2012; 34: 450–453
TWELVE TIPS
Twelve tips for writing educational research
grant proposals
MARIA A. BLANCO
1
& MARY Y. LEE
2
1
Tufts University School of Medicine, USA,
2
Tufts University, USA
Abstract
Background: The need to promote educational research and faculty development grants and assist medical educators with grant
writing is well documented in the medical education literature.
Aims: To assist medical educators with writing educational research grant proposals, we propose a set of 12 tips for writing
competitive grant proposals.
Methods: We distilled challenges and effective strategies and approaches from our experience in writing and assisting with
education research grant proposals. We presented these challenges and approaches at faculty development workshops on writing
educational research grant proposals conducted over the past 3 years and evaluated the outcomes of these presentations and the
participant’s experiences with educational research grant writing.
Results: Approximately 100 participating faculty provided feedback, affirming that these sessions were very useful for developing
grant proposals and for reaching out to funding agencies and that these faculty development efforts in grant writing are much
needed.
Conclusions: Based on our experiences with education grants and workshop efforts, we propose a set of strategies for faculty to
seek grant sources and write promising education research grant proposals.
The need to promote educational research and faculty
development grants is well documented in the medical
education literature (Albanese et al. 1998; Walling et al. 1998;
Carline 2004; Irby et al. 2004; Quirk et al. 2005; Collins 2006).
Still, this literature highlights the need to assist medical
educators with educational research efforts, such as writing
research proposals. Although basic science or clinical medical
educators are familiar with clinical and/or basic science
research, they are less comfortable with conducting medical
education research. Reasons include lack of training in
educational research methods, unclear ‘‘credit’’ in promotion
processes, limited education research funding, and insufficient
mentors.
Over the past 3 years, we have offered faculty development
workshops on writing education research grant proposals
(hereafter, grantsmanship) at local, regional, and national
professional meetings. Our main goal has been to assist faculty
with identifying challenges of and strategies for writing
effective grant proposals. Approximately 100 participating
faculty provided feedback about the effectiveness of and
lessons learned from these sessions, affirming that these
sessions are very useful for developing their grant proposals
and reaching out to funding agencies and that these faculty
development efforts in grant writing are much needed. The
predominant ‘‘take-away’’ lessons were how to write compe-
titive research in medical education proposals, and how to
plan grant search strategies. The chief concern faculty raised
was the paucity of funding for such educational efforts and the
difficulty finding the few funding sources that do exist.
Based on our experiences with education grants and
workshop efforts, we propose a set of strategies for seeking
funding sources and writing promising education research
grant proposals.
Tip 1
Identifying funding agencies and resources
Start by contacting the Development Office at your institution.
Development offices have a database of funding agencies and
are familiar with funders’ missions and funding opportunities.
Development staff can assist you with identifying possible
funders for your project and verifying that your project aligns
with the funder’s mission and goals.
Your school’s offices of medical education, or educational
or faculty affairs may be able to assist you with finding funding
resources and refining your proposal. Some schools offer
internal grant programs for faculty educational innovations
(Albanese et al. 1998; Walling et al. 1998; Maderer et al. 2009).
Internal programs are a valuable venue to pilot-test your
project. Initial data and results from the pilot can inform the
next-stage proposal to expand your project and seek external
funding resources.
Correspondence: M.A. Blanco, Office of Educational Affairs, Department of Psychiatry, Tufts University School of Medicine, 145 Harrison Avenue,
Sackler Building, Room 325, Boston, MA 02111, USA. Tel: 1 617 6366588; fax: 1 617 6360894; email: Maria. [email protected]
450 ISSN 0142–159X print/ISSN 1466–187X online/12/060450–4 ß 2012 Informa UK Ltd.
DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.668246
Professional organizations, such as the American
Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the international
Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE), are good
venues to learn about funding resources and to network with
colleagues. By participating in professional meetings, you can
learn from colleagues’ educational research grantsmanship
experiences, and they can provide you with constructive
feedback on your project. Furthermore, sharing educational
research initiatives with colleagues provides an opportunity for
collaborative projects. Some of these professional associations
offer Educational Research/Innovations Grant programs, for
example, the regional groups of the AAMC Group on
Educational Affairs (GEA 2011).
