Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byUCLA CTSI
A Tactical Approach to Writing Your Grant Application (2020)
This document provides a comprehensive guide to preparing an NIH R01 grant application, emphasizing essential steps and timelines for submission. Key recommendations include familiarizing oneself with grant processes, obtaining administrative tasks done early, and actively seeking feedback to improve the application. The grant preparation process encompasses the construction of several specific sections and calls for thorough understanding of evaluation criteria used by reviewers.
More Related Content
Similar to A Tactical Approach to Writing Your Grant Application (2020)
![How to Craft the "Significance” & "Innovation" [Filler] - 2023](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/fillersignificanceinnovation2023-231106193724-1a0824f3-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
A Tactical Approach to Writing Your Grant Application (2020)
- 1. A Tactical (Practical)Approach to Preparing Your Grant Application William Parks, PhD Department of Medicine Cedars-Sinai and UCLA
- 2. Topics • Emphasis onan NIH R01 Submission • Preparation and Timelines • Reviewers and Review Criteria • Investigator Criterion – Preparing Your Biosketch • Presentation Tips
- 3. My Central Recommendations •Read other grants – both successful and unsuccessful • Become familiar with the grant-submission process, rules, and deadlines Both NIH and Institutional • Give yourself plenty of time • Get as much admin stuff – letters, budget, forms etc. – done or lined up early • Get feedback from your mentor, committee, other faculty, your peers, and this workshop
- 4.
- 5. How to Submityour Application 1. Be familiar with NIH forms, etc. 2. Identify your group’s grant administrator 3. Tell this person that you plan to submit an R01 for Feb 2021 •Do this 2-3 months – if not longer – ahead of the due date •Important: You are not the only one submitting a grant 4. Email your documents to your grant admin person • Get the easy stuff done early (coming up) 5. Grant admin uploads components and builds application 6. Institution uploads to grants.gov.
- 6. Grant Preparation: NIHThings to do Well in Advance • Familiarize yourself with NIH grants, forms, instructions, and due dates • All grants: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/parent_announcements.htm • NIH Forms: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms.htm • Page Limits: http://enhancing-peer-review.nih.gov/page_limits.html • Due Dates: http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm • Know what Institute to target and what they are in interested in • RFA, Program announcements, etc. : http://www.grants.gov/ • By Institutes: http://www.nih.gov/icd/ • Know your competition • RePORT (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools): http://report.nih.gov/ • Database of all NIH grants, success rates, and much more Good video on some grant preparation tips: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAOGtr0pM6Q
- 7. Instructions Download Research Instructions:Version F Go here: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide.html Other Useful Sites • How to apply videos: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide/video/index.htm • Portal to lots of info: https://www.nih.gov/grants-funding • Fellowship kiosk: https://researchtraining.nih.gov/programs/career-development
- 8.
- 9. Current Forms, PA,Review Criteria, etc. – A Useful Site https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/parent_announcements.htm All Grants:
- 10. NIH Dates forNew (A0) R01s in 2021 Feb 5 Jan 29 June Sept Dec June 5 (7) Jun 1 Oct Jan Apr Oct 5 Sept 28 Feb May July • OCGA* (UCLA) or ORA** (CS) submits your application to Grants.gov • Your submission deadline to them is 5 (UCLA) or 3 (CS) days before the NIH due date. *Office of Contract and Grant Administration, **Office of Research Administration NIH Due Dates NIH Submission Due Date UCLA Due Date Study Section Review Council Review Funding Begins UCLA Due Dates
- 11. NIH Dates forResubmitted (A1) R01s in 2021 Mar 5 Feb 26 June Sept Dec Jul 5 (6) Jun 29 Oct Jan Apr Nov 5 Oct 29 Feb May July NIH Submission Due Date UCLA Due Date Study Section Review Council Review Funding Begins
- 12. Timeline for aFeb 5, 2021 Deadline Dec 2021 Funded! Good Score Submit Reviewed Think Plan Data Write Feedback Re-write Admin Stuff Feb (Jan) 2021 Summer/Fall 2020 Oct to Jan 2020/21 Jun 2021
- 13. Timeline for aFeb 5, 2020 Deadline Oct 2021 Feb 2022 Jul 2022 Funded! Fair Score Resubmit Re- reviewed Realistically a 2-year + Process Good Score Submit Think Plan Data Write Feedback Re-write Admin Stuff Critique 2-3 weeks later Reviewed Feb (Jan) 2021 Summer/Fall 2020 Oct to Jan 2020/21 Jun 2021
- 14. Grant Preparation -Things to do Well in Advance • Give yourself plenty of time • Formulate your ideas and think • Testable hypothesis that advances a field • Present your ideas and aims to your colleagues • Do this more than once • Know the literature & be critical • Issues and controversies • What gaps will your work fill • Generate preliminary data • Support all hypotheses • Confirms feasibility • Publish • The importance of this cannot be stressed enough • Read successful applications! • Seek advice • Enlist collaborators, consultants • Special reagents, techniques, advice • Obtain letters • Take care of the administrative stuff • Budgets • Human subjects, animals, biohazards, etc.
