8 April 2015

A Survey Analysis of Grant-Writing Costs and Benefits

Theodore von Hippel Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

It seems that whenever astronomers meet, we end up discussing the difficulty of funding our research. After conversations with many of you (and too many failed proposals myself), I decided to investigate what funding-rate threshold was too low to make it worth applying. My sister-in-law, an organizational psychologist, outlined how we could measure appropriate trade-offs related to this question, and a dozen colleagues helped us refine our initial survey, the results of which appeared in the online open-access journal PLOS One on 4 March 2015.

In order to address the funding-rate question, we needed to determine the typical effort involved in writing grant proposals and to explore the direct as well as possible ancillary benefits. In 2012 we surveyed 113 astronomers and 82 psychologists active in applying for federal funding on their grant-writing history between January 2009 and November 2012. We collected data on demographics, effort levels, success rates, and perceived nonfinancial benefits from writing grant proposals.

We found that the average proposal takes 116 principal-investigator hours and 55 co-investigator hours to write, though time spent writing was not related to whether a proposal was funded. Effort did translate into success, however, as academics who wrote more grant proposals received more funding. Participants indicated modest nonmonetary benefits from grant writing, but these were unrelated to how many grants investigators applied for, the number of grants they received, or the amount of time they devoted to writing their proposals.

We also explored how long an investigator can afford to apply unsuccessfully for research grants. Our analysis suggests that funding rates below approximately 20%, commensurate with current National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF) funding, are likely to drive at least half of active proposal-writing researchers away from federally funded research within three years. We conclude with recommendations for individual investigators and for department heads.

We invite you to read our article and supplemental materials in PLOS One, where we also discuss correlations (or lack of same) between grant-writing success and gender, seniority, and other demographics.