slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Massachusetts General Hospital Postdoc Association Office for Research Career Development Grantwriting: Who Reviews Gran PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Massachusetts General Hospital Postdoc Association Office for Research Career Development Grantwriting: Who Reviews Gran

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 31

Massachusetts General Hospital Postdoc Association Office for Research Career Development Grantwriting: Who Reviews Gran - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 197 Views
  • Uploaded on

Massachusetts General Hospital Postdoc Association Office for Research Career Development Grantwriting: Who Reviews Grants?. Janet E. Hall, MD Reproductive Endocrine Unit Department of Medicine Massachusetts General Hospital Boston, MA. Today’s Goals. Understanding the Review Process

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Massachusetts General Hospital Postdoc Association Office for Research Career Development Grantwriting: Who Reviews Gran' - jayme


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1
Massachusetts General HospitalPostdoc AssociationOffice for Research Career DevelopmentGrantwriting:Who Reviews Grants?

Janet E. Hall, MD

Reproductive Endocrine Unit

Department of Medicine

Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston, MA

slide2

Today’s Goals

  • Understanding the Review Process
    • what happens when you submit a grant to the NIH (or other agency)?
    • how does this influence how you prepare your application?
    • who can you talk to?
  • Resources
submission of a grant

Institution

Reviews the

Application

NIH

Submits the

Application

Allocates

Funds

Conducts

Research

Submission of a Grant

Grant Application

PI

Initiates

Research

Idea

what s in the box
What’s in the Box?
  • NIH is one of eight health agencies that are part of the US DHHS
  • NIH is composed of 27 separate Institutes or Centers
  • Office of the Director
  • Nat’l Cancer Institute
  • Nat’l Eye Institute
  • Nat’l Heart, Lung & Blood Institute
  • Nat’l Human Genome Research Institute
  • Nat’l Institute on Aging
  • Nat’l Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism
  • National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases
  • Nat’l Institute of Arthritis & Musculoskeletal & Skin Diseases
  • Nat’l Institute of Child Health & Human Development
  • Nat’l Institute on Deafness & Other Communication Disorders
  • Nat’l Institute of Dental Research
  • Nat’l Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases
  • Nat’l Institute on Drug Abuse
  • Nat’l Institute of Environ Hlth Sciences
  • Nat’l Institute of General Medical Sciences
  • Nat’l Institute of Mental Health
  • Nat’l Institute of Neurological Disorders & Stroke
  • Nat’l Institute of Nursing Research
  • Nat’l Library of Medicine
  • Nat’l Center for Research Resources
  • John E. Fogarty International Center
  • Warren Grant Magnuson Clinical Center
  • Center for Information Technology
  • Center for Scientific Review (CRS, formerly DRG)
know your nih institute
Know your NIH Institute!
  • Look at NIH Institute-specific websites (www.niddk.nih.gov)
  • Learn Institute’s research priorities
  • Look at Institute’s application success rates (# applications; # awards):

