Download - Grants and Grantsmanship. Human Resources for Grantsmanship Training Mentors Colleagues working in your field Scientists working in other fields Research

Grants

and

Grantsmanship

Human Resources for Grantsmanship Training

MentorsColleagues working in your fieldScientists working in other fieldsResearch administratorsProgram officers at funding agenciesAnyone skilled in expository writing

Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Office of Grant Support

Location: Belfer 917

(718) 430-3642

www.aecom.yu.edu/ogs

NIH COMPETING RPG* APPLICATIONS: TRENDS IN NUMBER, AWARDS AND SUCCESS RATES FY 1998-2007

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Nu

mb

er

of

Ap

plicati

on

s a

nd

Aw

ard

s

(in

th

ou

san

ds)

Fiscal Year

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Su

ccess R

ate

Number Reviewed Number Awarded Success Rate

RPG 4

*RPG activity code in R00, R01, R03, R15, R21, R22, R23, R29, R33, R34, R35, R36, R37, R55, R56, RL1, RL5, RL9, P01, P42, PN1, UC1, UC7, U01, U19, U34, DP1, DP2, RL1, RL2, RL5, RL9. Also includes RPGs from NLM as of FY07.

Types of Funding

Contract Project originates with funder

Stresses deliverables

Cooperative Agreement

Contract-Grant hybrid

Funder has programmatic input

Grant Project originates with grantee

Few deliverables

Gift Noncompetitive

Unrestricted

Cost Accounting Standards

e.g.

Consistency in Estimating, Accumulating, and Reporting Costs

Consistency in Allocating Costs Incurred for Same Purpose

Allocation of Direct and Indirect Costse.g. Criteria for determining how costs are charged or

allocated to cost objectives.

The Costs of Research

Direct Costs Indirect Costs

SALARIES

FRINGE BENEFITS

CONSULTANTS

EQUIPMENT

SUPPLIES

TRAVEL

PATIENT COSTS

ANIMALS

SUBJECT COSTS

PUBLICATION COSTS

SERVICE CONTRACTS

SPACE

UTILITIES

CUSTODIAL SERVICES

SECURITY

LIBRARY

ANIMAL FACILITIES

INFORMATION SYSTEMS

SHARED RESEARCH FACILITIES

IRB

IACUC

BIOSAFETY

PAYROLL

PURCHASING

GRANT MANAGEMENT


Direct Costs

Total Costs = +Indirect Costs

Direct CostsIndirect Costs = X

(estimated) Indirect Rate


Example:

Annual Direct Costs = $100,000

Indirect Rate = 70%

Total Annual Costs = $170,000

Total Budget Request = $100-170K

Assurances and Certifications Human Subjects Animal WelfareHandicapped IndividualsSex DiscriminationAge DiscriminationEthical ConductIntellectual Property Human Embryonic Stem CellsDrug-free WorkplaceCombating Trafficking in PersonsConflict of InterestDelinquent Debt

InstitutionalReview(REQUIRED)

to address budgetarypriorities and

regulatory obligations

Pre-Submission Review of Grant Applications

Principal Investigator

IRB

Biosafety

IACUC

Finance

Administrators

ScientificReview(OPTIONAL)

to maximizecompetitiveness

to maximizecompetitiveness

Proofreaders

MentorsExperts ?

Non-Experts?

OGS

PresentationReview(OPTIONAL)

“The institution should provide a document on institutional

letterhead that describes its commitment to the candidate and

the candidate’s career development, independent of the

receipt of the award. The document should include the

institution’s agreement to provide adequate time and support

for the candidate to devote the proposed protected time to

research and career development for the entire period of the

proposed award. The institution should provide the

equipment, facilities, and resources necessary for a structured

research career development experience. It is essential to

document the institution's commitment to the retention,

development and advancement of the candidate during the

period of the award. “ [NIH K Award Guidelines]

Basic Steps for Success

1. Come up with a great idea.

2. Find an appropriate funding source.

http://www.infoed.org/new_spin/spin.asp

http://www.grantsnet.org/

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/index.html

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/browse.html

http://www.grants.govhttp://www.aecom.yu.edu/ogs/FundingSources/privatefunding.htm

http://www.aecom.yu.edu/ogs/FundingSources/funding.htm

Types of Funders

Federal Government

State Government

Voluntary Health Orgs (aka Public Charities)

Professional Associations

Private Foundations

Corporate Foundations

Corporations (Direct giving programs)

Individuals

Types of Grants

Fellowship

Research

Training

Career Development

Travel

Equipment

Construction

Program/Service

Types of NIH Grants

R-series = Research Grants

R01- Research Project Grant

R21- Exploratory/Developmental Grant

R03- Small Grant

K-series = Research Career Development Grants

K23- Mentored Patient-Oriented RCDA

K08- Mentored Clinical Scientist RCDA

aka “Grant Mechanisms”




3. Discuss your idea with a program officer at

the funding agency.