Finally, professional specialty and sub-specialty organiza-
tions in areas such as family medicine, obstetrics-gynecology,
surgery, rheumatology, etc., sponsor various education scho-
lars programs that include early career support and project
funding.
Tip 2
Getting to know the funding agency
Once you have selected a funding agency, make sure you
understand their mission and goals. Check their website,
annual report and prior grant holders to evaluate whether your
project is a good fit. Do you match the profile of prior grant
holders? Does your project address their goals? Private funders
need to be approached in partnership with your development
office, since these are generally by invitation only.
Tip 3
Talking to the program officer
If the agency has a program officer, do your homework first
(Tip 2). You can then call the program officer to verify the ‘‘fit’’
and ask about any special requirements or exceptions. This is
particularly important for budget issues (Tip 10). Talking to the
program officer can provide insights on how to refine your
project to better match the funding agency’s interests, goals,
and mission.
Tip 4
Reading the directions and following them
This is such a simple tip, but one that is often missed. Read
carefully through all the directions, and make a checklist.
Ideally, have someone else confirm your checklist, and quickly
notify everyone involved including accounts departments,
letters of support writers, critical readers, etc. For annually
recurring grants, talk with a prior successful applicant for
things to pay attention to or avoid. Note the required order,
length, and format of documents such as addenda and
curriculum vitae. Some prescribe whom the letters of support
should be from and how many are allowed. More is not always
better. Letters of support generally are best from the highest
ranking administrator who needs to approve the project
budget or other requirements and should explicitly state that
support.
Tip 5
Writing clearly
The reviewer is unlikely to be from your field and typically will
be a busy person. Therefore, it is critical to write clearly and
avoid jargon. If the formatting rules permit, create headings
that contain the ‘‘take-home message’’ for each section. Topic
sentences should contain the key points for quick reading. Use
bullets, key diagrams, or charts to highlight other key points.
Test diagrams or charts with someone unfamiliar with your
project to insure that they are self-explanatory and enhance
your message. Allow time to ask mentors or colleagues to
provide feedback on a latest draft to insure clarity.
Tip 6
Making a case for the need of the project
Provide a convincing argument that clearly shows that your
project will address a problem or answer a research question
that is timely and relevant to the field. The reviewer should
quickly be able to answer several key questions related to the
importance, need, and purpose of the project, and your own
credentials to undertake the proposed project: (1) Why is your
project important to the funder? Why should the funder care?
(2) Was a case made for the project’s need? What’s new,
different, better? (3) Was the hypothesis or purpose clearly
identified, does the hypothesis or purpose address the need?
(4) Do the specific aims address the purpose? (5) What track
record do you have to accomplish your aims/goals? Do you
have prior related work, experience, and grants? Who have
been your collaborators?
Tip 7
Stating the relevance to the literature and the degree
of innovation of the project
Cite appropriate literature. Elicit help from your reference
librarian to conduct an additional search of the relevant
literature. Reviewing related literature will help to better
identify the problem or research question related to your
project that has not yet been addressed by others and to tailor
your project accordingly. Is the proposed project contributing
to the field with innovation in content, instruction, or
assessment? Consulting relevant literature will also help
define the conceptual frameworks that will inform your project
(Bordage 2009).
Tip 8
Designing appropriate methodology
Clearly explain your methodology and evaluation methods.
Describe the participants and context of your project, and
Twelve tips for writing grants
451
select the appropriate sample size. If the project involves
human subjects, state that you will seek Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approval and consider the IRB application process
when you design your project timeline (Tip 9). Identify
potential measurable outcomes of the project and the type of
data you need to collect. Do you need to collect qualitative
data, quantitative data, or both? Describe the strategies and
instruments you will use to collect the data, followed by the
methods of data analysis you will perform. The methods must
test the hypothesis or answer the research questions and
address the purpose of your project. Once you lay out your
methodology, assess whether or not you have the appropriate
team available to carry out this methodology, and plan
accordingly.
Tip 9
Planning a feasible project development and imple-
mentation timeline
Based on the design and methods you will pursue, map a
realistic and feasible timeline within the grant time period.