http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/award/success.htm

types of scientific review groups
Types of Scientific Review Groups
  • ScientificGroups (SRG)
  • CSR
  • Regular Study Sections
  • Special Study Sections
  • Special Emphasis Panels
  • Institutes
  • Scientific Review Groups
  • Contract Review Committees
  • Applications Reviewed
  • Research Project Grant
  • Academic Research Enhancement Awards
  • Postdoctoral Fellowships
  • Small Business Innovation Research
  • Shared Instrumentation
  • Program Projects
  • Centers
  • Institutional Training Grants
  • Contracts
  • RFA’s
  • Conference Grants
  • Career Awards
  • Some Small Grants
nih system of peer review
NIH System of Peer Review
  • Center for Scientific Review
  • assigns to Study Section & Institute/Center
  • Study Section
  • evaluates for Scientific Merit
  • Institute
  • evaluates for Program Relevance
  • Advisory Councils and Boards
  • recommends action
  • Institute Director
  • takes final action for NIH Director ($)
initial review scientific merit
Initial Review: Scientific Merit
  • Assignment to Study Section
  • Information Sent to Investigator
    • assignment number
    • name, address and telephone number of the scientific review administrator (SRA) of the Review Group to which the application is assigned
    • assigned Institute contact and telephone number (s)
who assigns the applications
Who Assigns the Applications?
  • Referral Officers
    • Professional Scientists most of whom also serve as Scientific Review Administrators of CSR Study Sections
  • Can I Influence the Assignment?
  • Cover Letter
    • indicate the Study Section which you think is most appropriate
      • study section rosters and overall interests are posted
      • Reorganization is ongoing
    • indicate the Institute(s) likely to be interested in funding your work
initial review scientific merit11
Initial Review: Scientific Merit
  • Constitution of Study Section by SRA
    • ensures expertise to review all grants
    • distributes grants among reviewers
  • Grants Forwarded to Reviewers
    • reviewed for conflict of interest and appropriateness of assignment
    • each reviewer will have 8-12 grants to review in full as primary, secondary or reader
    • reviewers will receive all grants (60-75 in total)
initial review scientific merit12
Initial Review: Scientific Merit
  • CSR Study Sections
    • review 80,000 applications per year
    • ~ 70-75% of applications reviewed by NIH
    • uses ~18,000 external reviewers
  • Study Section Membership
    • ~ 16 members - regular and ‘ad hoc’
    • term is 3-4 years with staggered appointments
  • Criteria for Selection to Study Section
    • demonstrated scientific expertise
    • mature judgement, balanced perspective, and objectivity
    • personal integrity - critical re confidentiality
    • representation - women, minority, clinical
initial review scientific merit13
Initial Review: Scientific Merit
  • Preparation of Review
    • scientific review using established criteria
    • Streamlined Review - bottom half
  • Study Section Meeting
    • 3 times/year x 2 days
    • members/chair, SRA, Institute Representatives
    • review bottom half grants
    • individual discussion of all top half grants primary, secondary, reader, full group and final vote by all members (1 high --- 5 low)
criteria based review
Criteria-Based Review
  • attempt to emphasize more innovative concepts and approaches rather than safe science
        • SIGNIFICANCE
        • APPROACH
        • INNOVATION
        • INVESTIGATOR
        • ENVIRONMENT
council review
Council Review
  • Priority Score
    • average of all scores x 100
    • ranking tabulated from the results of the current and two previous review meetings percentiles
    • preparation of summary statement (pink sheet)
    • Institute’s National Advisory Council
    • scientific and public representatives ~12-15
    • meet 3x/yr to advise the Institute on its programs and priorities and review research applications
    • review of application based on scientific merit and relevance to the Institute’s programs and priorities
awarding of grants
Awarding of Grants
  • Institute
    • acts on recommendations of the Initial Review Group and Council
      • scientific merit
      • programmatic considerations
      • availability of funds

INSTITUTION

INVESTIGATOR

how long does it take

CHECK

How Long Does it Take?

Submission Jan-May May-Sept Sept-Jan

Initial Review June-Jul Oct-Nov Feb-Mar

Group (IRG)

National Advisory Sept-Oct Jan-Feb May-Jun

Council Board

Earliest Possible Dec 1 Apr 1 July 1

Funding

*** Dates are changing so stay current

CSR is considering new ways to shorten the review cycle.