- 15. R01 Grant Sections •Face Page • Table of Contents • Performance Site • Project Information • Project Description: Abstract • Project Narrative: 2 sentences • Facilities and Other Resources • Equipment • Key Personnel • Biosketches • Budget (all years) • Budget Justification • Cover Page Supplement • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Significance, Premise • Innovation • Approach • Preliminary Data • Research Plan • Protection of Human Subjects • Women & Minorities • Planned Enrollment Table • Children • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Letters of Support • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources • Checklist
- 16. R01 Grant SectionsYou Prepare • Face Page • Table of Contents • Performance Site • Project Information • Project Description: Abstract • Project Narrative: 2 sentences • Facilities and Other Resources • Equipment • Key Personnel • Biosketches • Budget (all years) • Budget Justification • Cover Page Supplement • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Significance, Premise • Innovation • Approach • Preliminary Data • Research Plan • Protection of Human Subjects • Women & Minorities • Planned Enrollment Table • Children • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Letters of Support • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources • Checklist
- 17. R01 Grant SectionsEasy or Boilerplate • Face Page • Table of Contents • Performance Site • Project Information • Project Description: Abstract • Project Narrative: 2 sentences • Facilities and Other Resources • Equipment • Key Personnel • Biosketches • Budget (all years) • Budget Justification • Cover Page Supplement • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Significance, Premise • Innovation • Approach • Preliminary Data • Research Plan • Protection of Human Subjects • Women & Minorities • Planned Enrollment Table • Children • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Letters of Support • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources • Checklist
- 18. Grant Review Process HowYour Application is Evaluated What Matters to the Reviewers
- 19. National Institutes ofHealth
- 20. All NIH InstitutesReview Grant Applications Office of the Director National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases National Cancer Institute National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research National Institute on Drug Abuse National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences National Institute on Aging National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders National Eye Institute National Human Genome Research Institute National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute National Institute of Mental Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke National Institute of General Medical Sciences National Institute of Nursing Research National Library of Medicine Center for Information Technology Center for Scientific Review National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Fogarty International Center National Center for Research Resources Clinical Center National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities NIH Institutes http://www.nih.gov/icd/ No funding authority But CSR does the bulk of reviews
- 21. The Fate andEvaluation of Your Proposal Pretty dull and needlessly long video of this topic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuuAGROm_1Q&feature=relmfu Your can influence this process Institute Assignment Study Section Assignment You ➜ ➜ ➜ CSR ➜ ➜ Reviewers ➜ Back to You • Suggest Institute assignment • Suggest Study Section • Identify conflicts • Identify areas of needed expertise • Special situations • Do not recommend specific reviewers Cover Letter (optional) Project Information OCGA ORA Grant Admin
- 22. Who Do YouCall? • Institute based • Before submission • After initial (study section) review • Has influence on funding • Tracks progress Program Officer (PO) Scientific Review Officer (SRO) • CSR (mostly) or institute based • During initial review stage • Has no influence on funding PO SRO Submit to NIH Grant Preparation Resubmit to NIH 2nd Review Funded 1st Review PO
- 23. CSR and StudySections • CSR: Center for Scientific Review • 70-80,000 applications per year • Study Sections (>220): Organ, disease, scientific-based expertise • ~24 members per study section, essentially all from academia • 40-90 applications per Study Section meeting • 3 reviewers per applications • 10-12 applications per member • Information at the CSR web site • Study section scope and policies • Roster of reviewers • Schedules • Study sections are advisory - they do not fund applications.
