Effective January 25, 2010 and beyond Information from Part 5. Research Plan of NIAID’s NIH Grants Cycle Website.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ing%20for%20Success.pdf Information from NIH: Louis V. De Paolo NICHD Roger G. Sorensen.
Advertisements

Writing a Fellowship Part 1. My Fellowship History In my third year as a post-doc fellow I received a Leukemia and Lymphoma fellowship for senior fellows.
Yiu-fai Cheung, MD Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine LKS Faculty of Medicine The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, China Sharing in GRF.
How your NIH grant application is evaluated and scored Larry Gerace, Ph.D. June 1, 2011.
Grant Writing: Specific Aims and Study Design Zuo-Feng Zhang, MD, PhD EPIDEMIOLOGY
Environment - Facilities/Equipment Randall Duncan Biological Sciences COBRE Grant Writing Workshop January 21, 2015.
Developing and Submitting a Research Proposal in Psychosocial Oncology: Tips on Getting it Funded Mary Jane Esplen, PhD NCIC CCS Research Scientist & Associate.
Preparation/Content of an NSF proposal NSF proposals are uploaded to the Fastlane website prior to submission (NIH uses Grants.gov): 1.Cover sheet (basic.
Understanding Research Articles Microbiology Laboratory.
How Your Application Is Reviewed Vonda Smith, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
RGC Grant Applications in Biology & Medicine Formulating and Writing winning proposals Kathy Cheah, 2003.
Preparing Grant Applications
November 13, 2009 NIH PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS: 2010 REVISONS.
HRB Webinar Health Research Awards Content Objective of the call Scope and Panels Principal Investigator Response to peer-reviewers (rebuttal) Some.
11 1 Enhancing Peer Review Frequently Asked Questions on Application Changes.
Getting Funded: How to write a good grant
Grant Writing/Comprehensive Workshop Paul R. Albert, Ph. D
Publishing your paper. Learning About You What journals do you have access to? Which do you read regularly? Which journals do you aspire to publish in.
How to Improve your Grant Proposal Assessment, revisions, etc. Thomas S. Buchanan.
Formulating an important research question Susan Furth, MD, PhD Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research
Effective proposal writing Session I. Potential funding sources Government agencies (e.g. European Union Framework Program, U.S. National Science Foundation,
Writing a Research Proposal
UAMS Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Writing A Research Grant Proposal AJG Abboud J. Ghalayini, Ph.D.
Writing Successful Research Grant Proposals
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Integrating Diversity into.
Preparing a Successful SHRM Foundation Grant Application Lynn McFarland, Ph.D. August 23, 2012.
Literature Review and Parts of Proposal
Navigating the Changes to the NIH Application Instructions Navigating the Changes to the NIH Application Instructions EFFECTIVE JANUARY 25, 2010.
Michael A. Sesma, Ph.D.; NIMH What Is A Strong Grant Application? What Is A Strong Grant Application? Simple steps to a successful grant application Michael.
1 Introduction to Grant Writing Beth Virnig, PhD Haitao Chu, MD, PhD University of Minnesota, School of Public Health December 11, 2013.
COMPONENTS OF A GOOD GRANT PROPOSAL Philip T. LoVerde.
Research Project Grant (RPG) Retreat K-Series March 2012 Bioengineering Classroom.
Why Do Funded Research?. We want/need to understand our world.
Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) Program Erica Brown, PhD Director, NIH AREA Program National Institutes of Health 1.
NIH Challenge Grants in Health and Science Research RFA OD
