1 / 18

Survival Guide for Current Grant Funding Divaker Choubey, Ph. D. Ph.: 558-1014

Survival Guide for Current Grant Funding Divaker Choubey, Ph. D. Ph.: 558-1014 Divaker.choubey@uc.edu. Why “Survival Guide”? Reduced success rate for grant applications - Post-stimulus number of applications - Projected flat annual budget of funding agencies

elita
Download Presentation

Survival Guide for Current Grant Funding Divaker Choubey, Ph. D. Ph.: 558-1014

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. Survival Guide for Current Grant Funding Divaker Choubey, Ph. D. Ph.: 558-1014 Divaker.choubey@uc.edu

  2. Why “Survival Guide”? • Reduced success rate for grant applications • - Post-stimulus number of applications • - Projected flat annual budget of funding agencies • Reduced budget for private foundations • - Emphasis on Innovation (NIH)

  3. When is the best time to submit a grant application?

  4. New Investigators: - Independence - Relocation - Publication as a corresponding/senior author - Designated laboratory/office space - Institutional support - Current environment Mentors/Collaborators Established Investigators: - Research productivity - Impact of research

  5. Better strategies are needed to increase our chances of success 1. Is my grant application innovative? or Are proposed studies significant? (who decides?) 2. Why my application should be funded?

  6. How to select a project? • Find gaps in knowledge in the field of expertise • Assess your strengths and weaknesses to • perform proposed studies (track record) • Find out potential collaborators in the • Department/Institution • Start collaborations and document it through • publications before (or during) grant review

  7. How to select a funding agency? NIH (Biomedical research) DOD (Biomedical and other) NSF (Non-biomedical/basic research) Foundations (Disease-specific) Other agencies

  8. Selecting a funding mechanism: R03 (SMALL GRANT PROGRAM) Project period of up to two years, $50,000 per year. R21 (EXPOLATORY/DEVELOPMENTAL) Project period of up to two years, Total $275 K per year. R01 (RESEARCH PROGRAM GRANT PROGRAM) Project period of up to five years, Total $250 K per year. Other mechanisms Mentored Research Scientist Development Award (K01) Protected period for 3-5 years; 75% Effort

  9. Do I need a collaborator? Who should be a collaborator? Time Period Effort

  10. Pre-submission plan of action/preparation and interactions with the agency staff: IRB IACUC Identify an Institute (NIH) Pre-submission discussion with Program Directors

  11. Identification of a Study Section/Review Group SRO Potential Reviewers Research interests of reviewers Citations

  12. Preparation of an application: Agency deadline Institutional deadline Prepare application

  13. Preparation of grant application: -NIH Biographical Sketch (Personal Statement/ Publications) -Abstract (your advertisement) -Specific aim page (advertisement-longer version) -Research Strategy (6 or 12 pages) -Background -Preliminary data/Progress Report -Hypothesis (testable) -Specific aims (2, 3, or 4) -Research design/plan

  14. Internal evaluation of the application Internal reviewers Feedback from the internal reviewers Modifications Final draft of the application Cover letter

  15. Submission of the application and tracking: Warnings/Errors Assignment to a study section Reviewers (about a month before the meeting) Summary statement Score (fundable/ non-fundable) Reading and analyses (collaborators) Discussion with Program Director Notes from the study section meeting

  16. Border line score (may be fundable) Discussion with the program director Research needs (mice colonies) Is funding through the R56 mechanism likely? Demonstrate urgency to maintain research program/laboratory Persistence

  17. Revision/New submission: - Introduction (1-page) Summary of the changes - Addition of a new collaborator - New publication - Change in research strategy - Advancements in the field

  18. Resources: • Workshops for grant writing at UC • The Grant Application Writer’s Workbook* • (by Stephen W. Russell & David C. Morrison • NIAID Website • *No financial interest

More Related