Transcript Slide 1

GEMS Grants Writing
D.C. Rao
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Basics & Various Steps
Research Plan: Review Structure & Format
Designing Family/Genetic Studies & Consent
Issues; Types of Grants; Assignment
Human Subjects Issues & IRB; Revising a Grant
Review Assignments in Class
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Kelle H. Moley, MD; Dept of OB/GYN
Linda Pike, Ph.D.; Dept of Biochem & Mol Biophysics
Grant Writing
I. Basics & All the Steps Involved in Grant Writing
Conceive an innovative idea
And testable hypothesis
Evaluate feasibility & reality
Carry out literature review
And prepare the background
Generate preliminary data
If not funded the first time, consider revision
and re-submission; learn how to revise
effectively & responsively
Revise as necessary & submit
to the funding agency
Prepare the grant application keeping
An appropriate funding agency & study
It often helps to have it critiqued
Section in mind
By a couple of experienced investigators
Grant Writing: Some Facts
 In
general, better grants get funded but not all
good grants are funded; sometimes not-so- good
ones also get funded!
 Learning to write a good grant is a life long
learning experience; there are no short cuts!
 These days, NIH grants are rarely funded upon the
1st time; successful grants are usually funded upon
2 revisions
 There is no safe, reliable, and dependable
method; the same approach works sometimes but
not always!
Grant Writing: Some Facts
 Funding of a grant depends on several factors
not all of which are under the PI’s control
 Well written grant
 Composition of the particular Study section, the specific
reviewers of your grant
 What are you willing to do to maximize the chances of funding?
 Submission of a grant does not guarantee funding,
but not submitting a grant guarantees no funding!
 Also, submission of a bad grant guarantees
rejection!
Components of a Good Grant
These are necessary, but can not guarantee success
1.
2.
Sound, creative and innovative idea & a testable hypothesis
Determination and commitment to make it work; translate
determination into action!
o
o
o
o
3.
4.
Explore the feasibility & discuss with experienced colleagues
Generate pilot data/ preliminary studies
Articulate the idea into an attractively written grant
Seek frank critiques from experienced colleagues and improve the
presentation prior to submission
Never submit a grant too soon. Since successful NIH grants
usually take a total of 3 submissions, it is some times tempting to
start early knowing that anyway it will take 3 submissions.
Avoid such temptation since most of the 2nd submissions are NOT
funded! You have just 3 chances to make it work, and make good
use of every opportunity you have!
Grant Writing
Issues to Consider
1.
How to write a good grant?

Feasible, realistic, and timely
2.
How to select a Funding Agency (say, NIH),
Institute within the NIH, and a Study Section?
3.
How to revise a grant in a responsive and
effective manner?
Grant Writing: Complete Package
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Title page
Abstract page and Key personnel
Contents page
Budgets & Budget justification
Biographical Sketches with Other Support
Resources & Environment
Research Plan (A, B, C, D)
Human Studies
Inclusion of Women and Minorities
Inclusion of Children
Vertebrate Animals
Consortium/Contractual Arrangements
Letters of Support
Data/Resource Sharing Plan
Appendix
Literature Cited
Research Plan: Contents for Planning
SPECIFIC AIMS
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Limitations and Critical Barriers to Gene Discovery
Modulation of genetic effects by age
Modulation of genetic effects by obesity
Metabolic and CVD risk factors as a Major Public Health Problem
Uniqueness and Significance of the Proposed Study
PRELIMINARY STUDIES
3.
1.
2.
3.
Experience of the Investigators in Genetic Epidemiology Research
The GenSalt Family Study
Preliminary results on exploring the new direction to gene discovery
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
4.
Brief Overview and Rationale of the Research Plan
Characteristics of the GenSalt Study Participants
Methods for Specific Aim 1
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.
Methods for Specific Aim 2
1.
2.
3.
3.
4.
5.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Definition of Primary and Secondary Phenotypes
Variance Components Linkage Analysis Methods
Gene-Age Interactions in Linkage Analysis
Statistical Power
Anticipated findings, future studies, and potential problems/ resolutions
Definition of Phenotypes
Gene-Obesity Interactions in Linkage Analysis
Statistical Power
Multiple Testing
Potential Limitations and Backup Plans
Timeline
Protection of Human Subjects
Inclusion of Women & Minorities
Inclusion of Children
Vertebrate Animals
Consortium/Contractual Arrangements
Letters of Support
Resource Sharing Plan
Appendix
Bibliography
Grant Writing
II. Research Plan: Review Structure
& Format
D.C. Rao
Division of Biostatistics
Washington University in St. Louis
School of Medicine
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Kelle H. Moley, MD; Dept of OB/GYN
Linda Pike, Ph.D.; Dept of Biochem & Mol Biophysics
Research Plan

