1. Down the Road to Funding: Getting That First NIH Grant Dr. Ann M. Schreihofer Department of Physiology Medical College of Georgia ASchreihofer@mcg.edu Experimental Biology, April 2006

2. Getting started 1. NIH website: www.nih.gov 2. CRISP database -Grants & Funding Opportunities -Grants OER home page http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/oer.htm http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/qa/newpi.htm -See who and what NIH is funding with summaries 3. NIAID spells it out for applicants http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/default.htm http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/crisp/crisp_query.generate_screen

3. Learning the PHS 398 (aka RO1 forms) 3.Tackle one section at a time 2. Use the modular budget system -Know the maximum direct costs (250K/year) 1. Figure out those forms (.pdf or.doc?) -Print out instructions from NIH website -Look at examples on website or colleagues -Request maximum number of years (5) -Attend to page limits and font requirements

4. Submission Deadlines 1. Regular competing applications: 3 cycles 2. Institutional routing prior to submission Cycle 1: submit Feb. 1, review Jun-Jul, start ~Sept Cycle 2: submit June 1, review Oct-Nov, start ~Jan -Check with your Office of Grants and Contracts -internal routing forms due BEFORE grant submission Cycle 3: submit Oct. 1, review Feb-Mar, start ~May

5. Electronic Submissions to NIH 1. Register with NIH eRA Commons: NOW 2. PHS 398 replaced by SF424R&R: SOON Registration through institution: ask your Grants Office Manages grants: submit progress reports RO1 applications will be submitted on-line by Feb 1, 2007 Grants submitted to FOAs at: http://grants.gov View grant details: review, scores, contact information Changes in forms (some new, some PHS 398) Download PureEdge Viewer and pdf generator for forms https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/ http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/

6. News for New Investigators 1. CHECK that “New Investigator” Box! 2. New Investigator Policies (vary by institute) -Box on Face Page (Page 1 of PHS 398) -Never been a PI on NIH award (except R03, R15, R21) -Change review emphasis feasibility not preliminary data, training not track record -Higher payline: funding at higher percentiles -Fund for full requested time -Expedited review process for resubmissions

7. NIH Pathway to Independence Award 1. Program starts Fall 2006 (due April 7, 2006) 2. Up to 5 years -new grant: promotes transition to independence -facilitate receiving an R01 earlier in career http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new investigators/index.htm -Year 1-2: mentored phase (K99): 90K -Years 3-5: independent phase (R00): 249K for postdocs (≤ 5 years); look for independent position activate with tenure-track offer; apply for R01: still as a “New Investigator”

8. The R01 Research Plan (25 pages) A. Specific Aims (1 page) B. Background (2-3 pages) C. Preliminary Data (6-8 pages) D. Research Design & Methods (13-16 pages) State broad, long-term objectives of the project Sketch background, highlight gaps, state importance Illustrate research leading to project aims Outline experimental protocols to address aims E. Human subjects F. Vertebrate subjects

9. Honing in on a Hypothesis 3. Do not characterize or describe 2. Investigate a mechanism or pathway 1. Start with a phenomenon -seminal observation (obesity  diabetes) -critical gap in knowledge based on literature -may use multiple methods or models -no fishing expeditions; predict outcomes 3. Remember NIH goal: improve public health -link your project to this goal, even if indirectly

10. NIH Peer Review Criteria 3. Innovation 2. Approach 1. Significance Important problem? Advance field if aims achieved? Logical designs, methods, analyses / acknowledge pitfalls? Challenge existing paradigms & novel approaches? 4. Investigators Is the project feasible? Adequate expertise? 5. Environment Institutional support? Adequate facilities? Collaborations?

11. Aims Advice 4. NO Fatal Flaws -clear independence of aims 3. Propose multiple approaches -reductionist, integrative, translative 2. Ask direct questions: Sell your ideas - succinct statement of goals - no nuances, caveats 1. Follow logically from introductory paragraph, diagram, and hypothesis

12. Building a Background 3. Add a paragraph of innovation/novelty -help reviewer be excited about your project 2. Use section headings to highlight issues 1. Carefully choose pertinent literature -focus on studies that support your hypothesis -back up claims with citations -guide the reader, organize their thoughts -help reviewer make a case for your project

13. Picking Preliminary Data 3. Maximize readability 2. Demonstrate methods -show mastery of techniques or measures 1. Illustrate the phenomenon -outline characterization of model -illustrate reasons for hypothesis -bolded section headings state major issue -clear figures that stand alone with legend

14. Research Design & Methods 3. May put general methods at the end 2. Outline experimental protocols chronologically -include group sizes, with mention of stats 1. Restate each aim with a brief rationale -establish numbering and wording system Aim 1. To test the hypothesis that… Experiment 1.1: To determine whether… Experiment 1.2: To determine whether… 4. End each experiment description with… -Expected & alternative outcomes, potential concerns

15. Make it reviewer-friendly 1. Diagrams/flowcharts 2. White spaces 3. Bolding section headings 4. Sample outcome diagrams 5. Timeline diagram at end of plan -For aims page, models, complex experiments -Saying less can be more effective -Facilitate reading: background, experiments -Illustrate complex experiments