Peter Preusch, Ph.D. MSTP Program Director National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH

1. Preparing an NIH Institutional Training Grant Application Peter Preusch, Ph.D. MSTP Program Director National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH

2. Approximate Numbers of Individuals in Research Training Supported with NIH Funds

3. Institutional Training Grants • Purpose: To develop and enhance research training through a coordinated programmatic approach • Involve a considerable number of faculty • Trainees and fellows are selected by the institution

4. Review of Training Grants Out of the 750+ TG applications each year, how does NIH determine which will be funded?

5. Review of Training Grants Two Levels of Review: • Initial Review - Study Section- Scientific Merit Appropriate Scientific Expertise Established Scientists Many Participate in Training Programs • Institute or Center Council- Program Relevance • Broader Scientific Coverage • Established Senior Scientists • Leaders in Community (Scientific, Business, Philanthropic) Provide Guidance to Program Staff

6. Your Grant Application • Electronic Submission ---May (Sept, Jan) • Received Centrally by the Center for Scientific Review and Referred to Appropriate Institute • Assigned to Appropriate Initial Review Group (20 to 30 members) by the Institute • Each Application Assigned to Three to Four Primary Reviewers in Group • Initial Review Group Meeting --- September • Advisory Council --- January • Funding Decisions --- March • Award Issued --- July

7. Institutional TrainingReview Criteria • Scored Review Criteria 1-10: • Training Program and Environment • Training Program Director/Principal Investigator • Preceptors/Mentors • Trainees • Training record • Overall Impact Score: 1-10

8. Training Program and Environment • Are the research facilities and research environment conducive to preparing trainees for successful careers as biomedical scientists? • Do the objectives, design and direction of the proposed research program ensure effective training? • Is the proposed program of training likely to ensure that trainees will be prepared for successful and productive scientific careers? • Do the courses, where relevant, and research training experiences address state-of-the-art science relevant to the aims of the program?

9. Training Program and Environment • Does the program provide training in inter- or multidisciplinary research and/or provide training in state-of-the-art or novel methodologies and techniques? • Is a significant level of institutional commitment to the program evident?

10. Training Program and Environment • For applications that request short-term research training positions: • Is this aspect of the program well designed and, where appropriate, integrated with other aspects of the training program; • Are the numbers of short-term positions appropriate; and • Does the program include features to encourage short-term trainees to consider careers in health-related research?

11. Training Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) • Does the Training PD/PI have the scientific background, expertise, and experience to provide strong leadership, direction, management, and administration to the program? • Does the PD/PI plan to commit sufficient time to the program to ensure its success? • Is sufficient administrative and research training support provided for the program?

12. Training Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) • For applications designating multiple PD/PIs: • Is a strong justification provided that the multiple PD/PI leadership approach will benefit the training program and the trainees? • Is a strong and compelling leadership approach evident, including the designated roles and responsibilities, governance, and organizational structure consistent with and justified by the aims of the training program and with the complementary expertise of each of the PD/PIs?

13. Preceptors/Mentors • Are sufficient numbers of experienced preceptors/mentors with appropriate expertise and funding available to support the number and level of trainees proposed in the application? • Do the preceptors/mentors have strong records as researchers, including successful competition for research support in areas directly related to the proposed research training program? • Do the preceptors/mentors have strong records of training pre- and/or postdoctorates? 

14. Trainees • Is a recruitment plan proposed with strategies to attract high quality trainees? • Are there well-defined and justified selection criteria and retention strategies? • Is there evidence of a competitive applicant pool in sufficient numbers to warrant the proposed size and levels?

15. Trainees • For applications that request short-term research training for predoctoral and/or postdoctoral level positions, does the program have the potential or evidence to recruit high quality, short-term trainees? • For renewal applications, how successful has the program been in attracting and retaining individuals from diverse populations, including populations underrepresented in science?

16. Training Record • How successful are the trainees in completing the program? • How productive are trainees in terms of research accomplishments and publications? • How successful are trainees in obtaining further training appointments, fellowships, and/or career development awards? • How successful are the trainees in achieving productive scientific careers, as evidenced by successful competition for research grants, receipt of honors or awards, high-impact publications, receipt of patents, promotion to scientific leadership positions, and/or other such measures of success?

