They're or Their: Avoiding Common Grammar Mistakes in Grant Applications

Many words and phrases are commonly confused with each other when writing in English. (The same problem might exist in other languages as well, but unfortunately I am not fluent enough to pick up these nuances in another language. My high school French teacher, who was impressed with my ability to converse with strangers on a school trip to Paris, would be very disappointed.) 

Unfortunately, many of these confused words and phrases are not picked up by the Microsoft Word spelling and grammar review that so many of us have come to rely on. This includes common typos that might change the meaning of a sentence but are still grammatically correct. 

To catch these types of mistakes, it is important to allow enough time to review your final proposal draft, paying close attention to each word, as well as to ask at least one colleague or professional editor to review the proposal prior to submission. This means that if you are working on an R01 proposal for the October 5th deadline, you should not plan to finish writing your Research Strategy on October 4th. It takes time to read and absorb every word of a document - most of us have a tendency to skim over text we have written and already read multiple times.

Examples of word and phrase substitutions and common typos to watch for include:

• advise - advice
• affect - effect
• cancer - canker
• data - date
• flight- fight
• flow - fowl
• food - flood
• its - it's
• light - lite
• phase - phrase
• prostate - prostrate
• then - than
• they're - their - there
• to - too
• veterinarian - vegetarian (yes, I have seen this one!)
• who - whom
• your - you're

This list is, of course, not exhaustive. There are many possible typos and mistakes that can occur during the course of writing your NIH grant proposal. Often, typing quickly leads to typos in acronyms. For example, HPLC becomes HLPC. To help catch this if you are working on the document in Word, I recommend searching for each acronym that has been used in your proposal. The acronyms should have red lines under them, which indicate spelling errors. If you ignore the spelling error, the red lines with disappear under all instances of the acronym. If you do this for all of your acronyms and there are still red lines remaining in the text, it will help to alert you of typos.

I hope these examples help to illustrate why it is vitally important to begin the writing process early and finish your materials early enough to allow time to incorporate review by colleagues or professional staff. The more eyes on the proposal, the better!

Why font, margin, and spacing tricks are a bad idea in your NIH grant application

NIH has clear guidelines for formatting grant application attachments, including font and margin size, spacing, and font type. These rules are designed to provide a level playing field to ensure that researchers are all given the same amount of space in which to sell their research project in their proposal. As someone who has written and edited hundreds of NIH grant proposals over the years, I have seen many of the same attempts at gaming the system tried over and over again. Most often, the individuals who try to bend the rules regarding NIH formatting guidelines are trainees and junior faculty members who are fairly new to NIH grant proposal writing. However, occasionally I am surprised by a more seasoned investigator attempting some of the same tricks. Here I will cover some of the most common attempts at getting around the requirements.

Let's start with the NIH formatting guidelines. For all research, career development, and training grant applications (including R01, R21, R03, K01, F31, T32, etc.), the formatting requirements are described below.

Font and Line Spacing Requirements:

• Font size:  Must be 11 points or larger. Smaller text in figures, graphs, diagrams and charts is acceptable, as long as it is legible when the page is viewed at 100%.
• Some PDF conversion software reduces font size. It is important to confirm that the final PDF document complies with the font requirements.
• Type density:  No more than 15 characters per linear inch (including characters and spaces).
• Line spacing: No more than six lines per vertical inch.
• Text color: No restriction. Though not required, black or other high-contrast text colors are recommended since they print well and are legible to the largest audience.
• Recommended Fonts:
• Arial
• Georgia
• Helvetica
• Palatino Linotype

Paper Size and Margins

• Use paper (page) size no larger than standard letter paper size (8 ½" x 11”).
• Provide at least one-half inch margins (½") - top, bottom, left, and right - for all pages. No applicant supplied information can appear in the margins.

Now that you have a general idea of the formatting requirements, let's discuss what should not be done in your NIH grant proposal. Font size is one of the most common requirements that grant applicants attempt to circumvent. As written above, the font size is at minimum 11-point font and preferably the proposal should be written in one of four fonts. 

• This does not mean that 10.9 font is acceptable.
• This does not mean that 10.98 font is acceptable.
• This does not mean that 10.99 font is acceptable.
• This does not mean you should change part of your text to a different font to squeeze in a few extra words.
• This does not mean you should reduce your type density to squish your words together.

Line spacing is another common issue. I am not sure why, but well-meaning colleagues continue to suggest to new grant applicants that reducing the line spacing is the best way to edit a proposal so it falls under the page limits. Encouraging researchers to pack in their text more densely instead of revising their writing so it is clearer and more concise is well-intentioned but terrible advice. 

NIH formatting requirements specify that proposal text must include no more than six lines per vertical inch. If you are using Arial 11-point font and you change the line spacing in MS Word to "Exactly 12 point", the text will technically meet the NIH requirements for number of lines per vertical inch. However, the text appears dense and more difficult to read. If you change the line spacing to "Exactly 11 point", you will not meet the formatting requirements. This is not an automatic check that will show up as a warning or error in grants.gov; rather, you will be contacted by the Center for Scientific Review weeks or months after you thought your proposal was successfully submitted, only to find out that it is being rejected without review.

When it comes to formatting your NIH grant application, why take any changes by trying to circumvent the rules? Taking the time to review and edit your proposal text, or to seek the assistance of a senior colleague or experienced grant editor, will help you to put your best foot forward in the review process. The cardinal rule of grants is, "Don't annoy the reviewers!" Attempting any of the tricks mentioned above not only runs the risk of a proposal rejection, but also is likely to give the reviewers a headache as they tackle the dense text of your proposal.

