1 / 9

RIMI Grant-writing Workshop: NIH – National Institutes of Health

RIMI Grant-writing Workshop: NIH – National Institutes of Health. Office of Research & Sponsored Programs Ellen Shimakawa , Ph.D., Director Doug Carey, Grants Administrator Nancy Myers Sims, Grants & Contracts Development Specialist.

elina
Download Presentation

RIMI Grant-writing Workshop: NIH – National Institutes of Health

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. RIMI Grant-writing Workshop: NIH – National Institutes of Health Office of Research & Sponsored Programs Ellen Shimakawa, Ph.D., Director Doug Carey, Grants Administrator Nancy Myers Sims, Grants & Contracts Development Specialist

  2. ”…to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability…..” -- National Institutes of Health

  3. Thinking about your proposal… • Your Idea is KEY • Assess yourself, the competition (Reporter, other agency databases) • Agency, Program Relevance • Types of proposals • R15 • SC1, SC2, SC3 • R03, R21

  4. The “Cheat-sheet” • R15 • “mini R01” – THOUGH DOES NOT PROHIBIT SC-x • renewable • SC1, SC2, SC3 • R03, R21

  5. Rationale for NIH mechanism choices? • NIH Reporter • Similar projects • Mechanism success rates (though v. little on SC’s)

  6. Resources for NIH proposals • Program Announcement, (Scientific) Agency Contacts • NIH SF424 RR Guide (July 25, 2013) • NIH Grants Policy Statement (Oct 1, 2013) • SCORE: F AQ’s: http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/SCORE/pages/SCOREUpdateFAQ.aspx

  7. NIH SF424 RR Guide • Part I: from Page I-111 • Specific Aims • “Research Strategy” • Significance • Innovation • Approach • Letters, References Cited, “Human Subjects” not included in page count

  8. Specific Aims • Rule of Thumb (#): NO MORE than 1 SA for each project year • Separate, discrete Aims • such that lack of progress on one does not impede progress on another • “No fishing” • Hypothesis driven research! • Wording: • Major predictions of Central Hypothesis • lower-order, SA-specific, working hypotheses ok • ‘compare’, ‘describe’, ‘catalog’, ‘investigate’ … and the like, often connote descriptive, rather than hypothesis driven research

  9. A thought about Innovation… • Review success is required for funding success. • Reviewer enthusiasm is required for review success. • “Innovation” can be a useful way to generate reviewer enthusiasm.

More Related