Account for extra time in case the implementation process
does not run as smoothly as planned, particularly if you cannot
commence necessary start-up activities prior to the official start
date. Projects that involve multiple sites and programs typically
demand more time. If your project involves human subjects,
the IRB process must be factored in, especially if participants
are hosted at different sites, which may require going through
the IRB at each site. Check your proposed timeline with
experienced colleagues. Remember, ‘‘less is often more.’’ A
succinct timeline that is self-explanatory and highlights project
milestones or deliverables is often most effective.
Tip 10
Allocating funds appropriately
The level of budget detail required and what is fundable vary
widely by agency. This information might not be clearly stated
in the grant instructions; so, check with the program officer to
insure that your budget items are eligible for funding (Tip 3).
For instance, common areas where agencies differ include
travel, faculty support, overhead rate, equipment, student
stipends, and expectation for in-kind contributions.
Tip 11
Sustaining the project after the grant period
Funding agencies seek projects with products that will endure
beyond the grant period and may stipulate community
involvement and/or impact. State how the outcomes of the
project will be sustainable beyond the funding period in your
department, school, institution, or field. Anticipate how you
will maintain and even expand the outcomes of your project
after the grant period. The outcomes of your project should not
require extra funds to insure their sustainability, unless this
is a pilot being used to pursue the next level of funding.
The explicit support of your higher ranking administrator (Tip
4) may serve as a testament of the sustainability of your
project.
Tip 12
Disseminating the project and extent of impact on
the field
Describe your plans for disseminating the outcomes of your
project, including to non-academic audiences, and your
project’s impact locally, nationally, and/or internationally.
Explain the difference your project will make to the field and
what future initiatives your project might give rise to. Your
dissemination plans will also reflect the sustainability of your
project beyond the grant period (Tip 11). Consider using open-
access venues to disseminate your work more widely and to
enable others to more easily build on your work.
Conclusion
As the faculty and educational scholars who joined our
educational research grantsmanship efforts suggested, these
educational efforts, as well as generating more funding for
research in medical education, are much needed. With this
article, we hope to reach out to more faculty and educational
scholars and continue to promote faculty involvement in
educational research grantsmanship efforts while raising the
field’s awareness of the need for such efforts.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the faculty and educational scholars
who joined their grantsmanship efforts and thus contributed
with their encouraging and constructive feedback. One of the
grantsmanship workshops offered by the authors in collabora-
tion with other educational scholars was submitted to an
educational online repository and is under review at the time
of this submission.
Declaration of interest: The authors report no declarations
of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content
and writing of the article.
Notes on contributors
MARIA A. BLANCO, EdD, is Associate Dean for Faculty Development,
Office of Educational Affairs, and Assistant Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts
University School of Medicine.
MARY Y. LEE, MD, MS, is Associate Provost, Office of the Provost, and
Professor of Medicine at Tufts University.
References
Albanese M, Horowitz S, Moss R, Farrell P. 1998. An institutionally funded
program for educational research and development grants: It makes
dollars and sense. Acad Med 73(7):756–761.
Bordage G. 2009. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify.
Med Educ 43:312–319.
M.A. Blanco & M.Y. Lee
452
Carline J. 2004. Funding medical education research: Opportunities and
issues. Acad Med 79(10):918–924.
Collins J. 2006. Medical education research: Challenges and opportunities.
Radiology 240(3):639–647.
GEA. 2011. Regional Grant Programs. Available from: https://www.aamc.
org/members/gea/gea_sections/rimesection (retrieved 2001 Sep 30).
Irby D, Hodgson C, Muller J. 2004. Promoting research in medical
education at the University of California, San Francisco, School of
Medicine. Acad Med 79(10):981–984.
Maderer A, Epstein S, Blanco MA, Lowney K, Lee M, Rosenblatt M.
Innovations in education intramural grant program. Abstract presented
at The generalists in medical education, 30th annual conference, 2009
November 7, Boston (MA).
Quirk M, Haley H, Hatem D, Starr S, Philbin M. 2005. Primary care renewal:
Regional faculty development and organizational change. Fam Med
37(3):211–218.
Walling A, Calkins D, Kallail K. 1998. An intramural grants program for
developing medical school curricula. Acad Med 73(5):618–619.
Twelve tips for writing grants
453
Copyright of Medical Teacher is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
