Writing NIH Grants Writing for Success: NIH R- series Grants Jane Douglas Faculty, CTSI Associate Professor, Center for Management Communication Warrington.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

ts Writing for Success: NIH Writing for Success: NIH R-series GrantsR-series Grants

Jane DouglasFaculty, CTSI

Associate Professor, Center for Management Communication

Warrington College of Business

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsNIH R-series Grants

• Research Project Oriented:• Most common are:

– R03 Small Research Grants (preliminary, short-term)

– R21 Exploratory/Developmental Grants(Develop new research in categorical areas; short-term, restricted support)

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsNIH R-series Grants

• Research Project Oriented:• Most common are:

– R01: historically oldest grant mechanism in NIH

– Can be investigator-initiated or in response to specific RFAs

– But R01 plan must relate to program goals of NIH Institute or Center

– Renewable, focuses on multiple experiments to realize complex aims.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsBe Aware of Shifting

Deadlines

• R01 deadlines occur in cycles, as do other R awards, but– Deadlines for new submissions differ

from renewal applications– Applications under specific RFAs also

have different deadlines– As do R21s and other R-series grants– Always check relevant RFAs at

http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/funding_program.htm#RSeries

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsAnother Caveat: Institutes

and Centers

• Not all Institutes and Centers accept applications for all types of R-series grants

• Eligibility criteria may vary widely, as well as deadlines for submission

• Look up Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) to see which criteria and deadlines apply.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsR21 Grants

• Novel, exploratory or developmental research projects

• Support for early stages, including pilot or feasibility studies

• Limited to 2 years of funding• Budgets: Limited to $275K (direct

costs)• No preliminary data required (but

always helpful).

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsR21 Grants

• Currently, no grants pertaining to National Heart, Lung, Blood Institute (NHLBI)

• Also no submissions under National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsR03 Grants

• Currently, no grants pertaining to NHLBI, NIDDK unless pertinent to specific FOAs:

• Also applies to National Eye Institute (NEI)

• National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)

• And others.• See Center-specific FOAs, which

tend to be highly limited in scope

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsR-series Grants Caveats

• Never just assume you can submit an R03 or R21 without consulting specific FOAs from the NIH center relevant to your research

• Despite stated guidelines, preliminary data is always persuasive in establishing feasibility and potential outcomes.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsPlan WAY Ahead

• Consult different types of FOAs:– Parent Announcements

• Broadest category, investigator-initiated, established deadlines for submissions, just needs to fit within NIH overall mission

– IC-Specific Program Announcements (PAs)• Broadly defined but still investigator-

initiated, tied to IC’s scope.

– Requests for Applications (RFAs)• Well-defined scope and area, reviewed

within an IC by a Special Emphasis Panel.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWhat the NIH Looks for

• Originality– Conduct thorough lit review to ensure

idea isn’t duplicative of other research

• Innovation– Build off “black boxes” in understanding

of processes, etiology– Address an established problem using a

novel mechanism or approach

• Advancing knowledge– Capitalize on recent discoveries or poorly

understood mechanisms

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsNIH’s Stated Goals

• Foster discoveries and innovative research strategies to ultimately protect and improve health

• Develop resources to prevent disease

• Expand knowledge base in medical and associated sciences to enhance national economic well-being and a high return on investment in research

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWhat This Means:

Translation

• Research that addresses public health costs associated with widespread or chronic disease

• Reduces public health costs or anticipates and addresses increases in costs associated with treatment of disease

• Indirectly addresses costs of lost productivity from chronic disease.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWhat This Means:

Pragmatic Translation

• Focus on $$ in terms of – Population numbers afflicted with

disease– Costs of treatment– Losses in working days– Costs of complications or co-morbid

conditionsBenefits of prevention, early

diagnosis, or treatment in avoiding all of above.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWhat This Means: Your

Focus

• In an R21 or R03:1. Accounting for disparities in healthcare outcomes from prostate disease between African-American and other populations2. How minocycline targets gut microbiota implicated in development of T2D3. Using biomarkers to assess differing impacts of long-term pain among different racial and ethnic populations.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsTracing these back to NIH

pragmatic aims

1. Racial disparities in outcomes from prostate disease?

2. Targeting gut microbiota linked with T2D?

3. Establishing ethnic and racial disparities in biomarkers for chronic pain?

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsPlan Early!

