Writing Your First Grant

Sara Rockwell, PhDProfessor, Therapeutic Radiology and Pharmacology

Associate Dean for Scientific AffairsYale School of Medicine

Postdoc Workshop, 1/11/111

Why write grants? • To get money to support the research you

want to do

• To support your career development

• Current reality: institutional funds to support research and researchers at most medical schools is very, very limited

• If you’re going to become a PI you will need to write successful grants

• This is not easy (especially right now)2

3

• Going from being a trainee performing research in a lab headed by another PI to being the PI of a project is a major transition.

• Writing your first grant is the first step down this path to independence.

• Many people begin by writing applications for fellowships and mentored awards or by writing small grants that they hold while still in the lab of a senior faculty member. • Even this is a big step

new responsibilities new skills to learn

PI responsibilities - pre award• Securing appropriate institutional appointment• Obtaining space and resources• Signing Yale’s patent agreement• Filing your COI form• Taking the required PI training course• Other compliance protocols and approvals (HIC,

HIPAA, IACUC, Biosafety, etc)• Completing the application materials• Obtaining letters of support• Adhering to institutional and agency deadlines• Sending proposals to sponsors (some grants;

sometimes GCA must “press the button”)4

PI responsibilities - post award• Conducting your research as proposed

• Directly managing and administering your awards

• Authorizing all direct cost expenditures of project funds

• Approving all project related expenditures and cost transfers

• Ensuring that all charges to an award are appropriate, including salary/wage charges for yourselves and others are charged to the award

• Ensuring compliance with Human Subjects Protections; Animal Care and Use; Conflict of Interest disclosures; and other safety and responsible conduct of research regulations and guidance

• Reporting scientific progress to grantmaker as required5

Administration is a major part of the PI’s responsibility and effort

PIs on average spend more than 40% of their time on administrative issues directly related to their research grants

• Completing training and requirements (PI training, COI, IRB, RCR)

• Writing related research protocols (IRB, IACUC Biosafety, etc.); ensuring compliance

• Assembling team; ensuring their training• Continuing reviews; reports during project• Managing personnel• Managing finances

6

Your are going to need help

Fortunately, there are people who can and will help you

• Department Business Office

• Grant and Contract Administration

• Sponsor

• Others

7

Departmental Business Office

• The business office provides administrative support services to the PI

• Business office staff are the ‘Go to’ persons who will: Assist with proposal preparation Monitor awards and execute authorized transactions Keep the PI abreast of policy and sponsor

requirements and changes in these requirements Develop appropriate local business processes for the

administration of sponsored projects Provide reports to the PI on award status

8

Grant and Contract Administration

• Communicates changes in policy• Reviews applications for compliance• Negotiates terms and conditions against

standards• Primary contact with funding agency both

pre and post award• Partners with financial offices upon award

to set up and manage award

9

Other offices that can help• Office of Research Administration• Office of Strategic Research Initiatives• HRPP Office (HIC/IRB Office)• HIPPA Office• IACUC Office• Safety Office• Conflict of Interest Office• Faculty Office• Dean’s Office• YCCI• Development Office

10

The Old World: The NIH Mailroom

11

The new world:

ERA

Electronic Research Administration (ERA)• ERA has made the grants world both easier and

more difficult Standardized formats (in theory) Complicated routing structures More non-standard funding mechanisms, RFAs, RFPs More PI responsibilities More non-standard submission dates More changes, made more rapidly (and less carefully)

• Leave extra time for electronic submissions The systems often crash on deadline dates! The old 2-day “window” to make corrections on NIH

applications is gone as of January 25, 2011.

• Errors often occur during uploading. Check every page of every file to be sure it’s there, and still legible, correct, complete, and the right length.

• Check your application’s progress! 12

Right now there are continuing changes at Yale and beyond

• Continuing changes in funding mechanisms, policies, application forms, submission procedures, submission deadlines, review criteria and review procedures

• InfoEd (new internal grant writing and submission system, coming all too soon)

• PubMed• Clinical trials.gov• Stem Cell Research• ARRA requirements• Be sure you have the latest information