Know Your Funder

Area of funding interest

Type of funding

Typical size of grants

Application and review procedure

Eligibility restrictions:Type of institution Previous awardeesCitizenship GeographyFaculty status Age/Sex/EthnicityPrior funding Cost sharing

Know Your NIHese

PA vs. RFA

NINDS R03 vs. NICHD R03

Feb-June-Oct vs. March-July-Nov

Success Rate vs. Percentile Rank

SRA vs. Program Officer

eRA vs. IRG

Revision vs. Resubmission





the funding agency.

4. Follow the application guidelines.

To prove that an idea is great, you must show:

Need [Should it be done?]

Feasibility [Can it be done?]

Great Idea Checklist-Need-

Important problem?

Potential for major impact in the field?

Original concept or approach?

Great Idea Checklist-Feasibility-

Methods appropriate to Aims?

PI and team trained to carry out work?

Potential problems acknowledged?

Great Idea Checklist-Feasibility-

Good scholarly environment?

Institutional commitment?

Useful collaborative arrangements?

NIH Criteria for Review of Research Grant Applications

Significance 3 questions

Approach 2 questions

Innovation 3 questions

Investigator 2 questions

Environment 3 questions

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer_review_process.htm





the funding agency.


5. Write a research plan that is clear, focused,

convincing, complete and realistic.

Components of the Research Grant Application

ScientificResearch Plan:

Specific Aims

Background/Significance

Preliminary Data

Methods

Human Subjects

Vertebrate Animals

Literature cited

Appendices

AdministrativeFace page/Title Abstract (summary +

relevance)

Key Personnel

Budget

Biosketch

Other Support (JIT)

Resources

Checklist

A. Specific Aims

List the broad, long-term objectives and the goal of the specific research proposed, e.g., to test a stated hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, challenge an existing paradigm or clinical practice, address a critical barrier to progress in the field, or develop new technology.

Specific Aims• Well-defined objectives from which the project

is derived and level of success is determined.

• Should present a framework that helps to organize the rest of the Research Plan.

• Often used by reviewers as an initial triage tool.

Specific Aims• Clearly presents a gap in knowledge that

will be filled by the proposed work.

• For NIH applications, does not confuse “significance” with “health relevance”.

Specific Aims• Be brief and specific.

• Make each Aim a single sentence.

• Add detail paragraph under Aim if needed.

• Most successful applications have 2-4 specific aims.

Specific Aims• Often begins with an opening paragraph

that summarizes the problem, background, rationale, and long-term goals.

• Should be understood by scientists outside your field. Provides a summary for non-primary reviewers. The less technical information is presented first.

Specific Aims• Should make the reader eager to read the

rest of your application.

• MUST make the primary reviewer eager to read the rest of your application.

• The most important page in most applications. Should be the first page written and the last page revised.

Reviewer-Friendly Writing• Good paragraphs are easy to read and easy to skim:

• Topic sentence• About 8 lines• Expected buzzwords and phrases• No more than one big idea (unless there is strong

logical flow)• Active vs Passive voice ?

• Serif vs sans serif typefaces ?

Reviewer-Unfriendly Writing• Bad grammar.

• Misplaced modifiers and confusing antecedents.

• Jargon, acronyms, and abbreviations.

• Sending the reviewer to the lexicon.

• Long, abstract, pretentious, Latin-laced circumlocutions when a short, concrete description will work.

• Insufficient or unclear justification for significance of problem.

• Too little detail about proposed studies.

• Too much work proposed.

• Failure to make preliminary data the cornerstone of Specific Aims

Common Reasons for Poor Reviews(First Time Applicants)

Basic Steps for Success1. Come up with a great idea.



the funding agency.


5. Write a research plan that is clear, focused,

convincing, complete and realistic.

6. Have experts and non-experts read your

proposal before submission.

Download - Grants and Grantsmanship. Human Resources for Grantsmanship Training Mentors Colleagues working in your field Scientists working in other fields Research

Top Related