When you’re applying for your first federal grant, or seeking money from an agency you’ve never approached before, it is helpful to read copies of funded proposals. But the issue of how to obtain those copies tends to ignite more sparks than a short circuit in an electrical-engineering lab.
You can request a copy of the proposal from its author, or you can request a copy — under the Freedom of Information Act — from the federal agency that awarded the grant. The author is not obligated to provide a copy, but the government agency is.
Filing a FOIA request is a routine task for journalists and a common exercise in journalism courses. But in the scientific world, some view FOIA requests for grant proposals as antagonistic to the grantees, as an abuse of the law, and as something to be avoided at all costs. A FOIA request can even result in professional retaliation against the requester. Scientists who object to FOIA requests see them as bullying by researchers seeking an edge in an increasingly competitive grant environment. These critics say the law was never meant to force them to surrender their research plans to competitors, and they see such requests as a strong-arm legal tactic used to make up for weak research abilities. Meanwhile, other academics are not even aware that funded proposals are public documents, available on request.
I have successfully obtained copies of grant proposals both by FOIA request and by contacting the scientists. There are pros and cons to each approach, and you must decide for yourself how (and whether) to proceed.
Requesting a funded proposal under FOIA is straightforward. Agency websites have a page devoted to how to submit your request. The page is likely to pop up if you type “FOIA” into the search bar on the agency’s website. Basically, you need to submit a written request that describes the records you want in as much detail as possible. For a grant proposal, you can use details such as its author, title, and grant number from the proposal abstract available online. You also need to state how much you are willing to pay in fees for the copy. Not all agencies will charge you, but they can. An agency’s response time can vary, but you will probably wait at least several weeks, if not more, for the document.
For scientists whose grant proposals attract a FOIA request: Be aware that the requester may not realize the practice is controversial.
One reason you won’t get the proposal immediately is that the agency is obligated to check with the author first to determine whether any information in the proposal is proprietary and exempt from disclosure. For example, the agency can black out discussion of a patentable invention in the same way that police or courts sometimes remove the names of victims from crime reports.
Keep in mind: The agency will share your identity with the author. Agencies must regularly publish the names of those who have filed FOIA requests, the documents they requested, and the agency’s response. In short, you cannot request a proposal anonymously.
You can, however, ask someone else to file the request for you. Your university’s sponsored-projects office might be willing to file on your behalf, although it might balk at paying any associated fees. There are also businesses that file FOIA requests on behalf of clients, but that will add another cost.
Some grant professionals and researchers vehemently discourage FOIA requests. Some scientists view those requests as a strong-arm tactic that is unprofessional and insulting. “When I get a FOIA request,” wrote one science blogger, “it’s transparently a request to lean about how I got funded, not to learn about the activities I am conducting. Who wants to do anything that migth harm their own funding success, especially when funding rates are so low?” Making such a request risks turning the proposal’s author into a foe who, in the small world of scientific specialties, can damage the requester’s career during a grant panel or manuscript review. It may be legal to file an FOIA request, but it can be a malignant career move, particularly for a new investigator. Scientists have called FOIA requesters “bottom feeders” who deserve to be publicly shamed.
Instead, grant professionals recommend asking the author directly for a copy of the proposal, using it as a chance to cultivate a collaborative relationship. In the request, try to mention a connection to the author, such as membership in the same disciplinary association or a common graduate school. The request will seem more respectful and might lead to a fruitful discussion of the scholarship involved. It can also be much quicker to obtain proposals directly from their authors — they can email the documents to you without any vetting by the agency.
Despite the hazards of using FOIA to request proposals, plenty of people still do it.
In scanning the FOIA logs that agencies are required to publish annually, I found requests from all manner of colleges and universities — public and private, two-year and research-intensive. Other requesters included consultants, individuals, law firms, and news organizations. Some requesters sought dozens of proposals.
Researchers at my university have filed FOIA requests with no apparent harm to their careers. I also spoke with scientists who were well aware that their grant proposals were public documents, and had no problem with others requesting copies via a FOIA request.
Some agencies have eliminated the need for FOIA requests by posting copies of successful proposals on their websites. That also saves federal officials the time and effort involved in responding to such requests.
You may also find copies of funded proposals simply by searching the internet. Sometimes the leaders of large collaborative grants post copies of the successful proposals on their project websites so all participants can easily refer to the work plan. That is obviously a hit-or-miss approach if you’re looking for grant proposals you can use as guides in crafting your own, but it can’t hurt.
For scientists whose grant proposals attract a FOIA request: Be aware that the requester may not realize the practice is controversial. I was astonished by how passionately some scientists object to them. The requester is not necessarily attempting to pirate your ideas and may simply want to see the structure and organization of your proposal. Consider feeling honored that others want to read your work.
Karen M. Markin is director of research development at the University of Rhode Island’s research office.
