Productive scholars prioritize research and use productive research approaches. How else could some produce ten or more publications per year and hundreds over their career? Productive scholars spend about half their work days focused on research, usually preserving the morning hours for research and writing, because those are their top priority and scholars want to give them their full attention when they are most alert. Productive scholars rarely publish alone. They collaborate on nearly 90 percent of their publications. Benefits of collaboration include the division of labor, multiple viewpoints, quicker outputs, and working on several projects simultaneously. Productive scholars typically juggle a half-dozen projects or more, in various phases of completion. They often seek grants that help them do more and better research. They also find publication opportunities by occasionally mining existing data sets, conducting meta-analyses, and composing literature reviews and conceptual pieces. Their research is marked by good research questions that are feasible to carry out with simple but powerful research designs. Productive scholars are self-regulatory, carefully monitoring progress and adjusting their approach as needed. Still, they occasionally fail, as all do. They are not disheartened, knowing that failure is their catalyst and success guide.

This chapter examines the capacity of the Federal Executive Government to spend money. The ability to spend is important to the functioning of government because of the need to pay public service salaries and to the implementation of government policies because many policy areas require large amounts of spending. Consistent with principles of responsible government, public funds are subject to parliamentary control through two constitutional requirements. First, all government revenue must be held in a single Consolidated Revenue Fund. Secondly, funds in the Consolidated Revenue Fund can be accessed only if appropriated by law. Funds that have been lawfully appropriated from the Consolidated Revenue Fund may be expended by the Federal Executive Government only if some law authorises that expenditure. Parliament also has power to grant funds to States on such terms and conditions as Parliament thinks fit. This power is regularly used to pay the States to implement policies that the Commonwealth lacks constitutional power to implement itself.

In this chapter, we investigate the economic choices – especially the price-output choices – made by performing arts firms. We cover the factors that help in determining the optimal price–output combination for performing arts firms. Furthermore, we discuss a multitude of market types and how these market types influence the behavior of performing arts firms. We also present the objectives of the performing arts firms, which depend on whether they are in the commercial or the not-for-profit sector of the economy. Ultimately, we end up with a model for the performing arts firm that is able to predict both ticket prices and length of season.

This chapter is for all academics, from students and faculty to professional staff at research centers and institutions. The content draws upon our experiences from when we were budding scholars, to experienced scientists, and now administrators, including time spent at federal funding agencies. Our aim is to provide information to scholars so that you can write more competitive grant proposals and secure greater resources for your research and scholarship. First, we provide a broad overview of what to consider before you embark upon writing a proposal. Then, we discuss areas for consideration in writing the proposal itself. Finally, we share steps to consider after you have received feedback about your proposal. We also provide some detail about particular funders, including support for international scholarship. As with all scholarship, persistence, collaboration, and support from colleagues are helpful for successfully securing external funding.

In Chapter 9 we talk about how to find requests for proposals/quotes/applications for your organization, or for community organizations you are working with, how to write a good prposal, and things you can do when money is tight.

One of the most important and daunting roles of the early academic is the pursuit of NIH grant funding. Although NIH funding allows for great autonomy and comes with validation and prestige, the process can feel overwhelming even for the most seasoned investigators. Therefore, being armed with information is crucial. Aiming to provide a guide to NIH grants with the early stage investigator in mind, this chapter outlines many of the key issues you will tackle throughout the process. These include: a) Developing Your Idea; b) Finding the Right Mechanism for You and Your Idea; c) Preparing Your Application; d) Submission and Receipt of Your Application; e) The Review Process; and f) Post-Review Strategies. These issues are addressed in light of the recent changes in the NIH grant submission and review process to provide an objective source, complimented by our favorite tips for your consideration.

So far, the book has explored different problems in the life cycle of a vaccine. First, it surveyed the pathways to bring new vaccines to market against a backdrop of lacking incentives to R&D, in spite of the recognized public health value of vaccines and the widespread use of intellectual property rights as an incentive to vaccine R&D. Second, it examined the allocative disparities that result from the commodification of vaccines, especially in situations of product scarcity, in which lower-income populations often face considerable hurdles in obtaining access to vaccines. This section examines possible solutions to alleviate these problems. It considers proposals that would take effect at the incentives level, by increasing funding for vaccine-related R&D work; proposals that would operate at transactional level, facilitating the transfer of vaccine technology through the use of patent pools and patent pledges; and proposals to expand and fine-tune the role of vaccine-dedicated public–private partnerships as instruments for the promotion of equitable access to vaccines by populations irrespective of their socioeconomic status.

This chapter offers practical guidance for funding language revitalization projects, particularly for language activists and community members. Some organizations devoted to endangered languages provide grants for revitalization efforts; funding may also be available from government bodies (mainly in the US and Canada) and other grants and scholarships. For smaller projects, crowd funding and other community initiatives have the additional benefits of raising awareness of the language revitalization program and involving the wider community. The factors that reviewers consider in assessing formal funding proposals are discussed, including the importance, feasibility and design of the project; the applicant’s connection to the community and ability to complete the work; and the appropriateness of the budget, including guidance on common budget categories and expenses. The capsule reports on a survey investigating attitudes of NGOs in Guatemala towards language revitalization; local organizations and institutions with a vested interest in local people were more likely to provide practical and financial support for revitalization initiatives.

Chaucerians seeking financial support for their research endeavors need to be cautious about using the appeal to enduring humanistic values, since they can be used both to deracinate and to trivialize what we do (even by our allies). More particular and specific arguments based on an ongoing and dynamic relation between past and present are both truer to the enterprise and, in the end, more compelling to contemporary audiences.