13

A good reason to get it right the first time

14

Planning, Writing, Submitting

Receipt & Referral

Peer Review & Scoring

Final Review & Negotiation

1-3 Months

9-10 months

Thousands of

applications per cycle

4-8 Months

AWARD

The Writing Process

• When to start? • At least three months in advance

Longer for new project Longer for complex project

• Don’t assume that a renewal will be automatic or easy Competitive renewals are as hard to get

as new grants Sometimes harder, if “new investigator”

advantage is lost

15

Research Grants and Career Development Awards

• Research grant: focus is on the merit of the project

• Career development award: focus is on the potential of the applicant

Different foci Different requirements Even when you use the same research

project for both kinds of grants, you will write them very differently

16

You can (and probably should) apply for more than one grant for your project

• “Pay line” is often less than 20%• Same project to different agencies• Research project + career development

award• Acknowledge overlap in “other support”

sheets• If they are all funded

Celebrate Decide which award (or sometimes awards) to

accept and which to decline (GCA can help)

17

How to find funding sources• Talk with colleagues• Talk with business office/chair• Talk to Melanie Smith in ORA/SRI• Search databases on GCA website• Utilize alert services• Professional society websites• YSM and Yale bulletin boards, list serves,

announcements, etc.

• Explore your options broadly!18

Limited competitions• “Scholars Awards”• Usually career development awards• Often limited to a narrow subject area• Often limited to junior faculty • Some open to or limited to postdocs• Often very prestigious – big career boost• Institution may be allowed to nominate

only 1 or 2 two candidates• Internal competition to select Yale’s

nominee(s)• Listed on GCA website• Melanie Smith can provide information

19

Internal competitions• Grants through programs at Yale• Often limited to Yale researchers• Generally very focused• Sometimes limited to new investigators• Some Postdoctoral Fellowships• Some Career Development Awards• Some research grants

Generally small Often for pilot studies

• Can be very valuable Get preliminary data Establish that you can be an independent PI Establish your track record of success as a PI 20

A few examples

• Brown Coxe Fellowships

• Anna Fuller Fellowships

• Cancer Center Postdoctoral Fellowships and Pilot Projects

• YCCI (CTSA) Scholars Program and CTSA Pilot Projects

• Skin Center Pilots

• Hematology Pilots

21

Explore all opportunities• Federal Agencies

NIH, NSF, DOD, DOE, NASA, others • Small Federal grant programs (e.g. R03)• Non Federal sponsors

Foundations Industry State and local organizations

• Voluntary Health Agencies • Professional Societies• Think and look very broadly• No grant is “too small” for your first grant22

Responding to an RFA or RFP

• Some Requests for Applications and Requests for Proposals are great opportunities; others are not worth the effort

• Talk to the contact person• Find out more about the request, the intent,

the criteria for funding, and the scope• Find out about the review process – who will

be reviewing your grant?• Is money set aside?• How many projects will they fund? 23

Where to start:

Gather information about grant and grantmaker

• Grantmaker’s areas of interest• Grantmaker’s policies• Amount and duration of funding • Deadlines• Instructions• Application forms• Procedures used to review grants• Time until funding• Probability of funding

24

Gather the information needed to plan and develop your application

• Literature related to project• Resources needed for project• Techniques needed• Possible collaborators and mentors • People who can be asked to write letters• Cost and budget information

• Make a list of everything you need to do before submitting the grant

25

Some critical things to think about before you begin to write

• Are you eligible? Position title Time in position Citizenship

• Do you have the resources you need? Skills Equipment, facilities Support from your department, institution

• If not, can you get them?• What scope of project can you perform with

your resources and time?• Don’t waste your time preparing grant

applications that can’t fly26

Things to keep in mind

• If this project is successful, why will the world be a better place?

• How does this project relate to the interests of the funding agency?

• Why is your research strategy the right one for use in this project?

• Use these to target the proposal to the appropriate funding agency and to sell the grant to the reviewers and program people

27

Remember: Reviewing and Funding are separate actions by different groups

• Study Sections / Review Panels Review applications for scientific merit Prioritize by scientific merit

• Program Officers fund projects Consider the scientific reviews and rankings Also consider priorities of program Consider balance of their portfolio May “reach” for applications in areas they feel

are critical or under funded May skip applications of low interest to their

program 28

When you have questions• Talk to your Business Office• Talk to your GCA representative• Contact the grantmaker

Program people (scientists) Administrators

• Talk to experienced investigators in your field of research Senior investigators Young investigators, a couple years ahead

of you Successful applicants for same grant

29

Writing the application• Formats and contents of applications vary

dramatically for different agencies Read the instructions Follow them to the letter You will need to alter focus for different

agencies and grant opportunities You will need to alter scope of work to

match money and time available You will need to re-write to fit length, format

• One size does not fit all…or even most 30

But you already knew that!

