Grant Mechanisms
Research Projects
R01
Research Project
R03
Small Research Grant
R21
Exploratory/Developmental Grant
R15
Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA)
R43, R44
Small Business Innovation Research Grant (SBIR)
P01
Research Program Project
Grant Mechanisms
Fellowship & Research Career Programs
F31
F32
Predoctoral Individual National Research Service
Award (NRSA)
Postdoctoral Individual National Research Service
Award (NRSA)
K22
K01
Career Transition Award (NIAID)
Career Transition Award (NCI)
K08
Clinical Investigator Award
K23
Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career
Development Award
Review of your proposal
• There are hundreds of study sections
• 60-100 grant / study section
• Study section rosters (about 20 people) can be found at:
http://www.csr.nih.gov/Roster_proto/sectionI.asp
• Each grant has about 3 reviewers
• All study section members score the grant 100-500
• Choose a study section that has goals consistent
with your proposal
http://www.csr.nih.gov/Roster_proto/sectionI.asp
http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/award/award.htm
• You can lose on the abstract and first page
Grant Writing
What makes a good grant proposal?
What makes a great grant proposal?
Good idea
Good science
Good application
A good proposal

Well performed study

Appropriate and up-to date technology

Carefully analyzed data that is accurately
reported

Ethical considerations dealt with
appropriately
Is this enough?
Benchmarks of an
“Outstanding” Application

New or original ideas

Focused, incisive research plan

Knowledge of published relevant work

Experience in essential methodology

Future directions and contingency plans
More Benchmarks of an
outstanding proposal
Published in respected journals
Recognized and cited by peers
Presented at high-quality meetings
Fundable on competitive grant review
What makes an
outstanding proposal?

Asks important questions

Has potential to yield “seminal”
observations
Does the project have the
potential to yield a “seminal”
observation?

Create truly new knowledge?

Lead to new ways of thinking?

Lay the foundation for further research in
the field?
Writing a Grant Proposal
 Good
idea
 Good
science
 Good
application
Pursue original science

Pursue original science

Consider your
perspective:

Novel vs. derivative

Hypothesis-driven vs.
“fishing expedition”

Mechanistic vs.
descriptive
Picking a Research
Project
• Ten steps to picking a Research Project
C. Ronald Kahn
New England Journal of Medicine. 1994
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Anticipate Results you might obtain
Is the most successful outcome
interesting?
What would be the next step if you
are successful?
Are you prepared to follow up?
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Is the area of interest to a large fraction
of the scientific community?
• If only of interest to a limited number of
people in the field, results may be
difficult to publish and hard to fund
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Is the field overpopulated?
• Look for an under-occupied niche that
has potential
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• The best ideas come from listening to
talks and reading papers outside your
area of interest.
• Talks and papers outside your area of
interest may point you in truly new
directions and allow you to anticipate
the evolution of the field.
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Find a balance between low-risk and
high-risk projects
• Include a high-interest project because
this will be an opportunity to make a
truly seminal observation
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Be prepared to pursue the work to the
next important level.
• To be recognized for important
research accomplishments may require
a willingness to pursue a project to any
depth necessary
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Differentiate yourself from your mentor
• This is especially true of you stay at the
same institution.
• Independence is an important criteria
for promotion and tenure
• You need to be more expert than your
mentor in some area even if you choose
to collaborate.
Picking a Research
Problem
• However, collaboration can be a good
strategy especially if you are not
technically prepared to carry out a
particular aspect of the project
• List an expert in this area as a collaborator
on your grant.
• Once you have established some expertise
in an area, you can become more
independent.
Steps to picking a
Research Project
• Focus rather than trying to make an
impact in three or four different areas at
once.
• At first focus on one or at most two
projects and define very limited goals.
Writing a Grant Proposal
 Good
idea
 Good
science
 Good
application
Good Science

Logical and organized Research Plan

Rationale for the Methods chosen

Include Experimental Pitfalls

Include Alternative Approaches

Sufficient Experimental Detail
Good Science

Use appropriate controls

Avoid “shotgun” approaches and “fishing
expeditions”

Do not assume reviewers with know what you
mean: SPELL IT OUT
Good Science
The Hypothesis

A meaningful hypothesis and a means to
test it

Rationale for the hypothesis

A set of related aims

Aims that are focused and not diffuse
Formulate Sound Hypotheses
What’s the hypothesis here?
Writing a Grant Proposal
 Good
idea
 Good
science
 Good
application
Good Application

Read and Follow all instructions

Make sure your Institute offers the type of
grant you plan to prepare. For instance, not
all Institutes offer R21 grants