Up to 25 pages depending on the type of grant

R21: 15 pages



R21 does not require “Preliminary Studies”, however, it would be
desirable to include some preliminary data and justify that the
proposed work is feasible!
R01: 25 pages

Requires convincing “Preliminary Studies” and some publications
and/or abstracts.

When planning for an R01, it is generally advisable to generate
limited preliminary data first and then apply for an R21 for generating
the necessary preliminary studies for subsequently preparing the R01
application.
NIH-acceptable format for preparing grant applications
include:

Arial font 11, single space, with ½ inch margins all around
Specific Aims: Generally one page
Lead Paragraph: Rationale and motivation: Set the
general background with a dramatic but factual
opening, e.g.:
“High dietary sodium and low potassium intake are associated with increased blood
pressure (BP) in observational studies. Dietary sodium reduction and potassium
supplementation lower BP in randomized trials, although the BP reduction varies
among individuals. The relationship between sodium and Potassium sensitivity and
risk of hypertension has not been well studied”.
“Despite major advances in the control and treatment of Coronary Heart Disease (CHD),
CHD continues to be a major cause of mortality in the US and throughout the
world, constituting a serious public health challenge”.
Identify gaps in the knowledgebase
Second Paragraph: Objective and Proposed Study
The objective of the proposed study is to investigate and characterize the relationship
between sodium and potassium sensitivity and risk of hypertension. …………….
Toward this objective, we propose the following specific aims:
Specific Aims: Generally one page (continued)
Specific Aim 1: To determine …..
Specific Aim 2: To evaluate ….
Usually 2 to 4 Aims (hypotheses may be
stated as part of each Aim
Specific Aim: Investigate the degree to which obesity modulates the genetic effect on
cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors, with particular emphasis on risk factors related
to insulin resistance and blood pressure, by incorporating gene-obesity interactions as
part of the analysis method.
Hypothesis: Obesity modulates genetic effects on cardiovascular and metabolic risk
factors.
Concluding (Salesmanship) Paragraph: Innovation & Expected Benefits:
Recall the novelty, innovation, and the potential benefits:
“Upon completion of this work, we expect to learn …Thus, these findings are ultimately
expected to have a significant impact on the filed of ….”.
“This study is expected to make a significant contribution to the understanding of how ..”.
“We anticipate that the findings of this exploratory study (R21) have the potential to open
up new avenues of research relating to the discovery of the genetic architecture
underlying common complex traits ….”
Background & Significance
Generally 2-3 pages
Lead Paragraph: Provide an attractive opening
paragraph to Background
1.
2.
3.
Review literature, identifying significant and critical
gaps in knowledge
Relate the gaps to your specific aims, reiterating
the importance of the proposed research.
Organize into multiple sub-sections
Conclude with a “Significance” Paragraph: Stress why
this study is important to conduct, what the significant benefits
would be if this is performed, and what are the negative
consequences if it is not conducted!
Preliminary Studies (Progress Report)
Generally Up to 8 pages
It is a good place to emphasize the expertise,
experience, and the unique strengths of the
investigative team (which may not be clear
from the Bio’s or the preliminary studies!
 Also describe any special circumstances
pertaining to this study which may not otherwise
be clear.
Describe all relevant preliminary studies:
 Avoid discussing results which are not very relevant
 More is not better, relevance is important
Research Design & Methods
1.
2.
Provide an “Overview” section describing in broad
strokes your overall research strategy
Organize all methodological detail for each Aim into
separate sections





