1 / 12

Mastering NIH Grant Applications: A Comprehensive Guide

Learn the insider secrets to crafting successful NIH grant applications from leading experts. Understand the review process, mechanics, and strategies to make your application stand out. Elevate your grantsmanship skills today!

currie
Download Presentation

Mastering NIH Grant Applications: A Comprehensive Guide

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Writing a NIH Grant ApplicationEllen Puré, PhD, Professor and Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs, Wistar Institute Mitchell Schnall MD, PhD, Matthew J. Wilson Professor of Research Radiology

  2. The NIH • 27 institutes and centers • Most have active extramural grants programs • Under different local leadership and local missions • There are many small differences in operation among the institutes • United by common extramural purpose and language

  3. The Institute & Centers

  4. The Institute & Centers

  5. Types of applications: How are they judged? • K grants (career development) • Trainee, training environment, project • R grants (research projects) • Research project • P grants (multi-investigator grants:PPG, center etc) • Research projects, “the group is stronger than the sum of its parts”

  6. Mechanics: Standard grant components • Face Page • Budget/justification • Bio sketch /other support • Resources / Environment • Approach • Specific aims:1 page • Research strategy: 12 pages • Significance, Innovation, Approach, Prelim data • Bibliography • Human / Animal Studies

  7. Strategy assembling application • Identify collaborators early: collect bio/other support ASAP • Complete resources and environment ahead of time (can leverage boiler plate sections if available) • Budget at least 2 weeks before deadline (take a break from the science to complete)-but start at least 3 months in advance! • Details of animal/human studies can go outside of the research strategy (overall description in the research strategy) • Can use appendix for supporting documents, however the Approach section should be self contained. (?not any more?)

  8. Where does my application go? Application grants.gov NIH eRA Commons Institute or Center Division of Receipt & Referral Review SRO & Study Section

  9. What, exactly, is the review process? • The procedure by which each grant application submitted to the NIH receives a fair, independent, expert, and timely evaluation, free from inappropriate influences, so the NIH can support the most promising research. • Two steps: • Peer review panels: generates score /percentile • Institute council review: relevant for large grants/borderline grants

  10. Review Criteria: R grant • Each scored 1-9 • overall evaluation is not derived from individual components • only overall evaluation is voted by the study section • component scores serve to identify areas of strength/weakness • Significance • Investigator • Innovation • Approach • Environment • Overall Evaluation

  11. Some Statistics • Center for Scientific Review (CSR) • Receives over 80,000 applications/year • Recruits over 17,000 external experts • This is the volume of your competition • How do I make my application rise to the top? Grantsmanship!

  12. Grantsmanship words to live by: • Think first…..write second!!!! • Vet! • Logic and clarity trumps density • Focus on the “pitch” • A grant is a marketing document (not a clinical trial protocol) • Your primary audience is the review panel • Understand the reviewer’s job, make it easy • Assume a diverse set of reviewers • You share responsibility of a “bad review”

More Related