31

Watch for special requirements in career development applications

• Letters of recommendation• Statement of long range career goals• Statement describing the relationship

between this project and your long range professional goals

• Plans for course work Responsible Conduct of Research Statistics Courses related to the research

• Interviews for finalists• Agreement to attend or speak at meetings

32

Important parts of the application• Cover sheet• Abstract or abstracts• Administrative elements• Assurances • Biosketches or CVs• Scientific sections• Letters (sometimes)• Appendices (sometimes)

33

The cover sheet• Specific to agency and grant type• Will have very specific format and instructions• May require very specific (and sometimes

very bizarre) information Some you will not know Go to your Business Office and the Grants and

Contracts website and for help

• May require signatures and assurances

• Must be complete and accurate

34

Assurances• Don’t panic at the terrifying list of required

assurances• Many already have been handled by the

institution• You will need to handle some

Human subjects protection (HIC; HIPPA) Animal welfare (IACUC) Biosafety, Radiation, Environmental Health (OEHS) Conflict of Interest and Commitment Patent assignment Export Controls Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Scientific Misconduct Data sharing /Data management Mentoring

35

Picking a title for your project• Sounds trivial…but isn’t• Length may be quite limited• Be informative:

Titles may be used to assign grants to review committees and to individual reviewers

Titles may be sent to reviewers to allow them to the select grants they want to review

• Should be intelligible to non-specialists• Don’t use jargon • Don’t get cute

36

Abstract• Draft first; then edit/rewrite when your

application is almost done• May be the most important part of

application Used to assign committees and reviewers Reviewers may use to select grants for review Read by all reviewers on panel

• The abstract should summarize your project, describe its importance, and make the reader excited about reading the application and funding the project

37

Lay abstract• Many agencies require lay abstracts• Very important

There may be non-scientists on the review panel Foundations give these abstracts to their donors

• Can be difficult to write• Write it for an intelligent non-scientist• Describe project in non-technical terms• Emphasize importance and relevance• Ask some non-scientists to read and

critique your draft 38

CV or Biosketch• Very important element of any grant• Absolutely critical for fellowships and

career development awards• Primary reviewers will examine this very

carefully• Other reviewers will look at it before and

during meeting - especially if there are questions or problems

• Different from your resume and from your full academic CV

• Focus tightly on information relevant to your research career and your project 39

Preparing the Biosketch or CV• Format varies with grantmaker• Look for forms and detailed instructions

Follow them exactly Do not alter order from that specified Proofread, proofread, proofread Do not exceed the allowed length

• Sections usually include Current position Education Personal Statement (NIH: specific to application) Professional Experience Honors and Awards Publications

, 40

Biosketch: Current Position• Be sure your Current Position on the CV

matches that on cover and elsewhere• Use your official University title • Promotion in progress?

List effective date List only positions that have been offered and

accepted in writing You may be asked to provide documentation If application includes letter from the Chair,

Dean or Mentor be sure that letter mentions the pending promotion

41

Education and Experience

• Generally: start with college• Include areas of study and degrees earned• Non-degree programs and education may

warrant inclusion• Include all graduate and postdoctoral

training and research Broad outline: start and end dates, institution, city,

state, country, mentor Don’t give details of project or activities NIH: education goes in boxes, wanting less information

• Chronological, but watch order42

Experience and Awards• Experience may go beyond your primary job

appointment, if it is relevant to application Secondary appointments Advisory boards Some other experience and activities (e.g. teaching,

certain community activities)

• Avoid unexplained gaps

• Awards and honors Select with care Begin with college Do not include trivial awards Awards relevant to professional career Describe award if implications may be unclear to an

outside observer 43

Publications• Follow instructions for format and content very

carefully – great variation between grantmakers• Reviewers will look at

Number of publications Evidence of a good trajectory of publication Quality of publications

Peer reviewed journals?Quality, impact of journals?Full article or brief notes and case reports?

Your position as author How many authors? Who are the other authors? Relevance to proposed research

• Warning: Negotiate your authorships carefully44

Publications • Usually allowed

Papers published in peer reviewed journals Papers in press (this means the paper has been

accepted for publication) Books Book chapters, full papers in peer reviewed

proceedings, review articles (may be separate) Abstracts - maybe. Specify and list separately

• Do not include Papers in preparation Papers submitted but not yet accepted

Plan ahead - submit earlyCan sometimes send new papers

after they have been accepted45

Publications• Look for restrictions on the number of publications

New NIH Biosketch format specifies a maximum of 15 recent, relevant publications

NSF wants 5 publications relevant to the project Select with care!

• Check formatting requirements (e.g. NIHMS or PMC # for NIH Biosketches)

• Some agencies also ask for your total number of publications

• If you have more publications than allowed consider including an opening statement such as “Selected from a total of 195 publications”

• If you have only fewer than the allowed number of publications, include them all

46

Budget• Format and required information vary dramatically• Some agencies specify a fixed budget and define

how you must spend it.• Some want budget details• Some want none• Give them what they want• Use the forms or follow the format given in the

instructions• Check agency guidelines: what costs are allowable

and what are not? You won’t get money for unallowable items Watch how Indirect Costs (Facilities and Administrative

Costs) are handled. 47

Developing your numbers• Even if the agency doesn’t want details,

work up a budget so you know what you can do with the funds available

• Use real numbers Real salaries and fringes Real costs of supplies, animal care, etc Include everything you will need

• Extrapolate costs to actual start date of grant• Don’t “low ball”• Don’t forget the F&A costs

48

Future years• Extrapolate from first year budget• Consider changes in project over

time; the science and the budget should always correspond

• Project future salaries as accurately as possible Include expected raises and promotions Business office can help here

• Increase other costs to allow for inflation

49

PROBLEM: Constant budgets• Some agencies fund grants at a constant

level for future years NIH modular grants Grants with total budget set by agency

• May allow carryover of funds• Remember to plan for raises and inflation

in deciding how much money you request in the first year

• HINT: for a 3 year grant use second year cost estimates (not current year values or first year cost estimates) to develop the budget for the project

50

Budget Justification

• Format and detail required vary greatly for different applications

• Follow instructions carefully• Always justify your costs in terms of the

science of the project• Will be examined by study section

members (scientists) during their review• Will be examined later by business

people and accountants

51

Time and effort is examined closely by the reviewers

• Does it match the scientific activities you have described?

• Do you have enough time from the people who are essential to the project?

• Do you have all the skills you need?• Do you have enough technical support?• A very common problem with grants from

young investigators is that the project described cannot possibly be performed with the resources available.

52

Expectations on time/effort• Percent Salary = Percent Effort

If not, you must justify the difference Effort generally is not allowed without salary support

• You cannot have more than 100% professional effort All Yale assignments All external professional activities

• Watch efforts in application carefully. If you are funded: You may be held to the promises you’ve made You will be asked to document the efforts of those

on the grant

53

Resources and Environment• Space

• Equipment

• Core facilities Departmental School of Medicine University External

• Expertise, equipment and facilities available through your co-investigators

• External resources to be used

• Watch grantmaker instructions NIH: description must now be specific to the project Watch for new requirements for Early Stage Investigators and

Career Development Awards54

Resources and Environment

• For critical resources and expertise that you don’t have yourself, you may need to get letters of collaboration

• You have an advantage by being at Yale Many talented scientists, willing to share their

expertise and resources Great core facilities

E.g. Keck center, West Campus cores Internationally known Available on fee for service basis If you’re going to use them, say so in the grant and

budget justification55

Scientific Sections • Format varies with sponsor

• Follow instructions exactly

• Conform to required length Can be shorter Can never be longer

• Don’t try to get around length limits by using tiny fonts, small margins or appendices Many agencies reject such grants without review Even if they don’t, the reviewers are usually

ruthless and unsympathetic Everyone else has the same space limit

56

Scientific sections of an NIH application (revised in May 2010)

• Specific Aims

• Research Strategy Significance Innovation Impact

• Literature Cited

• Appendices - sometimes

57

Specific Aims• Short paragraph describing overarching

goal of project

• Brief list of specific things you plan to accomplish

3 - 5 Aims May have sub-aims

• Length 1/2 to 1 page

• Broad overview of goals, hypotheses to be tested and approaches to be used, in telegraphic form

58

Specific Aims (from NIH instructions)• State concisely the goals of the proposed

research and summarize the expected outcome(s), including the impact that the results of the proposed research will exert on the research field(s) involved.

• List succinctly the specific objectives of the research proposed, e.g., to test a stated hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, challenge an existing paradigm or clinical practice, address a critical barrier to progress in the field, or develop new technology.

59

Significance (from NIH Instructions)• Explain the importance of the problem or

critical barrier to progress in the field that the proposed project addresses.

• Explain how the proposed project will improve scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice in one or more broad fields.

• Describe how the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field will be changed if the proposed aims are achieved.

60

Innovation (from NIH Instructions)• 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 interventions to be developed or used, and any advantage over existing methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions.

• Explain any refinements, improvements, or new applications of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions.

61

Approach (from NIH instructions)• Describe the overall strategy, methodology,

and analyses to be used to accomplish the specific aims of the project. …include how the data will be collected, analyzed, and interpreted as well as any resource sharing plans as appropriate.

• Discuss potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success anticipated to achieve the aims.

62

Approach (continued)

• 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.

• Point out any procedures, situations, or materials that may be hazardous to personnel and precautions to be exercised.

63

Organizing the Research Strategy

• If there are multiple Specific Aims, you may address Significance, Innovation and Approach for each Specific Aim individually, or you may address Significance, Innovation and Approach for all of the Specific Aims collectively.

• Preliminary studies – used to be a separate section of the old NIH application. Now they are to be included in the Research Strategy, within the Significance, Innovation, and Approach sections. Despite this change, preliminary studies are still very important.

64

The reviewers will examine your preliminary data critically

• To evaluate the basis and feasibility of the project

• To predict the chance of success• To evaluate your

Ability to develop and test hypotheses Ability to design rigorous experiments Expertise with experimental techniques Expertise in analysis of data Rigor in interpreting the data Ability to present findings clearly and effectively

• Sloppiness here is absolutely fatal65

Preliminary Studies• Your own preliminary data

Present your data carefully and clearly Use high quality graphs, photos, and tables Show, discuss appropriate controls Analyze appropriately Use appropriate statistics Interpret your findings carefully and critically;

acknowledge limitations of techniques and data

• Can include closely related work by others66

In describing the Research Strategy be sure to give the “big picture”

• The Approach is not just methods• Outline your experimental approach

Base on specific aims - restate aims and describe flow of experiments under each aim

Develop logic of project Describe timeline, sequence of experiments Describe potential pitfalls and what you will do

if they occur• Point out significance and innovation• Talk about clinical relevance (for those

grantmakers with clinical interests)67

When describing methodology• Cite appropriate references• Establish your expertise with the techniques

to be used give citations to your work using the techniques provide accurate discussion of techniques and of their

strength and limitations give methodology details where critical (especially if

unpublished or unique) describe alternatives you will use if a technique is

inadequate or the results are inconclusive Don’t forget data analysis and statistical analyses

• The new NIH format was supposed to decrease emphasis on methodologic details, but many reviewers still seem to want them.68

For techniques that are new for youTell how you will obtain expertise• Collaborator

Yale include as investigator

Outside consultant: biosketch, letter, subcontract: agreement between

institutions• Someone who will teach you

Letter Biosketch

• Use a core facility • Take a course

69

Literature Cited• Follow required format exactly• Be complete, but not silly• Be accurate

read entire article carefully cite accurately

• Remember: some reviewers will probably be people reading and publishing in this area

• Include your own work but also cite others, including competitors

• Don’t ignore literature you don’t like, instead cite and discuss it

• Be objective 70

Appendices• Follow instructions carefully

Some applications have mandatory appendices Some do not allow appendices Some limit appendices

• Possible appendices NIH: animals, human subjects, sharing resources NSF: mentoring, data management / sharing Letters of collaboration Letters of recommendation Papers Manuscripts in press

71

Warnings about appendices

• Sometimes only the primary reviewers have them

• Some reviewers never look at them • Do not try to use them to circumvent page

limitations• Do not use them for critical information;

mention ever critical point in the body of the application

• They may be separate from the main application - label them clearly

72

Letters of Recommendation• Sometimes required• Examined with great care• Letters should discuss your past and

current work and your long range potential in your chosen profession

• Select sponsors carefully Professional references, not personal references Ideally, include thesis advisor, postdoctoral advisor,

and someone who knows your present work Select people who know your work, are reasonably

senior, and know how to write good letters

73

When requesting letters• Provide instructions from the grantmaker.

Specific information may be requested Specific format may be specified Forms or checklists may be provided and required Sometimes included with your application; sometimes

sent or uploaded separately• Provide your current full CV.• Provide a good draft of the proposal.• Talk with the writer about your long term

plans and goals.• Provide a draft letter giving an overview of

the project and your career goals. Include any elements you want to see in the letter.