17. Training Record • For programs that provide research training to health-professional doctorates, is there a record of retaining health professionals in research training or other research activities for at least two years? • Does the program have a rigorous evaluation plan to assess the quality and effectiveness of the training? • Are effective mechanisms in place for obtaining feedback from current and former trainees and monitoring trainees’ subsequent career development?

18. Training Record • For renewal applications: • Does the application describe the program’s accomplishments over the past funding period(s); • Are changes proposed that would improve/strengthen the training experience? • For applications that request short-term research training positions: • Are plans presented to follow the careers of short-term trainees and to assess the effect of the training program on subsequent career choices? • What is the success in attracting students back for multiple appointments? • What is the effect of the short-term component on the overall training program?

19. Institutional TrainingAdditional Review Criteria & Considerations • Additional Review Criteria • Protection for Human Subjects • Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children • Vertebrate Animals • Biohazards • Resubmission, Renewal, Revision factors • Additional Review Considerations: • Diversity Recruitment Plan • Training in Responsible Conduct of Research • Select Agent Research • Budget and Period of Support

20. Table 1. Participating Departments

21. Table 2. Participating Faculty Members

22. Table 3. Existing Institutional Training Grant Support

23. Table 4. Grant Support of Faculty

24. Table 5. Training Record of Faculty

25. Table 5. Training Record of Faculty

26. Table 6. Publications of Trainees

27. Table 6. Publications of Trainees

28. Table 7A. Admissions and Completion Records for Participating Departments and Programs

29. Table 7B. Admissions and Completion Records for Participating Departments and Programs

30. Table 8A. Qualifications of Recent Predoctoral Applicants

31. Table 8B. Qualifications of Recent Postdoctoral Applicants

32. Table 9A. Qualifications of Current Predoctoral Trainees

33. Table 9B. Qualifications of Current Postdoctoral Trainees

34. Table 10. Admissions and Completion Records of Underrepresented Individuals

35. Table 11. Appointments to the Training Grant for each Year of Past Award

36. Table 12A. Predoctoral Trainees Supported by this Training Grant

37. Table 12A. Predoctoral Trainees Supported by this Training Grant (cont) Table 12A. Predoctoral Trainees Supported by This Training Grant (Renewal Applications Only) (Continued)

38. Table 12B. Postdoctoral Trainees Supported by this Training Grant

39. The Narrative • Background • Describe data in Tables 1, 2, 3: • Departmental Membership, Participating Faculty Members, Other TG Support • Program Plan • Program Faculty • Describe data in Tables 4, 5, 6: • Faculty Grant Support, Trainees, Publication of Trainees

40. The Narrative (cont) • Proposed Training • Training Program Evaluation • Trainee Candidates-Recruitment • Institutional Environment and Commitment • Admissions and Completion Records of Trainees (Tables 7A and/or 7B) • Qualifications of Applicants (Tables 8A and/or 8B)

41. The Narrative (cont) • Current Trainee Qualifications (Tables 9A and/or 9B) • Recruitment and Retention Plan to Enhance Diversity (Tables 1, 7 A/B, Renewal Apps Table 10) • Plan for Instruction in Responsible Conduct of Research For Renewal Applications—Progress Report (Tables 11, 12 A and/orB)

42. Narrative (cont) • Human Subjects • Vertebrate Animals • Select Reagent Research • Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan • Consortium/Contractual Agreements • FACULTY BIOSKETCHES • Appendix

43. Institutional TrainingReview Criteria • Scored Review Criteria 1-10: • Training Program and Environment • Training Program Director/Principal Investigator • Preceptors/Mentors • Trainees • Training record • Overall Impact Score: 1-10

44. Institutional Training Grants FY2011 • Competing: • 735 Applications • 67 Type 1s awarded • 254 Type 2s awarded • Non-Competing: • 1,578 Type 5s awarded • Total Number of T32s in 2011 = 1,899

45. Kirschstein-NRSA institutional research training grants Applications, awards, and success rates

46. NIH Research Training Grants Thank You For more info contact: Rod Ulane: ulanere@od.nih.gov Peter Preusch: preuschp@nigms.nih.gov