1. Writing that First Research Grant
Holly L. Storkel
University of Kansas

2. Acknowledgements
This presentation is influenced by prior presentations by the ASHA Lessons for Success Conference Faculty

3. First Research Grant Options
ASHFoundation New Investigators Research Grant
ASHFoundation New Century Scholars Research Grant
NIDCD Early Career Research (ECR) Award (R21)
NICHD Small Grant (R03) mechanisms/Pages/default.aspx
NIDCD/NICHD Exploratory Development Grant Award (R21)? and mechanisms/Pages/default.aspx
NIDCD/NICHD Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA, R15) or mechanisms/Pages/default.aspx

4. Help on Getting Started Resources: ASHA’s Clinical Research Education (CREd) Library
NIH for Early Career Researchers:
What Type of Grant to Submit:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 1:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 2:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 3:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 4:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 5:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 6:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 7:
Preparing for your First NIH Grant, Part 8:

5. More Help on Getting Started
ASHFoundation: See links on prior slide#3
Strategic plan for NIDCD:
Strategic plan for NICHD: or
Grant application instructions:
Grant review procedures: General R-review criteria R-critique template for reviewers
Your university internal procedures: See your grants office website

6. Main (Scored) Parts of NIH Research Application
Main (Scored) Parts of NIH Research Application* *Note: ASHFoundation follows similar formatting & criteria
Application Section
Reviewer Scoring
Biosketch
Facilities & Resources
Abstract/Project Summary
Specific Aims
Research Strategy – Significance
Research Strategy – Innovation
Research Strategy -- Approach
Overall Impact
Investigator(s)
Environment
Significance
Innovation
Approach

7. Grant Writing Goal: Convince the Reviewer of the Overall Impact
Overall Impact = Likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved
Likelihood = feasibility = Can you actually do what you propose?
Sustained, powerful influence = importance = Are you doing something that moves the field forward?

8. Biosketch Application Section Reviewer Scoring
5 Pages Max
Education
Personal Statement** Describe why well-suited for your role Factors may include training, previous work, technical expertise Cite up to 4 publications highlight qualifications
Positions & Honors
Contribution to Science (NEW)** Describe up to 5 significant contributions to science Cite up to 4 publications relevant to contribution
Relevant Research Support Ongoing & completed grants past 3 years
**Warning: Tricky narrative sections!!!
Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project?
If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training?
If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise

9. Biosketch Goal:
Convince the reviewer that the key personnel are qualified to do the proposed research.
Think of it a little like a job application: You/your team are applying to do this research project. Why should the reviewer “hire” you/your team?
This contributes to your “likelihood”

10. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
NIH Biosketch

11. Facilities & Other Resources/ Environment
Application Section
Reviewer Scoring
No special form
Identify facilities to be used (e.g., laboratory, animal, computer, office, clinical, etc)
Indicate their capacities, pertinent capabilities, relative proximity, extent of availability to the project
Describe only those resources that are directly relevant to the proposed work
Describe how the scientific environment contributes to the probability of success (e.g., institutional support, physical resources, and intellectual rapport)
Describe ways in which the proposed studies will benefit from unique features
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success?
Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed?
Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

12. Facilities/Environment Goal:
Convince the reviewer that the environment is appropriate (and perhaps even ideal) for the proposed research.
This contributes to your “likelihood”

13. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
Grant Writing Overview (section on resources)

14. Abstract & Specific Aims
30 lines of text
Summary of the proposed activity suitable for dissemination to the public
Self-contained succinct and accurate description of the project
Statement of objectives and methods to be employed
State the application’s broad, long-term objectives and specific aims, making reference to the health relatedness of the project
Describe concisely the research design and methods for achieving the stated goals
1-page
State concisely the goals of the proposed research and summarize the expected outcomes, including the impact that the results of the proposed research will exert on the research field.
List succinctly the specific objectives of the research (e.g., test a hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, challenging an existing paradigm/practice, address a critical barrier to progress, develop new technology

15. Abstract & Aims Goal:
Describe the grant in a nutshell that anyone could understand
Heavy on (1) broader goal (theory/problem), (2) specific objectives/aims (exact issues/questions being addressed in this grant), (3) impact of completing this work (how will the world change when you are done?)
Lighter on exact method/approach but this should be mentioned
~90% “Sustained, powerful influence” + ~10% “likelihood”

16. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
Abstract & Specific Aims:

17. Research Strategy: Significance
Application Section
Reviewer Scoring
Explain the importance of the problem or critical barrier to progress in the field that the proposed project addresses.
Describe the scientific premise for the proposed project, including consideration of the strengths and weaknesses of published research or preliminary data crucial to the support of your application
Explain how the proposed project will improve scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice in one or more broad fields.
Describe hos the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field will be changed if the proposed aims are achieved.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field?
Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? 
If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved?
How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

18. Significance Goal:
Convince the reviewer that the problem you are working on is the critical thing that has limited progress in the field. If your proposed research is accomplished, the field will be in a better place.
What do we know now? What will we find out from this research? How does knowing that change the future?
This contributes to your “Sustained, powerful influence”

19. Research Strategy: Innovation
Application Section
Reviewer Scoring
Explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms.
Describe any novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation or intervention(s) to be developed or used, and any advantage over existing methodologies, instrumentation or intervention(s).
Explain any refinements, improvements, or new applications of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation or interventions.
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions?
Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense?
Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

20. Innovation Goal:
Convince the reviewer that, although many have tried to address this important problem in the past, you are doing something new that is likely to result in a better outcome than past attempts.
This contributes to your “Sustained, powerful influence” and also “likelihood”

21. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
Significance & Innovation:

22. Research Strategy: Approach
Application Section
Reviewer Scoring
Describe the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses to be used to accomplish the specific aims of the project.
Describe the experimental design and methods proposed and how they will achieve robust and unbiased results.
Discuss potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success anticipated to achieve the aims.
If the project is in the early stages of development, describe any strategy to establish feasibility, and address the management of any high risk aspects of the proposed work.
Explain how relevant biological variables, such as sex, are factored into research designs and analyses for studies in vertebrate animals and humans.
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed?
Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented?
If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed?
Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

23. Approach Goal:
Convince the reviewer that what you are planning to do will work and thus will bring the aims to fruition.
You probably think this section is all about
“likelihood.” However, this section should include a detailed analysis plan with predicted results, which moves you back into “Sustained, powerful influence”

24. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
Approach & Preliminary Studies:

25. Resource: ASHA’s CREd Library
Review Process Part 1:
Review Process Part 2:
Responding to Reviews Part 1:
Responding to Reviews Part 2:
Resource: ASHA’s Educational & Mentoring Programs
Pathways:
Lessons for Success:
Clinical Practice Research Institute:
Grant Review & Reviewer Training: