1 / 34

Funding Strategies for New Faculty

Funding Strategies for New Faculty. Israel A. Goldberg Health Research Associates UTHSC - Memphis March 25, 2008. Focus on NIH, because --. Most biomedical-funding organizations use proposal and review formats similar to the NIH format. NIH INSTITUTES AND CENTERS.

dawn
Télécharger la présentation

Funding Strategies for New Faculty

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. Funding Strategies for New Faculty Israel A. Goldberg Health Research Associates UTHSC - Memphis March 25, 2008

  2. Focus on NIH, because -- • Most biomedical-funding organizations use proposal and review formats similarto the NIH format

  3. NIH INSTITUTES AND CENTERS • AA National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism NIAAA • AG National Institute on Aging NIA • AI National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIAID • AR National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases NIAMS • AT National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine NCCAM • CA National Cancer Institute NCI • DA National Institute on Drug Abuse NIDA • DC National Institute on Deafness and Other Communicative Disorders NIDCD • DE National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research NIDCR • DK National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases NIDDK • EB National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering NIBIB • ES National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences NIEHS • EY National Eye Institute NEI • GM National Institute of General Medical Sciences NIGMS • HD National Institute of Child Health and Human Development NICHD • HG National Human Genome Research Institute NHGRI • HL National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute NHLBI • LM National Library of Medicine NLM • MD National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities NCMH • MH National Institute of Mental Health NIMH • NR National Institute of Nursing Research NINR • NS National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke NINDS • RR National Center for Research Resources NCRR • TW John E. Fogarty International Center FIC

  4. Focus on NIH, because -- • Most biomedical-funding organizations use proposal and review formats similarto the NIH format • That’s where they keep the big money

  5. Focus on theNIH R01 grant proposal, because -- • Most biomedical-funding organizations use proposal and review formats similarto the NIH-R01 format • R01 = Currency of the Realm • R01 = Your Academic Advancement • R01 = Your Goal

  6. Focus on the NIH R01, because -- • Most biomedical-funding organizations use proposal and review formats similar to the NIH-R01 format • R01 = Currency of the Realm • R01 = Your Academic Advancement • R01 = Your Goal Institutional and smaller-agency funding are key to getting started.

  7. Top 10 errors in grant proposals

  8. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 1. Proposing to do too much – • Common problem of new PIs • Giving reviewers too many targets to throw darts at • Assuming that the reviewers will be impressed with your ability to do everything

  9. A. SPECIFIC AIMS (One Page) • Begin with a 3- to 4- sentence paragraph that presents: • Big picture • Focus • What I hope to accomplish • Organizing hypothesis • S.A. 1 -- Test the Prediction that ... . 1A. We will manipulate X and measure Y .... . • Our hypothesis predicts …. . • 1B. We will.... . • Our hypothesis predicts .... . • S.A. 2 -- Test between the alternative hypotheses, A and B. • 2A. We will manipulate X and measure Y .... . • Hypothesis A predicts ...., whereas hypothesis B … • 2B. We will.... . Hypothesis A predicts ...., • whereas hypothesis B predicts … . • S.A. 3 – Ditto Scientific American - style diagram

  10. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 2. No Hypotheses or Predictions • Methods in search of reasons • Create animal models • Descriptive ‘bean counting’ or ‘fishing’ • [If you must do any of these, explain why.]

  11. Criteria for SPECIFIC AIMS and HYPOTHESES of a grant proposal___________________________________ Specific aims should: • test predictions that are based on • meaningful hypotheses about the • fundamental mechanisms that drive • important functional relationships

  12. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 3. Silly Hypotheses

  13. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 4. Disconnect between Specific Aims and Research Design & Methods • Methods without Designs • Incomplete details of methods

  14. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS (10 - 15 pages) D.1. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS (6 - 10 pages) [Continues the logical flow of the Specific Aims] D.2. DETAILS OF METHODS (5 - 9 pages) [Cookbook Recipes in Copious Detail] D.3. TIMETABLE of Aims and Experiments (10-12 lines)

  15. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 5. Expertise missing • Demonstrated capability in Prelim Studies • Published, demonstrated capability • Appropriate consultants • Cameo appearances

  16. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 6. Non-Modular Budget • Inflated budget • Naïve low budget without explanation

  17. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 7. Tilting at other people’s windmills • There are no “kid’s grants”

  18. Sample Success Rates FY-2007 • NHLBI R01 727/3,332 = 22% R03 0/60 = 0% R21 91/797 = 11% • NIAMS R01 166/746 = 22% R03 34/229 = 15% R21 46/271 = 17%

  19. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 7. Tilting at other people’s windmills • There are no “kid’s grants” • Present YOUR best science – RFAs can waste your time and efforts

  20. Genes & Environment Trans-NIH Initiatives • NIH Roadmap • Neuroscience Blueprint • Genes and • Environment • Trans-Institute Research Programs • Angiogenesis • Nano-medicine • Obesity • Etc.

  21. NIH Office of Portfolio Analysis and Strategic Initiatives (OPASI) [http://opasi.nih.gov/] These special initiatives account for less than 2% of total NIH budget.

  22. Advice to all young PIs • 1. Don’t tilt at other people’s windmills • 2. R01 = Currency of the Realm • 3. R01 = Your Academic Advancement

  23. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 8. Sloppiness • Typographical errors, poor grammar • Inconsistent information

  24. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 9. Unexplained hiatus in productivity

  25. Top 10 errors in grant proposals 10. Amended proposals -- • Giving reviewers new targets to throw darts at • Failing to take advice • Trying to “rebut”

  26. NIH Success Rates in FY-2007R01 Proposals • 20,648 new R01 proposals • 3,958 were funded • Success Rate = 19% Note: Success rates are not percentiles

  27. NIH Success Rates of FIRST-TIME Competing Proposals in FY-2006 • All FIRST-TIME Competing Proposals – 8% • FIRST-TIME Competing Renewal Proposals – 7% • FIRST-TIME New Proposals – 9% As published in Science, April 2007

  28. Revision and Resubmission When you prepare a revised proposal -- • Do what the reviewers advise you to do. • Do not argue or ‘stick to your guns.’ • Do not add anything to replace dropped components, unless reviewers specifically advised you to do that. Do not add anything simply because you think the amended proposal is too thin. Anything you add is now a new target for the reviewers’ darts. And, every dart costs you points.

  29. PERSISTENCE PAYS Success Rates of NIH New R01 Applications in FY-2002 There were 16,896 New R01 Proposals -- 11,924 were First Time 3,871 were First Revision 1,101 were Second Revision Success Rates First Time 20% First Revision 34% Second Revision 47%

  30. COMPARISON OF TWO STRATEGIES FORNEW GRANT APPLICANTS

  31. COMPARISON OF TWO STRATEGIES FORNEW GRANT APPLICANTS

More Related