CSR is considering novel grant and review formats.

slide18

CHECK

R01 Applications are now Electronic

*    No paper applications will be allowed

*    Applicants and grants offices should prepare Now!*    BIG process change      -- Involves change in application form      -- Must use application form from specific Funding Opportunity Announcement in the NIH Guide

*   Grants offices must submit applications

Get more info at http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt

grants for different career stages phd

R21

R03

Grants for Different Career Stages: PhD

F32

or

T32

K22

K02

R37

T32

F31

R01

Independent

PI

Graduate

Student

Faculty

Position

PhD

T32 - Institutional Training Grant

- pre & post doctoral slots

F32 - Individual Minority Pre-Doc

F32 - Individual Postdoctoral Fellowship

K22 - Research Scholar Dev’t Award

*R03 – Small Grant *R21 – Exploratory Grant

K02 - Independent Scientist

Award

R37 - Merit Award

nih career development programs k awards
NIH Career Development Programs (“K” Awards)
  • fourteen different mechanisms
  • articulate with Career Stage:

Mentored, Mid-career, Senior

  • interact with other NIH Awards
  • use “K Kiosk” or “Career Award Wizard”: http://grants.nih.gov/training
career or k series awards
“Career” or K-series Awards
  • designed to “protect” time, i.e., free up time currently spent in clinic or on administrative or teaching duties
  • most are for early career development
  • provide ‘salary’ not ‘stipend’
  • meant to train U.S. citizens/permanent residents
    • K99 is an exception to this policy
  • limited to U.S. research/clinical institutions
k series awards
K-series Awards
  • K01 – Mentored Research Scientist Development Award (Ph.D.)- usually basic research
  • K08 – Mentored Clinical Scientist Development Award (M.D. or other clinical degree)- usually basic research
  • K23 – Mentored Patient-oriented Research Career Development Award (M.D. or other clinical degree)
  • K99/R00 – Pathway to Independence (PI) Awards
  • K22- Transition Award- 2-3 years at NIH; 2-3 years at extramural academic institution in U.S.
  • K24 – Mid-Career Investigator Award in Patient-oriented Research (M.D.)
elements reviewed in mentored k award applications
Elements Reviewed in Mentored K Award Applications
  • Qualifications of candidate
    • prior training
    • letters of recommendation
    • publications**
  • Mentors
    • previous mentoring experience
    • expertise in area of research
    • current funding
  • Research project
    • hypothesis driven
    • preliminary data
    • reasonable in time frame
    • logical sequence of studies
    • appropriate safeguards
  • Career development plan
    • ‘enrichment’
    • training
    • future plans
  • Environment
mentored clinical scientist career development award k08 k23 k99
Mentored Clinical Scientist Career Development Award (K08/K23/K99)
  • Essential components of grant application:
    • career development plan must be carefully documented
      • may include coursework
      • may work toward a graduate degree
    • mentorship must be strong and appropriate
    • Institutional commitment to career development must be clear
who reviews k award applications
Who reviews K award applications?
  • K award applications are generally reviewed by Institute-specific study sections, NOT the Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
  • check the roster of study section members BEFORE the review
  • http://era.nih.gov/roster/index.cfm
r series grants
R-series grants
  • R01s – Research project grants unsolicited and in response to Funding Opportunity Announcements (e.g. PAs and RFAs)
  • R21s – Exploratory/Developmental grants usually only in response to FOAs
  • R03s – Small grants only in response to FOAs
use the institutional resources available to you
Use the Institutional Resources Available to You
  • Clinical Research Program
    • Statistical Support
  • Clinical Research Center
    • Scientific Review Committee
  • Research Affairs Administration

Ask your colleagues!

Ask your mentors!

grant resources
Grant Resources

Sample K award applications

  • K08: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/funding/training/redbook/k08model.htm
  • K23: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/funding/training/redbook/k23models.htm
use the resources available to you

NIH (www.nih.gov)

    • Office of Extramural Research
    • Grants Policy
    • Institute Personnel
    • New Investigators http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/resources.htm
  • Center for Scientific Review
    • Referral & Review
      • overview of Peer Review Process
    • SRG Study Section Rosters
      • NIH Peer Review Notes
  • Grants Net www.grantsnet.org
  • Private Foundations (examples):
      • ADA www.diabetes.org , JDRF www.jdrf.org
Use the Resources Available to You