The AUCD Council on Research and Evaluation (CORE) Presents:
Strategic Grant Writing: NIH Funding Mechanisms, Proposal Preparation & Review Process February 18, 2013 11:00am-12:00pm EST Recording will be available at www.aucd.org/webinars
Strategic Grant Writing: NIH Funding Mechanisms, Proposal
Preparation & Review Process
Judith S. Gordon, PhD Associate Professor
Associate Head for Research
Family & Community Medicine
Affiliated Faculty Sonoran UCEDD
Objectives
• Understand the process of strategic grant writing
• Learn which NIH institutes to target for disability-related research
• Describe the various NIH funding mechanisms
• Learn how to prepare the components of an NIH application
• Understand the NIH review process
Strategic Grant Writing
Funding Mechanism
Expertise/ Resources
Research Idea
Proposal
Planning for NIH Applications
• Review Institutes & Centers (IC) priorities and goals. Each IC has a research training and career development program.
• Identify the grant programs offered by each IC
• Make early contact with program officers
• Find innovative, well-respected mentors and collaborators
• Study successful grant applications- talk to your mentor
• Propose your best and most creative ideas
• Apply (After all, this is the only way to get a grant.)
National Institutes of Health • 27 Institutes and Centers (ICs)
with specific research agendas
• World’s largest source of funding for basic, biomedical, and behavioral research
• ~$31 Billion ▫ ~12% career and training
▫ ~53% for research projects
▫ ~35% on intramural projects
• Support >300,000 research personnel, and >3,000 universities and research institutions
Institutes to Target
DISABILITY RELATED
• NICHD (child and human development)
• NIMH (mental health)
• NICDC (deafness/communication)
ISSUE RELATED
• NIA (aging)
• NCCAM (alternative therapies)
• NIMHD (health disparities)
• OBSSR (health disparities)
• NCI (cancer)
• PARs and RFAs (e.g., dissemination and implementation)
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/index.html
Funding Mechanisms
• Career development (K Awards)
• Small Grants (R03)
• Developmental Grants (R21, R34)
• Research Grants (R01)
Career Development Awards
Overview
• Individual awards known as Ks
• Opportunities for basic and clinical investigators
• Mix of mentored and independent mechanisms
• Some designed as awards for faculty investigators
• Newer programs (K22 and K99/R00) are transition awards for MDs and PhDs
Review Criteria
1. Candidate
2. Career Development Plan; Career Goals & Objectives and Plan to Provide Mentoring
3. Research Plan
4. Mentor(s), Consultants(s) and Collaborator(s)
5. Environment and Institutional Commitment to the Candidate
K Kiosk: http://grants.nih.gov/training/careerdevelopmentawards.htm
K01 Mentored Research Scientist
Development Award
Overview
• Supports development experiences leading to research independence & training in a new field
• May also be awarded following a research hiatus (varies by IC).
• Some ICs use K01 for junior faculty development. Other ICs use K01s for other purposes.
• Opportunities for MDs and PhDs.
• Salary Cap varies by IC and fringe benefits (determined by your institution; generally at 28% level)
Benefits
Term: 3 to 5 years
Research Support: up to $50,000/year (varies by IC)
Facilities & Administrative Allowances = 8%
IC contacts and policies: http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-10-056.html
K02 Independent Scientist Award
Overview
• Must have independent grant support as Principal Investigator, e.g. R01
• Most K02s go to PhDs.
• Salary cap varies by IC + fringe benefits for up to 5 years
• Relatively few applicants.
Benefits Salary support only Facilities &
Administrative Allowances = 8%
Recipient must give up salary support from all other NIH grants!
Small Grant Program (R03)
• Provides limited funding for a short period of time to support a variety of types of projects, including:
▫ Pilot or feasibility studies
▫ Collection of preliminary data
▫ Secondary analysis of existing data
▫ Small, self-contained research projects
▫ Development of new technology, etc.