Use clear and grammatically correct English

Write short, clear sentences. Minimize the use
of overly technical jargon

Avoid Reviewer fatigue
Selling Your Ideas

It’s your responsibility to make it effortless for the
reviewers to understand…
Your ideas
Why they are important
Why your approach is reasonable and feasible



Present an organized, lucid write-up!
Write for the skeptic: how would you convince your
harshest critic?
Do not write the application for the “specialist:”
assume the reviewers won’t know your system as
well as you do
Keep your focus on your big
picture

Focus: do not let your ideas wander from
your main theme

Show how this project fits into your “big
picture” research objectives, describe future
directions
Presentation & Formatting

Prepare a reviewer-friendly application!

Organize with headings & subheadings, but avoid
too many levels

Include well-designed tables and figures with
appropriate legends

Stay within the page limitations

Use a readable typeface and font size (Ariel 11pt)

Minimize grammatical & typographical errors
Components of a
Grant Application

Abstract

Specific Aims

Background and Significance

Preliminary Results

Research design
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Abstract

Pretend reviewer has only
this page to read

Abstract should be a mini
outline for the proposal.
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Abstract

Include a general statement of the problem
being addressed including gaps in our
knowledge

Include your hypothesis and why your
experiments will fill the gaps in our
knowledge (and why this is important)

Include an outline of the specific aims and
methods to be used, expected outcomes
and the long-range significance.
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Abstract
Specific Aims

The Specific Aims are the first part of the proposal that
the reviewer reads. Include a short description of
problem and background summary (one paragraph)

The Specific Aims should address an hypothesis and the
hypothesis should be clearly stated

They should be bulleted and clearly and succinctly
outline the proposed research.
Important Tip
Specfic Aims


The specific aims should be interrelated but should not
depend on the success of one aim to perform the others.
Example:


Aim 1 proposes to identify and clone the cellular receptor that
restricts HXV infection to humans. In Aim 2, there are plans to
construct transgenic mice expressing the receptor to develop
an animal model for HXV to study pathogenesis.
What if there is more than one receptor? Or you are not
successful in identifying putative receptors? Or infection is
also blocked at a stage past entry?
Keys for a Successful Grant Application
Specific Aims
 Identify hole in our knowledge
 Explain why this hole is important
 State your hypothesis and long term
goals
 Identify a series of logical steps to test
your hypothesis
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Specific Aims

List the aims as a bulleted list with a brief
description of the approaches to be used
after each aim

Be specific. Avoid generalities.

Avoid saying you will characterize or
describe a phenomenon or determine the
relationship between two processes
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Specific Aims

Think about “aim” as a verb.

Your aims should suggest a particular
outcome rather than being descriptive.

Do not merely “characterize” or “describe”
something! It’s boring and it doesn’t convey
the importance or excitement of what you
hope to accomplish
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Specific Aims

A specific aim that collects data
with out describing the rationale
for the hypothesis sounds like a
fishing expedition.

Each aim should include a
hypothesis if possible.
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Specific Aims

Is the scope of the problem
achievable?

Avoid proposing 10 years of work in
a 3 or 4 year proposal
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Specific Aims

Combine low risk aims with one or two that
are innovative and original

An innovative aim will include novel
concepts or approaches

An innovative aim should advance the field

The specific aims should be interrelated but
one aim should not depend on the success of
another
Brief summary
of background
Long term goal
Hypothesis
Rationale
Specific Aims
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Backround and Significance
Rationale
Rationale
Rationale
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Backround and Significance

Set the stage

Show how existing work lays the ground
work but does not go far enough

Bring together ideas and results (yours
and others)

Identify gaps that your proposal will fill

Lay out still unanswered questions you
will answer
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Backround and Significance

Compare and contrast work of
others. Evaluate and critique it, but
do so respectfully

Cite literature judiciously. You can’t
cite every finding, but try to be fair.
One more Tip…


After describing the background that
relates to a particular aim, end that
section with:
This problem will be addressed in Aim
_. Remind the reviewer that you are
going to save the day and solve that
problem in this grant by filling in that
particular gap in our knowledge
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Preliminary Results
In God we Trust
All others must bring Data
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Preliminary Results





Demonstrate expertise in the techniques
you are going to use.
Show your hypotheses are supported by
your initial studies
Include only pertinent data
Advance your data clearly and
professionally (don’t be sloppy)
Include well-designed tables and figures
Research Design & Methods





Provide a well-focused
research plan
Provide sufficient
experimental detail
Address data interpretation,
anticipated results and
alternative approaches
Propose a realistic amount
of work
Secure collaborators for
areas in which you lack
experience and training
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Experimental Design

Address each Aim one at a time

Keep numbering consistent between
Specific aims and Experimental Design
section

Make sure design and methods are welldeveloped and appropriate?