- 24. Review Process -Before the Meeting • Applications available about 6 weeks before meeting (all via web) • Scores and critiques are uploaded 1 week before study section • Each criterion is given a score: 1, 2, 3…9 (outstanding to really bad) • These are not discussed at the Study Section • But they are included in the Summary Statement you will get • Each reviewer gives each application an overall Impact Score (1-9) • Impact Score is not the mean of the criteria scores • Impact score is key and the only score discussed • Initial scores and critiques become available to all committee members
- 25. Scored Review Criteria ScoredCriteria for R-series Proposals • Significance • Investigator • Approach • Innovation • Environment Overall Impact Overall Impact or Criterion Strength Score Descriptor High 1 Exceptional 2 Outstanding 3 Excellent Moderate 4 Very Good 5 Good 6 Satisfactory Low 7 Fair 8 Marginal 9 Poor ! • Criterion Score • Whole numbers: 1-9 • 1 (exceptional); 9 (well let’s just hope you never get a 9) • Given by reviewers but not discussed at study section • Provided in Summary Statement of all applications • Overall Impact Score • Not the mean of the criteria scores • Different criteria are weighted by each reviewer • Final Impact Score, Percentile • Mean of all scores x 10 ➤ 10 – 90 • Percentiled against R01s applications across 3 meetings
- 26. Where and WhenDo Reviewers Review Grant Applications? • At the last minute - and thus a bunch in one sitting • Hence, reviewers can be stressed, anxious, and not terribly sympathetic • Do not make the reviewer read papers or go to the internet • Do not make the reviewer think! • Do not tick off the reviewers! Don’t let the reviewer become… or Bored Baffled, Bitter,
- 27. The Review Process- at the Meeting Good video of a mock Study Section https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBDxI6l4dOA • Review Grants - random order • Assigned reviewers state their scores: 1, 2, 3…9 • 1˚ reviewer, 2˚, 3˚, then open for discussion • All members vote (score) • Final Impact Score = (Mean of all scores) x 10 • Expressed as a % of all scores over 3 meetings • Lower 50% are not discussed • 15-20 min per application • Begin at 8 am EST (i.e., 5 am PST) • Cramped room full of laptops and several jet-lagged reviewers • Now virtual
- 28.
- 29. Current Forms, PA,Review Criteria, etc. – A Useful Site https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/parent_announcements.htm All Grants: Read these sections R01
- 30. Scored Review Criteria IndividualTraining F-series Grants • Candidate • Career development plan Career goals and objectives Plan to provide mentoring • Research Plan • Mentor(s), consultants, collaborators • Environment & Institutional commitment Career Development K-series Grants Investigator Initiated R-series Grants • Significance* • Investigator* • Approach* • Innovation • Environment Focus on training potential Focus on the science and you *Most important • Candidate • Training Potential • Research Plan • Mentor(s), consultants, collaborators • Environment & Institutional commitment
- 31. Review Criteria forR Applications • Overall Impact • Scored Criteria • Significance • Investigator • Innovation • Approach • Environment • Additional Review Criteria • Human Subjects, Inclusion • Vertebrate Animals • Biohazards • Resubmission • Additional Review Considerations • Select Agents • Resource Sharing Plan • Authentication of Key Biological… • Budget Affects Impact Score Yes Yes No Affects Criterion Scores No Yes No
- 32. R01 Grant SectionsThat Reviewers Care About • Face Page • Table of Contents • Performance Site • Project Information • Project Description: Abstract • Project Narrative: 2 sentences • Facilities and Other Resources • Equipment • Key Personnel • Biosketches • Budget (all years) • Budget Justification • Cover Page Supplement • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Significance, Premise • Innovation • Approach • Preliminary Data • Research Plan • Protection of Human Subjects • Women & Minorities • Planned Enrollment Table • Children • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Letters of Support • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources • Checklist
- 33. R01 Grant SectionsThat Reviewers Really Care About • Face Page • Table of Contents • Performance Site • Project Information • Project Description: Abstract • Project Narrative: 2 sentences • Facilities and Other Resources • Equipment • Key Personnel • Biosketches • Budget (all years) • Budget Justification • Cover Page Supplement • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Significance, Premise • Innovation • Approach • Preliminary Data • Research Plan • Protection of Human Subjects • Women & Minorities • Planned Enrollment Table • Children • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Letters of Support • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources • Checklist
- 34. Biosketch • Important toshow what you have done • Keep the Personal Statement succinct (300 words) • Education and Training only • Month and year OMB No. 0925-0001 and 0925-0002 (Rev. 03/2020 Approved Through 02/28/2023) BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Provide the following information for the Senior/key personnel and other significant contributors. Follow this format for each person. DO NOT EXCEED FIVE PAGES. NAME: eRA COMMONS USER NAME (credential, e.g., agency login): POSITION TITLE: EDUCATION/TRAINING (Begin with baccalaureate or other initial professional education, such as nursing, include postdoctoral training and residency training if applicable. Add/delete rows as necessary.) INSTITUTION AND LOCATION DEGREE (if applicable) Completion Date MM/YYYY FIELD OF STUDY A.Personal Statement “Briefly describe why you are well-suited for your role(s) in the project described in this application...” B.Positions and Honors Positions and Employment Past to current. Do not duplicate what’s above under Education. Other Experience and Profession Memberships Societies, committees, etc. Honors Nothing from high school. C.Contribution to Science • Experience, training and career goals • 1st person • 4 publications, preprints and/or research products** • Gaps in training • No figures, graphs, tables FAQs: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/faq_biosketches.htm# Forms: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms/biosketch.htm
- 35. Biosketch OMB No. 0925-0001and 0925-0002 (Rev. 03/2020 Approved Through 02/28/2023) BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Provide the following information for the Senior/key personnel and other significant contributors. Follow this format for each person. DO NOT EXCEED FIVE PAGES. NAME: eRA COMMONS USER NAME (credential, e.g., agency login): POSITION TITLE: EDUCATION/TRAINING (Begin with baccalaureate or other initial professional education, such as nursing, include postdoctoral training and residency training if applicable. Add/delete rows as necessary.) INSTITUTION AND LOCATION DEGREE (if applicable) Completion Date MM/YYYY FIELD OF STUDY A. Personal Statement This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. This is what 300 words looks like. **Research Products • Audio or video products • Meeting abstracts, posters, or other presentations • Patents • Data and research materials • Databases • Educational aids or curricula • Instruments or equipment • Models; protocols; and software or netware.
