What is Required to be Funded

1. NIHGrant ProposalsJohn C. Heath, PhDSpecial Assistant to the Dean (Grants)Assistant Professor Biomedical SciencesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Nursing & Allied HealthAdjunct Assistant Professor PsychologyCollege of Arts and SciencesTuskegee University What is Required to be Funded

2. NIH Premier research funding organization in the World National Institutes of Health (NIH) received $30.7 billion in 2011 ($260 million below the 2010 level) The 0.8% cut includes $210 million spread across all 27 NIH institutes and centers and the director's office, and $50 million from a buildings account

3. NIH

4. 27 NIH institutes and centers Biostatistics Comparative Medicine Epidemiology Molecular CarcinogenesisMolecular GeneticsNeurobiology Reproductive & Developmental Toxicology Respiratory Biology Signal Transduction Structural BiologyToxicology & Pharmacology

5. Types of Grants • The following groupings represent the main types of grant funding provided by NIH: • Research Grants (R series) • Career Development Awards (K series) • Research Training and Fellowships (T & F series) • Program Project/Center Grants (P series) • Resource Grants (various series)

6. Research “R” Grants

7. Research “R” Grants

8. Funding by NIH in 2011(RO1, R03, R15, R21)

9. Application Process • Identify the Requests for Application (RFA) • Download the RFA • Read the RFA • Read the RFA

10. Downloading Application • Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) • RFA-ES-12-007 • http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-ES-12-007.html

11. Downloading Application

12. Downloading Application

13. Downloading Application

14. Guide for SF424

15. SF424

16. Research PlanPage Limits

17. Research Plan • Significance • Investigator(s)     • Innovation • Approach • Environment

18. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria SIGNIFICANCE Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

19. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria INVESTIGATOR(S). Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, do they have appropriate experience and training? (Check online to review your status) If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; Are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

20. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria INNOVATION Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

21. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria APPROACH Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

22. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria ENVIRONMENT Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Is the equipment and apparatus available to you sufficient to contribute to the probability of success? Do the requisite personnel have the required training to operate the equipment Do you have qualified collaborators to fulfill the functions of the study that you are unable to fulfill

23. Enhanced Peer Review Criteria For information on writing these sections go to http://www.nlm.nih.gov/ep/Tutorial.html http://grants.nih.gov/grants/writing_application.htm DO NOT minimize the effect of any of these sections They are ALL pertinent to your score

24. Scoring System

25. Submitting Your Grant • Your grant must be submitted to grants.gov by the deadline stated in the RFA. • It must be submitted by your authorizing agent. • Please remember she has to have time to review your application for any technical errors

26. Submitting Your Grant • After submission your application will go through two electronic checks by Grants.gov and the funding agency. • Either of these can throw up ERRORS or WARNINGS. • Warnings are minor errors which will not stop your application. • Errors will stop your application and have to be corrected within 48 hours. • This is NOT an extra 48 hours passed the deadline • If you submit at the last minute and you get errors and it is past the deadline you will have to wait until the next cycle to resubmit.

27. Finally • Please remember what you are doing. • You are asking complete strangers to give you $1000’s of government money. • If you want them to say yes make your story convincing. • After all the government gets its money from taxpayers • In essence you are asking the person sitting next to you to trust you to use their hard earned money wisely.

28. Thank you Any Questions

29. Useful web addresses