edu/).

For NIH proposals:

Human subject approvals do not have to be obtained at proposal time. IRB review is not required until after peer review and the application has been judged to be in the fundable range.

• Curriculum vitae of key personnel
• Proposed questionnaires or survey instruments
• Abstracts, manuscripts, patents, or other printed materials directly related and relevant to the project
• Small Business Plans: Many sponsors, primarily federal agencies, require contract proposals to include a plan for purchasing goods and services from small and disadvantaged businesses. To assist in finding federally certified small businesses, the Small Business Administration (SBA), has established PRONET (http://pro-net.sba.gov/), a searchable database of small businesses that meet the federal requirements. Additionally, University of Minnesota Purchasing Services has established Federal Small Business Database, a Web site listing businesses that meet the federal requirement (http://fedsmall.umn.edu/).

NIH MODULAR PROPOSALS

A modular grant application is a format required by the NIH for proposals requesting up to $250,000 direct costs per year. If you are unsure if your proposal qualifies as a modular, check the "modular" box on the proposal setting screen in EGMS and prepare the budget, EGMS will determine. Instead of requesting funds in a detailed budget, the researcher requests monies in $25,000 modules. Other parts of the application are also simplified. The University still requires a detailed budget so that the award can be established in the financial system and so that F&A can be determined. EGMS will automatically convert a detailed budget into the modular format. For more information, see the EGMS job aid at: http://egms.quickhelp.umn.edu/EGMS_Instructions/Modular_instructions.html.

CONTINUATION PROPOSALS

Requirements for continuation proposal applications often differ according to whether the application is a competing continuation or a noncompeting continuation. The definitions below were adapted from the NIH Grants Policy Statement:

Competing continuation
An application to continue a project period that would otherwise expire.
 
Noncompeting continuation
An application for funding for the second or subsequent budget period within the already-approved project period.
 
Several federal sponsors have streamlined the process for completing these continuation proposals. Rather than filling out the whole application, PIs only complete several sections. Some continuation applications, e.g., NIH, are available on EGMS. The following points must be kept in mind as the application is filled out:
• All required sections must be filled in and answered; for items that have not changed, write "no change."
• If the application requests compliance committee's certification of approval, include only the most recent date of approval, i.e., the date of renewal or change in protocol approvals. This date must be the approval date from a meeting, not the date of correspondence. It can be found in the body of the committee's approval letter.
• Some sponsors, particularly federal agencies, require a list of inventions developed during the project or a certification that none were made.