3.
Sample/Assays/Experiments etc
Data Generated
Statistical Methods of Analysis
Statistical Power for testing each hypothesis
Desirable to include a section devoted to “Anticipated
findings, future (follow up) studies, and potential problems
and resolutions”. Alternatively, such a section may be added
after all the methods for all the aims, and address the
issues globally.
Various grant formats have additional requirements
(which may not be considered against the page
budget) (e.g., Data Sharing, Resource Sharing,
Multiple PIs etc)
Grant Writing
III. Designing Family/Genetic Studies &
Consent Issues; Types of Grants; Assignment
D.C. Rao
Division of Biostatistics
Washington University in St. Louis
School of Medicine
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Kelle H. Moley, MD; Dept of OB/GYN
Linda Pike, Ph.D.; Dept of Biochem & Mol Biophysics
Designing a “Genetic Study”

Family study or Population study? Choice must be justifiable
Recruitment and Informed consent issues are different for the
two types of study




Population Genetic Study: Each individual (potential) participant is
contacted independently of all other (potential) participants, and each
one gives informed consent for himself/herself
Family Study: We should first target a certain individual (propositus,
proband etc, who satisfies certain inclusion/ exclusion criteria; e.g., unmedicated hypertensive with age at diagnosis below 55 years of age)
and seek his/her consent for participation in the study, and also seek
his/her assistance & consent for contacting other specific types of
family members (eg, spouse and children, all sibs and parents etc).
Recruitment criteria for families can be more complex and challenging.
How to ensure that families with at least 2 sibs (say) will actually
participate in the clinical/genetic study?
Handling biological materials (like DNA) & genetic
information (like marker data) requires special attention
Does the study involve Human Subjects?
Level of Informed Consent

Keep in mind that sharing of data and biological materials
with investigators outside your immediate study requires
appropriate level of consent. Examples of levels of consent
for a hypertension study:



Very restricted: Data and biological materials may be used
by the study investigators exclusively for the purposes of
the study at hand.
Limited access to outside investigators: Data and
biological materials may be used for hypertension and
cardiovascular research in general.
Unrestricted: Data and biological materials may be used
for biomedical research to improve human health.
 Protect confidentiality of the data and never violate
the informed consent
Patients' Data on Stolen Laptop: Identity Fraud Not Likely, NIH Says
By Ellen Nakashima and Rick Weiss, Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, March 24, 2008; A01
A government laptop computer containing sensitive medical information on 2,500 patients
enrolled in a NIH study was stolen in February, potentially exposing seven years' worth of
clinical trial data, including names, medical diagnoses and details of the patients' heart
scans. The information was not encrypted, in violation of the government's data-security
policy.
The incident is the latest in a number of failures by government employees to properly
secure personal information. This month, the Government Accountability Office found that at
least 19 of 24 agencies reviewed had experienced at least one breach that could expose
people's personal information to identity theft.
NIH officials said the laptop was taken Feb. 23 from the locked trunk of a car driven by an
NHLBI laboratory chief named Andrew Arai, who had taken his daughter to a swim meet in
Montgomery County. They called it a random theft. Arai oversees the institute's research
program on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and signed the letters to those whose data
was exposed.
In the letter, Arai told the patients that "some personally identifiable information" was on the
stolen computer, including names, birth dates, hospital medical record numbers and MRI
information reports, such as measurements and diagnoses. Social Security numbers, phone
numbers, addresses and financial information were not on the laptop, officials said.
Arai's letter said that the NIH Center for Information Technology determined that the theft
posed "a low likelihood of identity fraud" or financial harm. "It is, however, an unfortunate
breach of our commitment to protect the confidentiality of your research records," he wrote.
Assignment
1.
2.
Select one of the two actual grants provided, critique it
thoroughly, with particular emphasis on Specific Aims
and Methods.
Prepare a one page written “Summary Statement” by
evaluating the grant application, and submit the day
before the presentations are due (item 3 below):