• Limited to two years of funding
• Limited to new investigators
• Direct costs generally up to $50,000 per year
• Not renewable
• Used by more than ½ of NIH ICs
Exploratory/Developmental
Research (R21) • Encourages new, exploratory and developmental
research projects by providing support for the early stages of project development
• Sometimes used for pilot and feasibility studies • Preliminary data are not required but may be
included if available • Limited to up to two years of funding • Combined budget for direct costs for the two year
project period usually may not exceed $275,000 • No preliminary data is generally required • Most Institutes and Centers utilize the R21 program
Exploratory/Developmental
Research (R34) • Encourages new, exploratory and developmental
research projects by providing support for the early stages of project development
• Used solely for pilot and feasibility studies
• Limited to up to three years of funding
• Combined budget for direct costs are variable
• No preliminary data is generally required
• Few but growing number of ICs have R34s
Research Project Grant Program (R01)
• Supports a discrete, specified, circumscribed project in an area representing the investigator's specific interest and competencies
• Applications are generally awarded for 1 - 5 budget periods, each normally 12 months in duration
• Applications for an R01 award are not limited in dollars but most have a $500,000 per year cap
• Full IDC rates apply
• Applications can be renewed by competing for an additional project period
• Supplements and amendments are allowed
• Almost all ICs fund R01s
Definition of New Investigator
• A PD/PI who has not previously competed successfully for a significant NIH independent research award (e.g., R01), other than the following awards: ▫ Research Project Grants: R00, R03, R15, R21, R25, R90,
(RL9, RL5), R34, R36, (R41, R43), R55, R56, SC2, SC3
▫ All training Grants: T32, T34, T35, T90, D43
▫ All Fellowships: F awards
▫ Mentored Career Awards: All individual and institutional mentored K awards
▫ Loan repayment contracts: L30, L32, L40, L50, L60
▫ Instrumentation, Construction, Education, Health Disparity Endowment Grants, or Meeting Awards: G07, G08, G11, G13, G20, R13, S10, S15, S21, S22
Definition of Early Stage Investigator
• A PD/PI who qualifies as a New Investigator is considered an Early Stage Investigator (ESI) if he/she is within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent)
• Can request an extension of the ESI Period
New and Early-Stage Investigators Increasing Time to Research Independence
Age at First R01 Equivalent Award from NIH, FY 1980-2009
Additional Resources
To learn more about NIH grants and training opportunities, visit
http://grants.nih.gov
Also, you may follow funding announcements at
http://twitter.com/nihforfunding
Applications Components
• Cover letter
• Project Narrative
• Abstract
• Specific Aims
• Research Strategy
• Literature Cited
• Human Subjects
• Appendices
• Biosketch
Cover Letter
• Application title • FOA # and title • Particular Study Section or study section
▫ Not all requests can be honored
• Reviewer conflicts with brief description • Reviewer expertise
▫ Do not name specific reviewers
• Approval from the agency: ▫ for a conference grant (R13 or U13) ▫ to submit over the $500K annual cap
Title, Project Narrative & Abstract
• Title and Narrative must convey scope of project and responsiveness to funding announcement
• Abstract
▫ 40 lines
▫ Clear, concise description of
Significance
Innovation
Approach IMPACT
Investigators
Environment
Specific Aims
• 1 page
• Compelling summary
• Project goals
• Specific hypotheses
Research Strategy
• 6 – 12 pages
• Significance ▫ Scope of problem
▫ Theoretical basis
▫ Gaps in science/health that this will fill
• Innovation ▫ Novel ideas & approaches
▫ Must advance science &/or health
Research Strategy
• Approach ▫ Design
▫ Methods
▫ Timeline
▫ Protocols & procedures
▫ Analyses
▫ Limitations
▫ Future directions
Biosketch
• 4 pages
• Personal statement
• Previous support
• 15 Publications
NIH Peer Review
• Partnership between NIH and the scientific community
• Per year: ~ 80,000 applications
~ 18,000 reviewers
• Standard mechanisms 2 – 3 cycles per year
Application Flow
• Center for Scientific Review
• Scientific Review Officer
• Manages all applications through scoring process
• Study Section
• Panel Members
• Review, score and recommendations
• Individual Agencies
• Program Officers
• Point of contact for scientific & administrative issues
Review Process
Prior to Meeting
▫ ≥ 3 reviewers are assigned to each application
▫ Read applications, prepare written critiques in templates, enter preliminary scores
▫ Read and consider critiques and preliminary scores from other Study Section members
▫ Streamline 50% of applications (ND)
At Study Section
▫ Discuss each application
▫ Members score after its discussion
Guidelines & Templates for Reviewers: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/reviewer_guidelines.htm
Scored Review Criteria
• Individual, numerical scores for:
– Significance - Approach
– Investigator(s) - Environment
– Innovation
“Review Criteria at a Glance” (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/reviewer_guidelines.htm)
Impact Score Descriptor
High Impact
1 Exceptional
2 Outstanding
3 Excellent
Moderate
Impact
4 Very Good
5 Good
6 Satisfactory
Low Impact
7 Fair
8 Marginal
9 Poor
NIH Scoring System
• Final impact scores
– Average of all votes multiplied by 10
– Range from 10 (exceptional) through 90 (poor)
– Percentiles for some
mechanisms
After the Review
• Receive a written summary statement
• If the outcome is not fundable:
• Consider scores, comments, talk to PO
• If concerns are addressable, revise and resubmit your application
• If not, consider major revision with different aims, different mechanism, etc.
• If the outcome is fundable, congratulations!
Additional Information
• Enhancing Peer Review Initiative http://enhancing-peer-review.nih.gov/
• Office of Extramural Research Peer Review
Process http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer_review_process.htm
• Peer Review Policies & Practices
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/peer.htm
• Center for Scientific Review
http://cms.csr.nih.gov/AboutCSR/Welcome+to+CSR/
Thank you!