Medical Futility Blog: "Lethal Malformations" and Language of "Futility"

Medical Futility Blog: "Lethal Malformations" and Language of "Futility": In the October 2014 Seminars in Neonatal and Fetal Medicine , Dominic Wilkinson and colleagues discuss the use of language surrounding severe congenital malformations.  This seminar brings up a very important issue that is important for everyone engaged in clinical research.  The terms that are used to describe various abnormalities may inadvertently confer some type of clinical judgement.  For example, calling a condition such as anencephaly "incompatible with life" infers that a baby with the condition will not survive, even though babies with the condition can survive for a period of time.  I highly recommend listening to this seminar and giving thought to how it may apply to your line of research. 

Font does matter

It seems that every so often, I encounter someone who insists on using a font in NIH grant proposals that is not approved by NIH.  People tend to get hooked on certain fonts, and asking them to use a different font is like asking them to write in Greek.  Why does font matter?  From a reviewer perspective, the fonts that are allowed by NIH have been chosen to be easier to read and more uniform than others.  Could you imagine having to read an entire research plan that looks like this?

So, which fonts does NIH allow?  There are only 4 to choose from, specified in the PHS 398 guide. These include:

• Palatino
• Georgia
• Arial
• Helvetica

No matter which one you choose, the size needs to be 11 point or greater.  If you try to cheat and use 10.9 to squeeze in a few extra words, you run the risk of your proposal being rejected for not meeting the formatting requirements.

What's in a name...of a file?

Yes, some of us do some very quirky things when it comes to naming documents that we are working on.  This includes me, as I have been known to name versions of files according to my level of aggravation (such as grant_proposal_X_revisedhopefullyforthelastdarntime).  When it comes to the SF424 application package, however, what you name your files may result in errors or outright rejection of your application.  Naming one file with a title that includes special characters such as ", +, or &, or my personal favorite, putting getmoney$ at the end of every document title, may prevent your application from passing validation.  Prevent these headaches and be kind to your research administrator by giving your documents easy titles.  Including the PI's name in the title of each document can also help to prevent confusion if you work in a busy department that may have multiple applications going in for the same opportunity.  Naming a grant file is like naming a baby - choose wisely or you may suffer long-term consequences!

Don't try to shove things where they don't belong!

With the June deadlines fast approaching, some of you may be in panic mode.  You may be frantically trying to get all of the knowledge out of your head and into the 12 page research strategy.  Or perhaps you are desperately trying to cut pages down to make the 6 page limit for your R03.  Either way, don't let your panic cloud your better judgement.  You need to follow the page limits, as does everyone else who applies for a grant from any funder, not just NIH.  The requirements are in place to make things uniform and help to ensure a fair and consistent review.  Read some of my previous advice on shortening paragraphs and editing proposals.  Also, read this older post that explains why you should not try to hide extra information in the Appendix to circumvent page limits. 

Oh no! I am over the page limit! Help!

Are you struggling to cut from 7 pages down to 6? Have you read your research plan 10 times, trying desperately to figure out how and where to cut? Don't panic. Take a deep breath, minimize your Word document on your screen, and trying goofing off for 5 minutes. (Yes, I am suggesting that you procrastinate in order to get your work done!)
First, what not to do. Do not start to think you are a Microsoft Word Master of the Universe. Any trick you can think of- shrinking margins to 0.495, shrinking text to 10.9, decreasing spacing so that lines are almost on top of each other- has already been tried and denied. Second, do not start deleting important pieces of your application just to save space. Third, and perhaps most important, do not start cutting from your research plan and trying to put the text in your Resources section or Appendix. (NIH recently announced that they are cracking down on this practice too.)

So, what's an aspiring scientist to do? Fortunately, there are methods of shortening your research strategy section that do follow NIH rules. Here are some options:

1. Tables and Charts are your friend. There are no text size requirements for tables and charts, as long as they are clear and legible. Have a long list of information? Try turning it into a table to save some space.




2. Check your text wrapping on tables, charts, and images. In many cases you can wrap text to one side or another of a graphic and create more space. Just remember to keep your image/table/chart together with the paragraph that references it. It will make it easier for reviewers to follow.




3. Using Track Changes and a thesaurus, attack your document from an editor's perspective. Rather than looking for content to remove, look for places where you may have a description that is very wordy, or may be able to convey the same message using shorter words or phrases.

If all else fails, talk to a seasoned proposal assistant or research administrator at your institution. An experienced person may be able to take a look and offer more advice on cutting. Don't have one? Email me at grantpwriter "AT" (replace with @) gmail.com and we can see if there is a way for me to help.

My advice on length (size matters!)

Since I just got off the phone and finished giving this advice I thought I should share it with the rest of the blog universe: When writing your grant proposal, it is much easier to cut material than to go back and add more material. Chopping is simpler than creating! So as you work on your grant proposal, dissertation, letter to the editor, or psychotic manifesto, just put all of your ideas and information on paper. Don't worry about section or page limits until after you have finished a first draft and are able to take a break from the document for a short period of time, then review it with a clear head for cuts that can be made.

If you are concerned about having to go back and change your reference citations if any are removed, my response is- you shouldn't be! With EndNote, RefWorks, and so many similar products on the market right now, there is no excuse for you to be numbering citations by hand! Create a great database of papers that you may need to cite, and these programs make it very easy to go back and make text edits later.