3.
4.
One paragraph summary of the grant proposal
One paragraph summarizing the strengths of the proposal
One paragraph summarizing the weaknesses of the proposal
Present your review in class in 3 minutes at the time of
our last session (you may do this with or without slides;
only 3 slides allowed)
Page limits and time limits will be strictly enforced!
Types of Grants
Investigator Initiated Research Grants:
– R03
– R21
– R01
Limited data analysis grants
Two year exploratory grants for
generating pilot data for R01’s
Fully mature investigations
Career Development Awards:
– K-Awards of several types (handout)
Comparison of K Awards across Institutes & Centers:
K01
NIH K
Kiosk
K02
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
General Objective: The K01 provides support for a
sustained period of “protected time” for intensive
research career development under the guidance of an
experienced mentor leading to research independence.
(See IC Specific Information)
General Objective: The K02 is intended to foster the
development of outstanding scientists and enable them
to expand their potential to make significant
contributions to their field of research. (See IC Specific
Information)
General Objective: The K08 supports didactic study General Objective: The K12 provides support to an
and mentored research for individuals with clinical
institution for the development of independent clinical
doctoral degrees (e.g., M.D., D.D.S., D.M.D., D.O.,
scientists.
D.C., O.D., N.D., D.V.M., Pharm.D., or Ph.D. in clinical
disciplines).
Award Duration: 3, 4, or 5 years
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of fulltime professional effort
Salary Limit: Varies by IC
Research Costs: Varies by IC
Program: Mentored Research Scientist
Development Award (K01)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Award Duration: 3, 4, or 5 years
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of fulltime professional effort
Salary Limit: Varies by IC
Research Costs: Varies by IC
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Award Duration: 3, 4, or 5 years
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of fulltime professional effort
Salary Limit: Varies by IC
Research Costs: Varies by IC
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Award Duration: Generally 5 years
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of fulltime professional effort
Salary Limit: Contact IC staff
Research Costs: Contact IC staff
Program: Paul Calabresi Career Development
Award For Clinical Oncology (K12)
IC Specific Information: See link above
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per candidate per year
Research Costs: Up to $30,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $30,000 per candidate per
year
NCI K01: NCI Mentored Career Development Award to
Promote Diversity (K01)
Program: Does not participate in the Omnibus
Announcement (see NHLBI announcements below)
IC Specific Information:
Salary Limit:
Research Costs:
NHLBI K01: Mentored Career Award for Faculty at
Minority Institutions
NHLBI K01: Mentored Career Development Award to
Promote Faculty Diversity in Biomedical Research
Program: NIH Omnibus K01 Announcement
NICHD
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Training Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
NIDDK
Training
NIGMS
Training
K12
Program: Independent Scientist Award (K02)
NCI
Training Research Costs: Up to $30,000 per year
NHLBI
Training
K08
Program: Mentored Research Scientist
Development Award (K01)
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Program: NIH Omnibus K01 Announcement (see
NIDDK-specific announcement in this box)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
NIDDK K01: NIDDK Mentored Research Scientist
Development Award
Does not participate in the Omnibus Announcement
(see NIGMS program below)
IC Specific Information: See MORE Faculty
Development Awards
Salary Limit:
Program: NIH Omnibus K02 Announcement
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: No research development support
Program: NIH Omnibus K02 Announcement
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Research Costs:
Program: NIH Omnibus K01 Announcement
NIMH
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Training Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $50,000 per year
NCI K08: NCI Mentored Clinical Scientist Award to
Promote Diversity (K08)
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: Generally none
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Program: NICHD accepts applications for K12s only in
response to active RFAs
IC Specific Information: See link above
Salary Limit: See link above
Research Costs: See link above
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: Institutional Research and Academic
Career Development Award (K12)
IC Specific Information: See link above
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Consistent with the established salary
structure at the applicant institution
Research Costs: Supplies, travel, and statistical
