Customer Reviews

Research Proposals, Third Edition: A Guide to Success

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"Research Proposals" is the best book I have found for teaching and/or writing research grants aimed at an NIH audience or related. I have used it for 10 years now in a grant writing class for graduate students and still take the book down and look over certain chapters before sitting down to write my own grants. The book is clearly organized into chapters dealing with each section of the grant and gives very solid and clear advise on the purpose of each section and ways to make each section strong and relate to the others. Later editions of the book have added to this basic information with more details on different types of grants and the grant process. This latest version is further strengthened with good examples. More such examples would further enrich the use of this book. Overall, it gives a perfect balance of depth, yet each chapter is short enough you can go through it quickly as a refresher and to help maintain your focus while writing. After reviewing about a dozen other titles in this area the Ogden book emerges as my clear favorite for teaching a grants class or for writing my grants.

I read this book after writing an NIH (National Institutes of Health) grant and I was able to go back and improve a number of substantive aspects of my application before I submitted it. Since this third edition was published, however, NIH has gone fully electronic in its grants application process and there is no description of how to navigate and use the mandatory online tools such as grants.gov, the PureEdge viewer and the eRA Commons. There are a number of gotchas in these tools and processes that can result in rejection of a grant for purely technical reasons. Perhaps this is less important for those applicants who are supported by full time, professional grants administrators at their institutions who know the nuances of these processes. But for applicants lacking such infrastructure, there is a steep learning curve and the process can be somewhat daunting. This book contains no information on the steps and mechanics of electronic grant submission. Nevertheless, on the substantive content of grant applications, this book offers excellent, practical advice and examples and belongs on the book shelf of everyone who applies for grants from government sources as well as from private foundations, etc.

A must for anyone who fishes for money/grant for research. Great asset and provides immense help and support for developing grant writing skill

This is a good book, I used it extensively while writing a dissertation grant in graduate school along with Gerin's book. This book has uses a more basic science example to illustrate their grant writing techniques and principles. In contrast Gerin's (I used the previous edition) had a more clinical example. I can't really say which was better. Gerin's example was much more applicable to my grant so that was helpful, but I liked the approach and explanations of this book as well.

However, the book's information is now out of date, particularly with respect to the NIH RO1 grant. It discusses the old 25 page grant format. That has changed to a new 12 page format, there are new review criteria and new scoring system, and new grant subsections: significance, innovation, approach. I don't think it covers the changes for new investigators, or new awards such as the new pathway to independence grant (K99/R00). (The section on postdoctoral awards/career development awards is quite short to begin with.)

The principles it discusses are relevant but the details are out of date (not just in the technical arena as another review pointed out) but also with respect to the actual format and focus of the NIH RO1 grant.

I'd wait for a new edition or consider an alternate book.