Searching for Secondary Research: Reflections of a Grant Writer
Searching for Secondary Research: Reflections of a Grant Writer
Past Experiences in Searching for Secondary Research
Reflecting on what I have learned about searching for secondary research increased my understanding of past experiences. This “new understanding” has led to a greater awareness of how searching for secondary research using recently acquired skills and resources could enhance my current work.
The key “illuminations” resulting from my reflection can be summarized by noting that, prior to participation in Issues in Technical and Professional Communication coursework, I have not often conducted searches for secondary research because the process of doing so seemed overwhelming, access and time constraints have presented barriers, and the gains of conducting searches for secondary research have not been evident. Clearly, each element of this illumination warrants further consideration, particularly given the impact “reflection learning” may have on the way I carry out my work as a grant writer.
Demystification of the Secondary Research Search Process
In my mind, secondary research is, or has been until this point, a simplistic sounding term for a vast body of information that is not easily navigated without the proper tools, or a clear road map. In reflecting on the process of searching for secondary research, I now clearly understand that I have used many of the techniques and search methods in my role as a grant writer for a health care system, although my searches for existing, secondary research as it relates to grant writing have historically lacked a consistent structure.
By using a deliberate, structured process to identify secondary research that includes defining a topic, developing an understanding of related professional organizations and journals, and searching available resources for specific research using key words, both effectiveness (did I find the “right” information?) and efficiency (did I find the “right” information quickly and in an organized manner?) are improved. Undoubtedly, using this process to search for secondary research as it relates to grant proposal development would strengthen both my knowledge of the subject matter being proposed, as well as the actual proposal itself.
The Impact of Access and Time on Searching for Secondary Research
Upon reflection, I now realize how much the constraints of access and time have also restricted my searches for secondary research in the past. While, as a grant writer for a health care system, I do have access to a fairly comprehensive library, the procedures for obtaining secondary research through this library are cumbersome and time-consuming. Rather than having access to databases such as those provided to me as a student at East Carolina University, I must request that a librarian conduct searches for research for me. This request must be submitted on an electronic form via email, rather than in person, a process that presents a significant barrier to finding secondary research efficiently and effectively. Often conveying what research would be helpful on the electronic form is difficult largely due to what I now recognize as recursive nature of the search process, based on class learning. How can a librarian effectively conduct a search for me based on the limited information an electronic search request form allows me to provide? What research remains unknown to me because I am a spectator, rather than a participant, in the actual search process? Based on experiences in the past and reflections on recent class activities, the answers to these questions are quite simple: the research I am provided with often “misses the mark” and is irrelevant to the grant proposal topic, a result indicating that relevant research is being overlooked.
Given this situation, the logical solution would likely be to conduct my own research; however, this option also leads to difficulties. In the past, without access to Joyner Library’s resources and databases, I have been able to find relevant, or what appears to be relevant, research using web search engines, but am faced with a dilemma as a result – do I then request that the FirstHealth librarian access specific articles, which adds significant time to the grant proposal development process, or do I pay the rather substantial fees for one-time viewing of these articles via “public” access to save time, knowing that reimbursement for such expenses would likely not be approved, given the fact that I do have access to articles through the FirstHealth library?
This dilemma might lead one to ask about the feasibility of accessing FirstHealth’s library resources myself. Certainly, providing me with personal access to the databases FirstHealth’s library uses would save time on my part, which is nearly always at a premium given the typically tight deadlines for grant proposal submissions, and allow me to “follow where my searches lead,” an approach that would certainly yield applicable research. However, access to databases and other resources for searching for secondary research is highly “guarded” by library staff, no doubt evidencing strategies of validation and self-preservation – why would an organization like FirstHealth, that faces the same financial constraints that most, if not all, health care organizations face, maintain a library staffed by numerous employees, if their expertise was not “required” to perform secondary research searches for physicians and health care system staff?
Searching for Secondary Research – A Real-Life Application
Upon recognizing that I have now developed the skills and gained the access necessary to effectively conduct secondary research searches, I reflected upon the benefits of doing so as a part of the grant proposal development process. After substantial consideration, I realized that the development of a needs statement, which is a nearly universal component of grant proposals, provides an excellent illustration of the potential for strengthening through searching for secondary research. In instances where grant funding agencies have defined a target audience either for funding (“all not-for-profit health care agencies may apply”) or intervention (“projects must focus on serving the health needs of low-income North Carolinians”), a grant seeking agency must define the most significant needs of those the proposed project will serve. In order to adequately prepare a needs statement in response to such requirements, an organization serving Latino North Carolinians might cite high rates of uninsured populations, low rates of dental care access among Latino children, or other similar circumstances using both quantitative and qualitative data, depending on proposal guidelines and project focus.
While much of the data and information presented in a needs statement of a health-related grant proposal, regardless of the specific topic, can easily be obtained from formal surveys conducted by either national, state or organizational entities (such as the US Census Bureau, for example), a well-crafted needs statement includes not just the “what” of data, but also aims to explain the “why” that is often provided by secondary research. Health insurance status among North Carolina’s Latinos demonstrates this point. In 2006, 72.6 percent of Spanish-speaking Hispanic men surveyed in North Carolina reported that they did not have any form of health insurance according to the 2006 Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the North Carolina State Center for Health Statistics (see http://www.schs.state.nc.us/SCHS/brfss/2006/nc/all/hlthplan.html). While this figure would certainly attract the attention of nearly any grant reviewer, a strong needs statement would include information as to reasons why the uninsured rate among this group could be so high. The “reasons why” provide an opportunity for searching for and including relevant secondary research, as such research might indicate fears related to undocumented immigration, misconceptions about the function of, or benefits of, health insurance, or an inability to pay health insurance premiums. Explaining in grant applications the potential factors that contribute to high uninsured rates among Hispanic men alerts those who fund grants that the organization submitting the application has a comprehensive understanding of the situation it proposes to address – certainly a contributor to a favorable review of a proposal.
Conclusions
Using a reflective mode of learning to analyze the process of searching for secondary research has provided me with new insights in regard to the barriers I have faced in conducting such searches in the past. Quite simply, I lacked the knowledge to appropriately plan searches for secondary research and have had limited access and time to do so as part of the grant proposal development process. Now that I have been provided with the foundation of knowledge required to effectively seek out secondary research and have the access to significant library and database resources as a student at East Carolina University, I will undoubtedly use secondary research to strengthen both my knowledge of community health topics in general, and the content of grant proposals relating to those topics.
1
A. Connor/7730 Project 2a