Strategic Planning for Grant Funding - NRSA (F32). Janet Gross, Ph.D. Grants Tutorial Director Office of Postdoctoral Education. Overview. Grant Writing – the challenge What is the NRSA grant proposal? Nuts and Bolts of NIH applications and guidelines Writing a competitive proposal
Janet Gross, Ph.D.
Grants Tutorial Director
Office of Postdoctoral Education
POSTDOCBest grant writers work collaboratively
Many research ideas Specific Aims
What is the objective evidence for this?
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Each NIH Institute and Center has a unique scientific purview and different program goals and initiatives that evolve over time. Prior to preparing an application, it is critical that all applicants consult the appropriate Institute website (listed with each Institute's name at the beginning of this announcement) for details of research areas supported by that Institute.
Applicants should also contact the appropriate Institute representative to obtain current information about specific program priorities and policies. This action is of utmost importance because applications with marginal or no relevance to the participating Institutes will not be accepted for review or possible funding. .....
Find a coach or coach yourself – grant writing group
Collect tips and hints about grant writing that have worked for others (Paul Casella handout http://www.urc.emory.edu/workshops/ )
Develop a strategic plan for your proposal – careful planning with guidance from mentors
Use a timeline to write - time management & priorities
Convey confidence in your research and writing style
“Arm’s Length” approach to reading your own work
Get others to read and critique your work
Ruth Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA F32)?
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards individual postdoctoral research training fellowships to promising applicants with the potential to become productive, independent investigators in research fields relevant to the missions of participating NIH Institutes and Centers.
The primary objective of this funding opportunity is to help ensure that diverse pools of highly trained scientists will be available in adequate numbers and in appropriate research areas to carry out the Nation’s biomedical, behavioral and clinical research agendas.
There are many non-NIH funding opportunities:
NIH Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
Assigned to review committee (study section)
Primary reviewer, Secondary reviewer, Reader
Reviewed at committee
Funded Not funded
Not scored (streamlined)
Anyone can resubmit 1 time
NRSA Applications, awards, and success rates
F Kiosk http://grants1.nih.gov/training/F_files_nrsa.htm
F32 for Individual fellowship (PA-09-210)
General Information http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/index.htm
Important Applications, awards, and success rates
Program Announcement rules are NOT OPTIONAL
SF424(R&R) + phs416-1
Nuts and Bolts
4.2. Cover Component (fillable forms)
4.3 Project /Performance Site Locations
4.4 Other Project Information Component
11. funder’s?Other Attachments
A. Required Attachment
Sponsor and Co-Sponsor Information
B. Additional Required Attachments
4.5 Senior/Key Person Profile funder’s?
5.2 Cover Letter – optional but strongly encouraged
5.3. PHS Fellowship Supplemental Form (fillable form)
B. Research Training plan (10 pages max.)
8. – 14.
Other Research Training Plan Sections funder’s?
*1 page maximum
C. Additional Information funder’s?
Human Embryonic Stem Cells
** 2 pages max.
How can strategic funder’s?
contribute to a competitive proposal?
NRSA is funding for training & career development not just for funding your research
Can you create linkages in the reader’s mind?
Scientific Grant Writing
The committee commented on the less than stellar grantsmanship throughout the proposal (misspellings and typos).
There are some concerns as to the likelihood of completing aims 2 and 3 within the allotted time given the pilot nature of the work and the number of techniques that need to be mastered.
The overly ambitious research plan researcher”
The training potential of the planned work is high. However, there are concerns that the research plan is overambitious, not hypothesis driven and lacks clear rationale and detailed description of the studies proposed. Taken together, these concerns diminish enthusiasm for the application.
While interesting, the proposal is extremely ambitious.
Overall, the research plan is too broad and too large to have any hope of being successful.
3. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE researcher”
Responsible Conduct of Research:
A formal course in the responsible conduct of research, taken within the past three years, is required; individual lectures/seminars and on-line tutorials are not acceptable for fulfilling this requirement. To ensure that the course is appropriate for fulfilling the requirements for training in the responsible conduct of research, the candidate must provide specific information on the course content to allow reviewers and/or staff to determine whether or not the course fulfills the NIH requirements. In this application, the course content and the date the course has been taken or will be taken are not specified, which is unacceptable.
It is clear that the applicant is not completely familiar with the drug interactions that follow the combined administration of substance x and substance y in patients with diabetic neuropathy.
The applicant has not considered the recently published research on psychosocial determinant of behaviors predicting HIV/AIDs infection in minority youth while much older literature has been discussed.
Mastery of the literature
Resources not adequately explained
Insufficient collaborative support or supervision
Design, Experiments, Data Analysis
It is unclear that the analytic techniques will yield the anticipated outcomes.
Reapply (you have 1 chance to reapply) if your training potential is still good (i.e., you are not too far along as a postdoc), or
Work on your publication record and apply for another type of grant where you will be more competitive
Seek other funding opportunities