NIH Grants HelpPresented by the Office of

Research and Grants (ORG)

The ORG TeamJack Blazyk, Ph.D. - Associate dean for researchJay Shubrook, D.O. – Director of clinical researchBrooke Gowl, Ph.D. – Research and program grants

developer Victor Heh, Ph.D. – BiostatisticianJessica Wingett, CPS/CAP – ManagerSuzanne Vazzano, CPS/CAP – Administrative associateCammie Starner, R.N., CCRC – Research nurseLynn Petrik, R.N., B.S.N. – Research nurse

Topics

OU Resources

Changes at NIH – How to choose the best funding mechanism for you

New NIH Review and Scoring System

OU Resources

Proposal Development

Brooke Davis, research grants developer, is available to help with proposal preparationHave the proposal written well before the

deadline if editing help is needed

Victor Heh, biostatistician, is available for help with research design and statistics

Approvals, Budget and Submission

Electronic transmittal form – LEO

Judi Rioch, COM’s pre-award grant & contract manager at ORSP – budgeting process, certification pages, signature process, and proposal submission

ORSP website, information for OU proposal preparation, budget templates

Pre-Submission ReviewsShould we offer to review Specific Aims?

Send complete proposal to RSAC or ORG if you would like preliminary reviews before submissionOne month for internal reviews by the Research

and Scholarly Affairs Committee (RSAC)Two months for external review coordinated by

ORG from experts in your field (beyond OU)

Pre-review improves quality!

Changes at NIHHow to choose the best funding mechanism for you

New Investigator Policy

New Investigator (NI)Has not previously competed successfully as

PD/PI for a significant NIH independent research award.

See FAQs about NIH's Enhancing Peer Review on the ORG website for more information.

Early Stage Investigator PolicyEarly Stage Investigator (ESI)

Is a NI within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent)

See FAQs about NIH's Enhancing Peer Review on the ORG website for more information.

Revised New and Early Stage Investigator Policies

NOT-OD-09-013New Policy

Beginning in FY 2009, NIH expects to support New Investigators at success rates equivalent to that of established investigators submitting new applications.

Applications from New Investigators will be clustered during initial peer review to the extent possible.

The NIH strongly encourages New Investigators, particularly ESIs, to apply for R01 grants when seeking first-time NIH funding.

R01 vs. R15ESI / NI Bump? R01 - YES R15 - NO

NIH now supports new PIs (mostly ESIs) at the same success rates as established investigators submitting new applications.

In FY 2009, NIAID initially set the payline for new and ESI R01 investigators at 2 percentile points higher than the regular R01 payline (12th percentile). Eventually, they raised the R01 payline to the 25th percentile in order to reach NIH targets. They also used other mechanisms such as selective pay and R56-Bridge awards to fund more new & ESI.

R01 vs. R15 (as of 1/25/10)R01

Next Submission Dates 10/5/10, 2/5/11, 6/5/11 Direct Costs Up to $250K per year (modular

budget)> $250K per year (detailed budget)

Award Length Up to 5 yearsRP Page Limit 12

R15Next Submission Dates 10/25/10, 2/25/11, 6/25/11

Direct Costs Up to $300K total(Detailed budget for > $250K)

Award Length Up to 3 yearsRP Page Limit 12

Should You Submit an R01?

“More than ever before, that answer could be yes for new investigators. NIH hopes to change the paradigm and encourage new investigators to apply for an R01 instead of an R21. Even if you have little preliminary data, consider applying for an R01. A higher payline will make it easier to get funded. And we can use an R56-Bridge award to help you get preliminary or other data should your R01 not succeed.

While many new investigators have used an R03 or R21 to collect preliminary data, this approach may no longer be the best one. An ESI who gets an R03 or R21 would need to pay attention to the number of years he or she would spend on this award and could lose ESI status if too many years passed after training.”

From NIAID Funding News – 11/21/08

NIH policy on new application vs. resubmission

“Simply rewording the title and Specific Aims or incorporating minor changes in response to comments in the previous Summary Statement does not constitute a substantial change in scope or content. Changes to the Research Plan should produce a significant change in direction and approach for the research project. Thus, a new application would include substantial changes in all sections of the Research Plan, particularly the Specific Aims and the Research Design and Methods sections.” NOT-OD-03-041

Know Your Study Sections

Study Sections have been changing

Check the CSR Study Section Roster Index and CSR Review Group Descriptions

Recommend a Study Section and Institute in your cover letter

New Grant Review Criteria

Five core criteriaSignificanceInvestigator(s) InnovationApproachEnvironment

New Grant Review ScoringThe new scoring system uses 9-point scale

(1 = exceptional, 9 = poor)Each criterion receives a separate scoreIn addition, impact is scored separately,

also from 1 to 9Your Overall Impact (Priority) Score is the

average of the impact scores from each reviewer multiplied by 10 (i.e., scores range from 10 to 90)

NIH Website

Score Descriptor Additional Guidance on Strengths/Weaknesses

1 Exceptional Exceptionally strong with essentially no weaknesses

2 Outstanding Extremely strong with negligible weaknesses

3 Excellent Very strong with only some minor weaknesses

4 Very Good Strong but with numerous minor weaknesses

5 Good Strong but with at least one moderate weakness

6 Satisfactory Some strengths but also some moderate weaknesses

7 Fair Some strengths but with at least one major weakness

8 Marginal A few strengths and a few major weaknesses

9 Poor Very few strengths and numerous major weaknesses

Minor Weakness: An easily addressable weakness that does not substantially lessen impactModerate Weakness: A weakness that lessens impactMajor Weakness: A weakness that severely limits impact

NIH Website

NIH Grant WritingFor more grant writing tips check out

Tips for Writing a Successful NIH Grant Proposal and FAQs about NIH's Enhancing Peer Review on the ORG website.

Please callIf you wish to speak with me about funding

for your research, please email or call me to set up an appointment.

Brooke A. Gowl, Ph.D.Research and Program Grants Developer233 Grosvenor Hall740-593-2304davisb4@ohio.edu