Figure it out for yourself: A Request for Proposals (RFP) attracts 50 competitive responses. Of these, 20 proposals are credible and 5 are outstanding. A government-appointed review panel has the thankless task of reviewing all 50 offers and making recommendations regarding one award. While this is an oversimplification of a complex competitive procurement process, hopefully you get the point that actually winning a grant or contract is a very competitive sport.
There are only three reasons to prepare and submit a proposal: (1) to win, (2) to place among the finalists and maintain a reputation for being a major player, and (3) to gain attention and respect as a serious new competitor. If you do not accomplish one of these three goals, you are better off investing your money in a fishing trip.
Winning a grant or contract—or accomplishing one of the other two objectives—requires more than simply submitting a proposal. Here are the bottom-line issues:
In today's environment of scarce federal resources, the key issues for grants are those cited above for contracts, even though the procurement procedures are somewhat different.
Recently when I spoke with a health agency official, he said that the colleges and universities winning the most money were those who had gotten to know the agency's program officers. No, this was not a case of impropriety: The successful educational institutions took the time to understand the agency's funding goals, to ask questions and explore agency preferences, and to learn about the achievements of other institutions who would be competitors.
Here are two scenarios to ponder:
Competition #1: XYZ Corporation is proposing the world-renowned research scientist who achieved fame through successful projects relevant to the current agency competition, and ZZZ Corporation is proposing an individual with an unrelated Ph.D. who has worked as a middle manager.
Competition #2: Wolf University is proposing a principal investigator who is widely published in relevant areas and well regarded by the agency, while Sheep University is proposing a professor who is unpublished and unknown.
So who do you think will favorably impress the agency reviewers in the above competitions?
If you do not have the right individuals to propose, you may need to change your hiring practices. You can consider contingency hires (employment after award), but you must convince the agency that the individual will really come on board ... and replicate success in your environment. You can also consider a panel of several renowned experts on a consulting basis, but their participation must be real and a believable contribution to the project.
Your institutional credibility is important, too. Have you performed similar projects previously? Do you have the necessary facilities, equipment, and management resources? Do you have a reputation for full and complete performance of projects? Are you trustworthy? Do you complete work within budget? Can you manage projects professionally, or are you a pain in the neck? Be sure to communicate your institutional strengths.
Only a very few institutions are successful in winning solely on the basis of politics, especially in these days of investigative journalism. Do use legitimate political connections, but that alone will almost never win the award unless you address all of the other issues outlined in this paper.
P2C2 Group
(301) 942-7985
kendrick@p2c2group.com
Copyright 1996 by Jim Kendrick, Kensington, MD