74

You may also need a letter from your Chair, the Dean, or the President

• The Chair may know you Provide draft letter Provide all information given to others writing

letters Get mentor to help

• The Dean and the President of Yale probably don’t know you very well Don’t panic The Department, ORA and Development can

arrange these and help with writing Will need information described above May call you for additional information Will ask your Mentor or Chair for draft letter

75

More on letters• Don’t be shy about asking for letters

It’s part of the senior faculty’s job to mentor you and do these things

Make their job as easy as possible Approach them early - give them enough time

• Multiple requests are not a problem Second and subsequent letters are easy Computers are our friends

• Be sure to let your writers know when you get an award

76

Readers• Begin asking people to read the grant at an

early draft stage (~2 months before submission)

• Use their input and feedback as you develop the project

• Do this early enough that you can add or delete experiments, aims, and collaborators

• Projects evolve while they are being written. Allow time to re-write when this happens

77

Who should read the final drafts?

• All collaborators must have an opportunity to read the proposal (ethical issue!)

• Anyone who is writing a letter for you should be given a good draft

• Outside readers (at least 3!) An expert in the field A person in a closely related field An intelligent non-expert

Good proofreader; good English skills

This reader will provide a critical perspective if there are non-scientists on the review panel

78

A few words on readers

• You want people who are honest and critical • You want both scientific comments and

editorial comments• Pick people who will take the time to read

thoroughly and thoughtfully• Yes, it is an imposition to ask a senior

colleague to read your grant Ask anyhow It’s part of their job Give them enough time

• With your peers: trade favors79

The final proofreading• Use spell check program• Use grammar check program• Don’t trust the programs! Proofread!

“principle investigator” “hear at Yael, wee all ways proof reed.”

• Have multiple people proofread• Check figures, tables, data, legends• If your English skills are not strong, get

someone with strong English writing skills to edit and proofread for you

• If needed: contact the library for help finding professional editing services

80

Assembling the application• Did you include everything the grantmaker said to

include?• Follow the instructions to the letter

Where/how to number pages? What order? How to handle appendices?

• If electronic One file or several? What kind of file (Adobe? Word? A web-based form?)

• If paper: How many copies? Staple copies or not?

• Identify proprietary or confidential information?• You don’t want the application refused because

you sent it in the wrong format !!81

Sending the application• Paper or electronic?• Where?• When?• How?• With cover letter?

It depends on your sponsor May be required, with specific information included You may be able to request consideration by a specific

institute or review by a specific review committee You may be able to request that specific people not

review the application

• Watch for special instructions 82

Electronic submission: still a major problem• Overload near grant deadlines slows systems,

prevents uploading, and causes systems to crash• Grants can just disappear into cyberspace• Check uploaded grant:

Open every file Make sure it’s there, legible, complete, & the right length

• For grants.gov submissions – watch for error messages that identify problems requiring correction or resubmission before the submission deadline

• Contact GCA for help• Keep following the submission until you have a

confirmation of successful receipt

83

Warning : For NIH grants• The two day correction window is gone as of

January 25, 2011

• Grants that are not accepted by the NIH Website by the submission deadline (date and time!) will not be considered.

• Minor errors can prevent acceptance (e.g. extra spaces, changes to formatting/length during uploading to the website, a section 1 line over the page limit, a minor typo at a critical place).

84

Warnings: Other Sponsors• Most other agencies already have no

correction window – if the grant is not completely and correctly uploaded at the exact time of the deadline, it is indeed dead

• NSF now requires data management plans• NSF will not review any research grant that

proposes cost sharing• NSF now requires a mentoring plan on

research grants that support trainees (and RCR training for all trainees)

• Every sponsor has its own specific set of requirements and they are changing rapidly

85

It’s submitted. Now what?• You wait and watch for information• May get an acknowledgement and

information on assignment for review and contact person (or you may have to check a website)

• The review can take months• In some cases you may be asked for

additional information - send it ASAP• In some cases you may wish to send new

information - contact the grantmaker before sending anything

86

A final word• All sponsors receive many more

applications than they can fund NIH (2010): received 65,010 / funded 14,659 NSF: receives ~40,000 / funds ~11,000 Am Cancer Soc: receives ~ 2000 / funds ~260 Brown Cox (2009): received 65 / funded 13

• Each review panel reviews 80-100 grants per session

• Each reviewer gets 5-20 grants to read • Regardless of sponsor, make your grant

the best one your reviewer reads, so he or she fights to get it funded

87

Questions?

88