Study Section Overview – The Process and What You Should Know George Richerson, MD, PhD Chairman, Neurology University of Iowa

K08/K23 K08 or K23? When should you apply? As early as possible! Some CNS-TP residents apply during residency will

Time from end of residency to K award (in months) (K awards made 1/2009 to 1/2014)   All MD only MD/PHD K08 Mean 55.5 68.6 46.3 SEM 3.2 5.2 3.6 N 95 39 56 K23 60.6 63.9 43.2 2.9 8.9 55 46 9

Success of NIH Training Grants NIH RPG award rates for first-time applicants with a prior LRP or K award are much higher than for those without: For MDs: 44.1 percent vs 9.2 percent. For MD/PhDs: 60.0 percent vs 10.1 percent. Similarly, close to 80 percent of a cohort of MD/PhDs with past MSTP appointments (1980-1989) have applied for RPGs Approximately 78 percent have been successful. NIH Physician-scientist Workforce (PSW) Working Group Report. June 1, 2014. http://acd.od.nih.gov/reports/PSW_Report_ACD_06042014.pdf

How are K Awards reviewed? By a study section devoted only to K Awards NST-1 is the NINDS K Award study section Each study section has its own personality My description is of NST-1 General structure is the same for others

How are K Awards reviewed? Study section meets three times per year in DC or other site Meeting is held in a conference room at a hotel About 30-45 scientists – typically half in person & half on phone NIH Program Officers usually join in person or on the phone 3-4 members read and “score” each grant before the meeting Primary reviewer Secondary reviewer Tertiary reviewer Discussant

Review of K Awards Focus is on 3 main parts of each grant: Science Mentoring Plan Career Development Plan (“Pathway to Independence” - How your K will lead to an R01 and independent lab)

Review of K Awards Scores of 1 to 9 assigned to each of five criteria Candidate Career Development Plan/Career Goals & Objectives/Plan to Provide Mentoring Research Plan Mentor(s), Co-Mentor(s), Consultant(s), Collaborator(s) Environment and Institutional Commitment to the Candidate Expectation of faculty position – not contingent on K Protected time (specific assignments) Each grant given an “Overall Impact” score Can weight 5 criteria however you feel is justified ½ of the grants are “triaged” based on preliminary scores of just the assigned reviewers – others might not read grant

How are K Awards reviewed? Everything just described occurs before the meeting!

How are K Awards reviewed? At the meeting Everyone introduces themselves and their area of research Everyone is asked if there is any grant on the “triage list” that they want to rescue. A single vote is sufficient to rescue a grant. Otherwise everyone marks that grant as “ND” (Not Discussed). For each application, anyone in conflict has to leave room

How are K Awards reviewed? Reviewers give “preliminary scores” Primary reviewer gives overview Touchs on each of the review criteria Emphasizes score driving factors Other reviewers summarize their main score driving factors General discussion open to all members Final scores by reviewers; Everyone enters their score into online scoring system; Anyone outside the range? Typically takes 20 minutes per application

Review of K Awards After everyone is done scoring then they discuss Training in Responsible Conduct of Research Authentication of Key Resources Vertebrate Animals Human subjects Resource Sharing Budget

Review of K Awards Don’t read your review Don’t drone on Scores often don’t change for main reviewers If there is a difference of opinion the person with the worst score often has the most influence on other SS members Not supposed to discuss any grants except as a group Proceedings are confidential – don’t ever ask SS members for details of review

What Do You Do When Your Grant isn’t funded? Read the Summary Statement dispassionately Decide what you need to do to fix the grant Resubmit if it is fixable What if it is “Not Discussed?”

Type 1 – De Novo Submissions – 83% Type 2 – Competing renewals – 17% Lauer, Extramural Nexus, NIH, 2017

Type 1 – De Novo Submissions – 83% Type 2 – Competing renewals – 17% Lauer, Extramural Nexus, NIH, 2017

Type 1 – De Novo Submissions – 83% Type 2 – Competing renewals – 17% Lauer, Extramural Nexus, NIH, 2017

NIH Recommendations for K Award Reviews NINDS would like to get K awards to applicants within 12-18 months of residency if they have: A prior record of conducting and publishing outstanding science on an important subject. Submitted a well-written application on a significant topic with strong science and high quality preliminary data. Constructed an excellent career development plan Have outstanding mentors and mentorship plan Have a project that has the potential for future funding If the above are true then they should not be penalized for a lack of residency and post-residency publications. Steve Korn, NINDS, 2016

Now you have your K Award! What next? This will be the hardest 5 years of your career – if you want to be successful Increase publications Career development Learn new techniques or new scientific field Develop independence Prepare for an R01

NIH Physician-scientist Workforce (PSW) Working Group Report NIH Physician-scientist Workforce (PSW) Working Group Report. June 1, 2014. http://acd.od.nih.gov/reports/PSW_Report_ACD_06042014.pdf

Where Should You Apply for Grants? Send the same grant to multiple funding agencies (NIH, VA, DOD, Navy, NSF, Foundations) Consider multiple grant mechanisms (R01, U01, PPG, VA Merit Review, DP2, StrokeNet, NeuroNEXT) Choose an NIH Institute that will give you the best odds Payline Special programs / RFAs Type of research they fund (14 institutes fund neuroscience) Invest time learning about available programs and RFAs Talk to NIH Program Officers – They care and want to help

If you do good science, everything else follows