The NIH Grant Review Process Hiram Gilbert, Ph.D. Dept. of Biochemistry, Baylor College of Medicine Xander Wehrens, M.D. Ph.D. Dept. of Molecular Physiology.
RESEARCH PROPOSAL Statement of problem Objectives of the study Scope of the study Review of Literature Methodology and theoretical back- ground Benefits.
NIH Mentored Career Development Awards (K Series) Part 5 Thomas Mitchell, MPH Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics University of California San Francisco.
AHRQ 2011 Annual Conference: Insights from the AHRQ Peer Review Process Training Grant Review Perspective Denise G. Tate Ph.D., Professor, Chair HCRT Study.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH CHALLENGE GRANT APPLICATIONS Dan Hoyt Survey, Statistics, and Psychometrics(SSP) Core Facility March 11, 2009.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Broadening Participation.
Components of a Successful AREA (R15) Grant Rebecca J. Sommer Bates College.
Grant writing 101 The Art of Flawless Packaging Scott K. Powers Department of Applied Physiology and Kinesiology Scott K. Powers Department of Applied.
J.P. Hornak, , 2004 Research Practices http://
 I applied for an NIH postdoctoral fellow before I ever started my postdoc and was unsuccessful  Problems  I hadn’t clearly developed what my project.
National Institutes of Health AREA PROGRAM (R15) Thomas J. Wenzel Bates College, Lewiston, Maine.
Using the NCBI SciENcv application to generate NIH Biosketches in new format Hermanie Pierre-Noel and Silvia Pulido, Ph.D University of Central Florida.
Ronald Margolis, Ph.D. National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases Amanda Boyce, Ph.D. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal.
How is a grant reviewed? Prepared by Professor Bob Bortolussi, Dalhousie University
Restructured NIH Applications One Year Later:
An Insider’s Look at a Study Section Meeting: Perspectives from CSR Monica Basco, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer Coordinator, Early Career Reviewer Program.
OCTOBER 18, 2011 SESSION 9 OF AAPLS – SELECTED SUPPORTING COMPONENTS OF SF424 (R&R) APPLICATION APPLICANTS & ADMINISTRATORS PREAWARD LUNCHEON SERIES Module.
Proposal Writing. # 1:The title Choose a title that conveys information about your project. Avoid acronyms that have negative connotations. Make it Brief.
CHAPTER 16 Preparing Effective Proposals. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS  Conducting a Preliminary Assessment  Prior to Writing the Proposal  How Fundable.
Response to Prior Review and Resubmission Strategies Yuqing Li, Ph.D Division of Movement Disorders Department of Neurology Center for Movement Disorders.
Developing Smart objectives and literature review Zia-Ul-Ain Sabiha.
Short and Sweet: Selling Your Science in 12 Pages ASBMR Grant Writing Workshop Friday, 15 October 2010 Toronto, ON Jane E. Aubin, Ph.D. Dept of Molecular.
R01? R03? R21? How to choose the right funding mechanism Thomas Mitchell, MPH Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics University of California San Francisco.
Research Strategy: Approach Frank Sellke, MD Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery Brown Medical School Providence RI AATS Grant Course 2011.
NIH R03 Program Review Ning Jackie Zhang, MD, PhD, MPH College of Health and Public Affairs 04/17/2013.
Grant Writing for Success
Grant Writing Information Session
The NSF Grant Review Process: Some Practical Tips
Research Project Grant (RPG) Retreat R-series
How to Write a Successful NIH Career Development Award (K Award)
Approach Section: The “Meat” of the Proposal
BU Career Development Grant Writing Course- Session 3, Approach
K R Investigator Research Question
UAMS Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Presentation transcript:

Effective January 25, 2010 and beyond Information from Part 5. Research Plan of NIAID’s NIH Grants Cycle Website

 Changes to Consider  Writing Tips  Changes to Research Plan ◦ Specific Aims ◦ Research Strategy

 Error correction window extended following submission – 5 days ◦ If corrections are submitted after the submission deadline, NIH does not have to accept them.  Biosketches: Personal statements for all key investigators  Introduction (revisions and resubmissions) - 1 page  Research plan length and sections

The goal of the proposed research is to investigate the interaction between drug abuse and normal aging processes. Specifically, we plan to measure changes in cognitive ability and mental and physical health across a five-year period in a group of older drug users and matched controls. I have the expertise, leadership and motivation necessary to successfully carry out the proposed work. I have a broad background in psychology, with specific training and expertise in key research areas for this application. As a postdoctoral fellow at Berkeley, I carried out ethnographic and survey research and secondary data analysis on psychological aspects of drug addiction. At the Division of Intramural Research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), I expanded my research to include neuropsychological changes associated with addiction. As PI or co- Investigator on several previous university- and NIH-funded grants, I laid the groundwork for the proposed research by developing effective measures of disability, depression, and other psychosocial factors relevant to the aging substance abuser, and by establishing strong ties with community providers that will make it possible to recruit and track participants over time. In addition, I successfully administered the projects (e.g. staffing, research protections, budget), collaborated with other researchers, and produced several peer-reviewed publications from each project. As a result of these previous experiences, I am aware of the importance of frequent communication among project members and of constructing a realistic research plan, timeline, and budget. The current application builds logically on my prior work, and I have chosen co- investigators (Drs. Gryczynski and Newlin) who provide additional expertise in cognition, gerontology and geriatrics. In summary, I have a demonstrated record of successful and productive research projects in an area of high relevance for our aging population, and my expertise and experience have prepared me to lead the proposed project.

 Five key points of focus for planning ◦ Is your hypothesis sound? ◦ Are specific aims logical and feasible? ◦ Do you understand potential problems? ◦ Can you analyze the data you collect? ◦ Are you the ideal PI for the project? Your research must answer your hypothesis!

How Much Detail?  The Challenge: Convey impact in less detail and space  Streamline – Only put in things that you plan to use. ◦ Focus on strategy ◦ Only detail experiments that let you shine ◦ Limit you aims  Know your audience - To whom will your proposal be going? ◦ Detail depends upon the expertise of the reviewers.  Use graphics, flowcharts, and tables ◦ Remember that figures can have fonts smaller than 11pt, which can save space.

The research plan is core of your proposal!  Specific Aims  Research Strategy ◦ Significance ◦ Innovation ◦ Approach  Preliminary Studies  Progress Report

 Length:1 page  Convey the big picture: the impact of your research on the field  Market your application ◦ Impact of research ◦ Reason for choosing the project ◦ Significance and innovation ◦ Write for experts and non-experts  Form the framework of the Research Strategy  Your aims should test your hypothesis

 Have aims that are clearly achievable (about 1 aim per year with one to two sets of experiments per aim) Remember:  You do not have to accomplish everything with one grant.  You do not have to max out the budget and/or time allowed.

 Significance  Innovation  Approach  Create a header for each main section  R01’s and R15’s - 12 pages  R03’s and R21’s – 6 pages

What to Highlight  State of your field and your long term plans ◦ Advancement of the field ◦ Filling knowledge gaps in what is currently being done ◦ New and unique approaches ◦ Related grants  Note how your work serves NIH’s mission to improve health through science. This section influences to which institute your proposal is sent.

How Much Is Enough?  How your work challenges or can improve existing paradigms ◦ Have a broad view of your field and the significance of your research  Why are you challenging existing paradigms?  How is your work ground breaking? Be realistic; don’t propose too much!

Organizing Experiments  Use Specific Aims to order your Approach ◦ Enter a bold header for each Specific Aim  For each aim, describe the first set of experiments ◦ Outline potential next steps  Provide a flowchart  Demonstrate ◦ Your understanding of the work involved ◦ Your resources and expertise to conduct the research

 Experienced investigator? Cite relevant work  Early State/New investigator? Demonstrate ability to handle the experimental methods. Note prior use of the methods.  Enlist co-investigators who possess expertise that you lack – tailor biosketches to reflect this expertise  Give a timetable

Wasted Space

Preliminary Studies (new applications)  Can be a separate subsection or incorporated into the rest of your Approach  Give preliminary data which show you are on the right track  Interpret your data with a critical eye – consider all possible conclusions  Put more focus on data from your own lab; be clear which data are yours ◦ Demonstrate your expertise ◦ Establish your competence

Progress Report (renewal or revision)  Previous grant project beginning and end dates  Summarize the importance of your findings in relation to Specific Aims  Highlight achievements – note published and unpublished results

 NIH’s Enhancing Peer Review website ◦  NIAID’s NIH Grants Cycle ◦ m m  ORG website – writing tips, notices ◦  Contact Brooke Davis, Ph.D., OUCOM Research Grants Developer, at or 740-  Contact your program officer  Read the SF 424!