110 likes | 235 Views
An Applicant’s Perspectives on the New NIH Changes Grover C. Gilmore. Background. Joined CWRU in 1975. External funding since 1978 in all but four years. NIH – 19 grants (12 as PI), 61 years of funding. ODMH – 1 grant (PI), 1 year of funding
E N D
An Applicant’s Perspectives on the New NIH Changes Grover C. Gilmore
Background • Joined CWRU in 1975. • External funding since 1978 in all but four years. • NIH – 19 grants (12 as PI), 61 years of funding. • ODMH – 1 grant (PI), 1 year of funding • Foundations – 2 grants (1 as PI), 5 years of funding
Application Process • Start with an idea that excites you • Identify collaborators • Examine NIH Program Announcements to determine a close fit • Contact a program director cited in the announcement to discuss your idea • Keep in contact as you develop the application
Application Process • Speak with other investigators who have applied for NIH funding • Identify a successful applicant and ask for a copy of the application • Follow the instructions of the new application to the letter
Application Process • Change in page limits for Research section from 25 to 12 pages • An original goal was to reduce the review emphasis on the details of methodology • Action of review panels will ultimately determine what is required in the application
Application Process • Identify the review panel that will likely be assigned the application • Examine the member composition of the panel to determine if the application should address an area more comprehensively. • Seek internal review of the application prior to submission to NIH • Suggest in the cover letter which review panel will be appropriate • After the application has been assigned, contact the program officer if you have questions about the panel or the process.
Resubmission (amendment) • Grumble to all who will listen about the faults of the review panel • Accept that you can do a better job of explaining your ideas and the strengths of your application • Itemize the comments of the reviewers • Identify central themes in the reviews that need to be addressed • Identify small areas that can be clarified
Resubmission (amendment) • Meet with research team to craft the changes and the response to the reviewers • Contact Program Officer to discuss your response to the review panel • Write an Introduction that responds explicitly to the reviewers concerns • Highlight with underline or italic format areas in the application with major changes. • Seek internal review prior to submission
Competing Renewal • Develop a plan for continuing the project. • If the review period is 9 months, then the renewal application must be submitted at least 9 months prior to the end of the award period. • Consider submitting the renewal 12-15 months prior to the end of the first award. • Consider carrying over funds to create a funding bridge in case the renewal is not funded before the first award ends.
Competing Renewal • Renewal will be based in part on the progress that has been made in addressing the first research questions. • Show activity at relevant conferences and in publications. • Attend conferences that are most relevant for the area in which the grant is funded. • Strategy is to ensure that you are up to date on the leading edge of science in that area.
Attitude • Persevere! • Use the feedback that you receive at every stage of the process. • Believe that good science will be funded.