Synopsis: This free live webinar summarized the insights we’ve gained from our work reviewing thousands of science and engineering proposals each year for national, state, and university-system grant competitions. We presented the ten most frequent reviewer criticisms and the strategies we’ve seen adopted in successful proposals to avoid those criticisms. Our work has spanned proposals in all fields of the sciences, engineering, technology development, and mathematics. The proposals that we have experience with range from small project development grants to large-scale transdisciplinary collaborations among multiple institutions and countries.
Audience: The webinar may be of particular interest for graduate students, early career faculty, or established researchers interested in our perspective.
Speaker: The live webinar was presented by Dr. Charles E. Dunlap, Director of the Research Competitiveness Program. Dr. Dunlap has more than 20 years of experience designing and implementing national and international S&T grant competitions, overseeing funding agencies, and developing and leading symposia on peer review process. He has created and led S&T programs in the U.S. and more than thirty countries.
Dr. Dunlap was joined by Dr. Heather E. McInnis, Associate Director of the Research Competitiveness Program. Over the last decade, Dr. McInnis has designed peer review processes for universities, technology-based economic development organizations, foundations, and national funding programs in 15 U.S. states and countries abroad, and managed review of thousands of S&T proposals on topics ranging from ecosystems science to high-energy physics.