• eRA Commons accounts require PI at least one month prior to grant submission.

• On-campus approvals can take months (IRB, budgetary)

• Line up collaborative team– Letters of commitment delineate their

roles

• Establish necessary resources (labs, diagnostics, expertise)

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsAs You Begin…

• Ensure your hypothesis hasn’t already been (a) published or (b) funded.

• Check funded NIH projects via RePORTER: http://report.nih.gov/

• RePORTER also displays associated publications and can be useful lit review resource.

• Be sure your hypothesis is compelling, novel, innovative, and addresses NIH and IC central aims.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsAs You Begin…

• Scrutinize FOA• Get feedback from

colleagues/mentors/available experts• Find an already existing R01, R03, or

R21 application as a model• Ensure your college, department or

division will give you protected time promised in grant

• Familiarize yourself with NIH peer review criteria, based on IC.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsBear in Mind

• R01s are the most complex and competitive grants you will ever write.

• Let your ideas germinate for months, if not years, prior to submitting an R01.

• If you’re not passionate about the central hypothesis, don’t start until you are.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsHypothesis and Specific

Aims

• Make or break a grant application• Hypothesis should be expressible

in 2-3 sentences, max. • Break down into realizable

specific aims– Better Aims 1, 2, 3 rather than

extensive sub-aims: Aim 1a, 1b, 1c– Unless you require a subsidiary

aim(s) to realize one aim.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsHypotheses – R01s

• Expect to generate multiple experiments to realize even one specific aim (4-5 is not uncommon)

• Be prepared to pre-empt questions about your experimental design (direct questions as subheadings can be helpful) with rationale(s).

• Provide anticipated results that acknowledge potential pratfalls, challenges in statistical analyses.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsEnlist Collaborators

• If you haven’t already done so, seek out mentors at meetings.– Include association heads, last authors in

influential studies, established authorities– Recruit mentors as collaborators or use

them as sounding boards for your hypotheses

– Mentors can have influence on decisions of NIH study sections.

– You may request specific experts/reviewers in your cover/letter of transmittal.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsCollaborators

• Can also provide access to labs, methodologies, expertise you lack.

• Can provide feedback on hypothesis, specific aims, and methodologies.

• Can reassure NIH that your team has appropriate expertise and resources to complete project.

• Can act as advocates for your research—if you’re lucky.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsPrimary Peer Review

Criteria1. Significance2. Investigators3. Innovation4. Approach5. Environment

Plus: Independence and LeadershipAppropriate ResourcesInstitutional Support

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsAdditional Peer Review

Criteria

1. Protections for Human Subjects2. Inclusion of Women, Minorities, & Children3. Treatment of Vertebrate Animals4. Biohazards5. Resubmission6. Renewal7. Revision

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsNIH Writing Priorities

• Applications should be written as clearly and accessibly as possible

• Primary gate-keepers won’t be subject matter experts

• Ensure title, abstract, background/public relevance are– Comprehensible to lay public– Use plain, accessible language, explain

terminology– Focus on potential impacts on public

health

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsAs You Begin

• Create an outline• Follow the suggested organization of

application• Craft one sentence for each main

point in outline• Focus on persuading reviewers why

– A) hypothesis is worth funding– B) you’re the person to carry out study– C) you have the institutional support to

complete it.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWrite Clearly!

• Reviewers are most likely to read carefully easy-to-read submissions.

• Avoid jargon and spell out all acronyms on first reference.

• Even NIH recommends using active construction over passive construction in sentences:– “We will achieve this aim by…” NOT– “This aim will be achieved by…”

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsWrite Clearly!

• To bolster readability:– Short paragraphs, one idea per

paragraph– Use transitions, especially causal

(as a result, consequently, therefore, because) to strengthen ties between ideas

– Enlist readers outside your specialization to assess ideas are accessible.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsUltimate Focus on Writing

• Get help if you’re not a strong writer!• Use an independent expert to

provide objective critique of application, if possible.

• Zero tolerance for any typos, misspellings, grammatical or diction errors, or poor formatting– Can lead reviewers to conclude

sloppiness in preparation will carry over to research.

Wri

tin

g N

IH G

ran

tsQuestions?

• Or objections?• Or a bloody good argument?