Practical Tips with Catarina Kiefe

ImageImage

Detailed Evaluation Results for Practical Tips with Catarina Kiefe

39 of the 54 faculty that attended completed evaluations.

The workshop was led by Catarina Kiefe from the University of Massachusetts Medical School. She is the chair in biomedical research and also a professor of quantitative health sciences.

Faculty responded in the surveys that the session lived up to their expectations and that the information given at the workshop will improve their ability to write grants. The session allowed them to get useful suggestions towards various aspects of grant funding, as well as provide useful tools for overcoming obstacles.

Their comments suggested that they learned about "different types & series of grants and their specifications," "how funding is provided & what are the major areas during the review process," and "the potential for Social Science funding through NIH." Some faculty were interested in having "more focus on Non-NIR/RO1 grant writing for junior faculty," and "an example of a good grant proposal would have helped."

Overall, participants said that "Dr. Kiefe was very clear, eloquent, supportive and inspirational." They were "encouraged by this seminar and really appreciate you organizing this."

Questions & Responses

The workshop on Writing Grants lived up to my expectations.
N=39 Mean=4.26 SD=1.02 Range= 1 (strongly disagree)- 5 (strongly agree)

I learned information at this workshop that will improve my ability to write grants.
N=39 Mean=4.21 SD=1.00 Range= 1 (strongly disagree)- 5 (strongly agree)

The session allowed me to get useful suggestions towards various aspects of grant funding, and provided useful tools for overcoming obstacles.
N=39 Mean=4.03 SD=1.06 Range= 1 (strongly disagree)- 5 (strongly agree)

I am glad I took the time to participate in this presentation.
N=39 Mean=4.23 SD=0.99 Range= 1 (strongly disagree)- 5 (strongly agree)

Questions & Answers:

Please give a specific example of at least one thing you learned and will definitely take from the Writing Grants: Art or Science? Overview and Practical Tips workshop to use in your work.

  • The review of grant review panels were useful.
  • To include weakness in proposal.
  • How to format methods section (especially non-mandated sections like strength/Limitation).
  • Brag about your team in the preliminary section.
  • Very detail information about how to write proposals, like of be friendly for reviewers, formats etc.
  • I learned about different types & series of grants and their specifications.
  • Format of grant slide.
  • How funding is provided & what are the major areas during review process.
  • Congress is the big boss.
  • Write carefully in strengths and weaknesses section.
  • Different type of grants, what to write and what not to write.
  • The whole talk was new for me! My first time hearing about grant writing tips.
  • Potential for Social Science funding through NIH.
  • Funding resources.
  • The nod to time management was helpful. Tips were good.

Is there anything that could have been improved about this workshop?

  • Not the fault of the presenter but I would say 99% of what I heard today is information I have heard many times before.
  • Less NIH specific.
  • Hard to note all valuable information, so it would be so great if you can send us summary or slides the speaker used.
  • Less use of terminology for those who are unfamiliar.
  • Yes, I think an example of a good grant proposal would have helped. Maybe specific sections from past grants would have helped.
  • More snacks!
  • None.
  • Perhaps scheduled a bit earlier for more discussion.
  • Move focus on Non-NIR/R grant writing for junior faculty.
  • First 6-7 slides are very heavily medical oriented.
  • More cookies.
  • Discussion on hypothesis.
  • Make slides available (printed) before session.
  • More time on tips and less on types of grants.
  • I am looking for information on how to get "budget dust" grants-small, 20-30k, one-time grants.
  • Less focus on scientific/medical grant writing.
  • I would love to see this expanded to a panel where Education grants are discussed in addition to NIH etc.
  • It was good for some populations.
  • Try showing the RFP and then actual grant that was written and funded.
  • Great introduction to grant writing.
  • The title should have specified the emphasis on Biomedical research because that is not applicable to me.

General Comments about the overall workshop?

  • Well presented, easy to follow, personal experiences were useful.
  • Dr. Kiefe was very clear, eloquent, supportive and inspirational.
  • A little general (to me).
  • I am also encouraged by this seminar. I really would appreciate you organized this!!
  • Interesting but detailed for someone unfamiliar with the overall process.
  • I liked the organization of her PowerPoint and the pace at which Dr. Kiefe spoke. She answered all questions and was knowledgeable about the material.
  • Very informative.
  • Great job!
  • Fantastic!
  • It was a well prepared and structure workshop.
  • Great nuts & bolts suggestions!
  • Great information!
  • The advertisement did not state science only. More to address Social Science or Education and independent research would have been nice. Or even Arts and Humanities.
  • Another grant seminar for individual who have applied to a grant before might be useful.
  • I guess this helps show me the gold standard of quantitative research. What I actually need is guiding on community engagement and student programs funding.