Are problems areas addressed?
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Experimental Design

Start with a brief overview to remind
reviewers what you are doing

Start each aim with brief rationale and
hypothesis to be tested

Provide framework for description of
experimental details which follow
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Experimental Design

If each aim has common experimental
detail, you can end the entire section
with a General methods section,
separate from the specifics for each
Aim.

Most reviewers what to see how the
general research design plays out
before fine details of methodology.
Keys for a Successful
Grant Application
Experimental Design

How much detail is enough?

Convey credibility but don’t get too bogged down
in details.

If you have previously shown expertise either in
preliminary results or publications, you don’t
need as much detail as if the techniques are new
to you.

Arrange for collaborations or coinvestigators in
scientific areas in which you do not have
established credentials.
Research Design and Methods



Do provide the rationale for each
experimental approach
Discuss possible outcomes and how
these will be interpreted
Discuss potential pitfalls and
alternative approaches
A Picture Can Be Worth a
Thousand Words



Illustrate models instead of describing them
in the text
Use schematics to summarize
If data figures or schematics are inserted into
the Preliminary Studies or Research Design
sections, make sure both the figure and the
legend are legible and easily readable by the
reviewer
Using Figures
Both the figure and legend can easily be read by the reviewers.
Using Figures
The legend can be read but the schematic cannot be read.
Using Figures
Neither the figure nor the legend can be read.
Why bother showing it?
Useful Tip
Add a short summary at the end of the
Research Design and Methods section
to drive home what will be learned from
the studies and why that is significant.
Future directions can be included
briefly.
Bottom Line?
 What
will the reviewers be
looking for?
 How
will they judge the
application?
Benchmarks of an
“Outstanding” Application

New or original ideas

Focused, incisive research plan

Knowledge of published relevant work

Experience in essential methodology

Future directions and contingency plans
Review of Research Grants

REVIEW CRITERIA
Significance
Approach
Innovation
Investigator
Environment
Review of Research Grants

REVIEW CRITERIA
Investigator - who are you? Make sure your CV
is complete and conveys your areas of
expertise and training.
Make sure your preliminary results section
conveys who you are. Actions speak louder
than words.
Review of Research Grants

REVIEW CRITERIA
Environment - Make sure you convince
reviewers that your institution addresses all
requirements of the proposed research plan.

List areas of expertise of colleagues, research
cores and facilities that will aid your research,
any institutional support that exists.

Justify reliance on external resources.
What if your first grant is not
funded?
 Don’t
give up
 Initial
failure is common
What if your first grant is not
funded?

Learn from it and succeed - a majority do

Study criticism in pink sheet

Decide if problems are reparable

Attend diligently to each criticism

Keep a positive tone and attitude in addressing
criticism
Most common reasons for
failure

Lack of new or original ideas

Diffuse, superficial or unfocused research plan

Lack of knowledge of published relevant work

Lack of experience in the essential methodology

Uncertainty concerning the future directions
More reasons for failure

Questionable reasoning in experimental
approach

Absence of acceptable scientific rationale

Unrealistically large amount of work

Lack of sufficient experimental detail

Uncritical approach
Remember
There is no grantsmanship that will turn a bad
idea into a good one, but…….
There are many ways to disguise a good one
William Raub, Past Deputy Director of NIH
Resources

National Institutes of Health http://www.nih.gov

National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov

Hints for Writing Successful NIH grants by Ellen Barrett.
http://chroma.med.miami.edu/Ellens.how.to.html

Extramural Funding Opportunites
http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/extra/extdocs/gntapp.html

Sounding Board: Picking a Research Problem by C. Ronald
Kahn. The New England Journal of Medicine. 330:1530

How to Ask for a Research Grant by Janet S. Rasey. In Writing,
Speaking, and Communication Skills for Health Professionals.
Yale University Press. Pg 91-117
Scientific Questions




Focused
Lead to testable hypotheses
Interesting
Significant
Drill down to a specific
question

What does PTH do?

What does PTH do in osteoblasts?

How does PTH regulate bone formation in
osteoblasts?

What are the downstream targets of PTH in
osteoblasts?
 What are the immediate early genes induced
by PTH through the cAMP-PKA pathway in
osteoblasts?