services including personnel and computer time
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Research Costs: Up to $20,000 per year
Program: NIH Omnibus K02 Announcement
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Development
Program Award (K12): Multiple FOAs - See K Kiosk
Program: Mentored Clinical Scientist Research
Career Development Award (K08)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $50,000 per year
Comparison of K Awards across Institutes & Centers:
K22
NIH K
Kiosk
NCI
Training
NHLBI
Training
NIDDK
Training
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Development Award (K25)
General Objective: The purpose of the K25 is to
attract to NIH-relevant research those investigators
whose quantitative science and engineering research
has thus far not been focused primarily on questions of
health and disease.
Award Duration: Generally 1-2 years of Mentored
support, and up to 3 years of Independent support
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of fulltime professional effort for Mentored phase
Salary Limit: Contact IC staff
Research Costs: Contact IC staff
Program: NCI Transition Career Development
Award (K22)
IC Specific Information: See link above - For Federal
(intramural) and non-Federal (extramural) scientists
Award Duration: 3, 4, or 5 years
Award Duration: 3, 4, or 5 years
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $50,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $30,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $40,000 per year
NCI K22: NCI Transition Career Development Award
to Promote Diversity
Program: NHLBI Career Transition Award
NCI K23: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Award
to Promote Diversity (K23)
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Career Development Award (K23)
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
IC Specific Information: See link above (for
Intramural Scientists Only)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year (Extramural
phase)
Research Costs: Up to $75,000 per year (Extramural
phase)
K99/R00
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
General Objective: The primary goal of the K99/R00 pilot initiative is
to facilitate receiving an R01 award earlier in a research career and to
assist investigators in securing a stable research position during the
critical transition stage of their career.
Award Duration: Mentored phase: 1-2 years; Independent phase: Up
to 3 years
Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of full- Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of full- Effort: Minimum 75% (or 9.0 calendar months) of full-time
time professional effort
time professional effort
professional effort during Mentored phase
Salary Limit: Varies by IC
Salary Limit: Varies by IC
Salary Limit: Contact IC staff
Research Costs: Varies by IC
Research Costs: Varies by IC
Research Costs: Contact IC staff
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
Career Development Award (K23)
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table & the Howard Temin Award in
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
this box
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $50,000 for salary, and up to
$30,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
$249,000 per year
NCI K99/R00: Howard Temin Pathway to Independence Award in
Cancer Research
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $30,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $ $40,000 per year
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development Award (K23)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $125,000 per year (Extramural
phase)
Program: NIDDK Career Transition Award (K22) in
Patient-Oriented Research
IC Specific Information: See link above (for
Intramural Scientists Only)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year (Extramural
phase)
Research Costs: Up to $100,000 per year (Extramural
phase)
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $25,000 per year
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development Award (K23)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $50,000 for salary, and up to
$20,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
$249,000 per year
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Research Costs: $25,000 to $50,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $40,000 per year
Program: Does not support this mechanism
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development Award (K23)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $20,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $40,000 per year
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development Award (K23)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Program: Mentored Quantitative Research Career
Development Award (K25)
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Salary Limit: Up to $90,000 per year
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $50,000 for salary, and up to
$20,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
$249,000 per year
Program: NIH Pathway to Independence (PI) Award (K99/R00)
Research Costs: Up to $50,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $50,000 per year
IC Specific Information: See link above (for
Intramural Scientists Only)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year (Extramural)
NIGMS
Training
Program: NIMH no longer accepts new applications
for the K22
NIMH
Training
K25
Program: Mentored Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development Award (K23)
General Objective: The purpose of the K23 is to
support the career development of investigators with
research or health professional doctoral degree, who
have made a commitment to focus their research
endeavors on patient-oriented research.
Program: NICHD Career Transition Award
NICHD
Training
K23
Program: Career Transition Award (K22): Multiple
FOAs - See K Kiosk
General Objective: The Career Transition Award
(K22) generally supports an individual postdoctoral
fellow in transition to a faculty position. Applicants may
be in an NIH Intramural Program. Some ICs also
accept applicantions from extramural scientists.
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $50,000 for salary, and up to
$20,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
$249,000 per year
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $75,000 for salary, and up to
$25,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
$249,000 per year
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
IC Specific Information: See IC Table
Budget (Mentored phase): Up to $50,000 for salary, and up to
$20,000 for research costs
Budget (Independent phase): Total direct cost may not exceed
Types of K-Awards by NHLBI
K08
Program: Mentored
Clinical Scientist
Research Career
Development
Award (K08)
K23
Program: Mentored
Patient-Oriented Research
Career Development
Award (K23)
K25
Program: Mentored
Quantitative Research
Career Development
Award (K25)
Salary Limit: Up to $75,000 per year
Research Costs: Up to $ $40,000 per
year
Grant Writing
IV. Revising a Grant, Discussion of Specific
Aims prepared for the other course, and Open
Discussion about Designing Genetic Studies
D.C. Rao
Division of Biostatistics
Washington University in St. Louis
School of Medicine
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Kelle H. Moley, MD; Dept of OB/GYN
Linda Pike, Ph.D.; Dept of Biochem & Mol Biophysics
Grant Writing
Things to Consider When Revising a Grant Application
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Read the summary statement carefully (and “walk away
from it for a few days”, but stay focused!)
Read it again and compile all criticisms into one list of
“Significant Concerns”, grouping them as necessary. All
relatively minor concerns my be grouped into “Other
miscellaneous concerns”).
Make a prioritized list of the major criticisms (usually 2 to
5) & prepare a response plan for each of them. Some of
them may require additional pilot/preliminary data or
simulations.
Avoid the temptation of re-submitting the revision for the
immediately available dead line; inadequate revision and
premature re-submission can and often does backfire, faring
even worse than before (thus wasting one of 2 or 3 windows
of opportunity)
Patience is a virtue but procrastination is not!
Grant Writing
Things to Consider When Revising a Grant Application # 2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Remember, the reviewers are also expert scientists like you and me. While your
anger at the reviewers’ disapproval of your grant is understandable, avoid
directing your anger at the reviewers
It would be more productive for you to assume that you have failed to present
your grant in a convincing and compelling manner.
Remember, most submitted grants are good. Yours has to be at the top of good
grants! Therefore, simply revising a grant rapidly based on the criticisms may
about Take
Designing
Genetic
Studies,
and you have
not be Open
enoughDiscussion
to secure funding.
advantage
of every
opportunity
for continuing to improve the grant.
Remember, reviewers have no obligation to us but they work hard for us, so be
gentle and make them feel appreciated (“Inspired by the cogent comments of the
reviewers, we have undertaken an extensive revision”).
Reviewers are also human and some times they do make mistakes (especially if
our grants are not well written to start with). Avoid the temptation to use
offensive language (preferable to say “we respectfully submit that ….”).
Prepare the best possible INTRODUCTION section (up to 3 pages). For revised
applications, if this section has not convinced the reviewer, may be nothing else is
going to! Be very well organized, clear, and succinct. Salesmanship is key!
Grant Writing
1.
Presentation & Discussion of
Specific Aims
2.
Discussion about Design of Genetic
Studies
3.
Discussion about the Assignment
4.
Next Session: Assignments due
(written & oral presentations
Grant Writing
V. Last Session
Assignments due (written & oral
presentations