- 36. Biosketch • Briefly describeup to five of your most significant contributions to science • 1-4 publications and/or preprints* • Do not need to list 5 areas. • DO NOT include abstracts as Publications • Up-to-date (no “In press…2018”) • Full citations: all authors, accepted journal abbreviations • Consistent format* • Name changed? Let us know • Must match what we see at PubMed • Some leeway is OK • OK to include manuscripts submitted and in preparation • OK to add a section for abstracts, other products (e.g., Presentations) * Your name in the order of authors Year published Journal C. Contributions to Science 1. Discovered DNA. Blah blah blah –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––blah. a. Pub b. Pub c. Pub d. Pub 2. Cured Cancer. Blah blah blah –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––blah. e. Pub f. Pub g. Pub h. Pub 3. Other Big Thing. 4. Yet Another Fascinating Accomplishment. 5. Abstracts/Presentations. Complete List of Published Work: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/myncbi/your.name/bibliography/ D. Research Support Ongoing Research Support Grant NumberPI’s Last Name (PI)Start-End Date Grant/project Title Brief description of project (1 sentence will do) Role: Your Role Completed Research Support *Reporting Preprints and Other Interim Research Products
- 37. Review Criteria -Investigator • Early Stage Investigators (ESI) • More emphasis on experience and training • Publications are important but not critically so • ESIs get a bit of break with productivity – but just a bit • Quality and relevance of publications are important criteria • Reality: Numbers and quality do matter. Your competition may have more. • Pay line handicap varies by institute https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-17-101.html https://grants.nih.gov/policy/early-investigators/index.htm https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/new-investigators • New Investigator • Never had an RPG • No age limit • Few institutes support this • NIAID • Established Investigators • Track record • Productivity • Accomplishments • Early Established Investigators (EEI) • Within 10 yr of 1st R01 • Only 1 grant and at risk of losing it
- 38. ESI Handicap ➞Equal Success Rates New Established No difference by gender
- 39. Review Criteria -Investigator • Not a review criterion • Does not affect scoring • Cannot even be discussed NIH/CSR Rules Independence Reality • However, it is in the reviewer’s mind • If you remain associated with your mentor, include a letter from him/her confirming your independence • My Advice: Do not include your mentor as key personnel • Do not say your lab space is in their lab space • Get a letter from your chair indicating commitment to you
- 40.
- 41. Formatting • For allsections you prepare • MS Word.docx • 0.5-in margins • 11 pt Arial • No header or footer • Submit to grant admin as PDFs Guide: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide.html#format Fonts: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide/format-and-write/format-attachments.htm Page Limits: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide/format-and-write/page-limits.htm • Facilities and Other Resources • Budget Justification • Introduction (resubmission only) • Specific Aims • Research Strategy • Human Subjects pages • Vertebrate Animals • References Cited • Multiple PI Plan • Resource Sharing • Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources
- 42. Presentation and Style •Paragraphs and spaces • Don’t make it look dense or cluttered • Flow • Logical transitions from sentence to sentence, paragraph to paragraph • Do the work for your reader • Use some system (bold, numbers) to outline sections and subsections •Again, read successful applications • Zero tolerance for tpyos • Avoid excessive use of abbreviations • Avoid vague terms: e.g., ‘affects’, ‘influences’ • Avoid pleonasms: “…has been shown to…” • Clean, concise English • Active voice is better than the passive voice
- 43.
- 44. Which Would YouRather Read?
- 45.