Grant Development Assistance
Grant Writing Bootcamp
The third annual Grant Writing Bootcamp was held in late March 2018. This 4 day workshop assists a small group of faculty in preparing R21 proposals for the June deadline. New this year, aspects of Bootcamp were made available for junior faculty (Early Stage Investigator Eligible – criteria is detailed here) who are preparing their first R01 proposal for the June deadline. The program for R01 proposals will extend beyond the Bootcamp week and lead into our standing Pre-Submission Peer Review program (described below). Faculty from DSPH are nominated by Department Chairs to participate in this Grant Writing Bootcamp.
The goal of Bootcamp is to provide an environment conducive for focusing on grant writing and will include mentoring and mini workshops led by experienced grant writers, peer reviews of drafted materials, and various amenities to stay focused and on track. The intention is for each participant to have a complete full draft of their proposal by the end of the four days.
Pre-Submission Peer Review Program
The DSPH Research Office offers a voluntary pre-submission peer review program available to all faculty with a primary appointment in DSPH for eligible proposals.
The goal is to provide useful feedback regarding the research narrative to aid the investigator in submitting the strongest application possible. The process also provides an opinion on the project from someone other than a collaborator.
Eligible proposals must have:
- Average annual budget of $100K of more
- Full indirect costs (including training grants)
- Both new applications and resubmissions are eligible
Contact Amy Confair if you plan to submit a proposal for peer review.
Investigators should submit, at minimum, the specific aims and research strategy/plan section of the grant for review. Resubmission applications should also include any previous funding agency reviews (i.e., “pink sheets,” summary statement, etc.) and responses to those critiques. Review of these sections will be prioritized, but reviewers will also be asked to look at other available sections (which can impact scores on personnel and environment) if they are made available. Deadlines must be met for notification of intent to submit and submission of draft proposal to the DSPH Research Office.
Each proposal submitted will be reviewed by one Drexel University faculty member and one outside reviewer. Both internal and external reviewers will receive an honorarium for their time which will be paid by the DSPH Research Office. DSPH Investigators submitting proposals will be asked to discuss with the DSPH Research Office the type of reviewers whose input they feel will be most valuable and attempts will be made to solicit those types of reviewers. The DSPH Research Office will contact candidate reviewers and manage the process of receiving feedback. Reviewers will be asked to score and give comments on proposals using the review criteria associated with the mechanisms the investigator is pursuing (if available). Reviewers will also be directed to provide specific advice on changes that can be made to improve the proposal.
This is the typical timeline of the peer review program:
6 weeks prior to the grant deadline - Notify DSPH Research Office of intent to submit proposal for pre-submission peer review, share draft Aims, and discuss candidate reviewers with Research Office. [Research office will contact reviewers]
4 weeks prior to the grant deadline - Submit draft proposal to DSPH Research Office (must include Aims and Research Plan at minimum – plus critiques and response to critiques for resubmissions). [Research Office will transmit proposal to reviewers]
2 weeks prior to the grant deadline - Feedback is received and the DSPH Research Office will share feedback with the faculty investigator.
2 weeks after the grant deadline - Submit evaluation of pre-submission review (form provided by the Research Office)