Otto O. Yang

Collaborators and Consultants

Your research project may require skills or materials that are not immediately available in your laboratory. In this case, a central question of reviewers will be whether you will have the capability to perform that work. This judgment will depend on your prior experience and track record. An effective way to address this concern, particularly if you are not a highly experienced investigator, is to enlist the aid of collaborators and/or consultants. These should be persons who are easily recognized as experts in a technique that you require, or who possess necessary materials (e.g., access to patient populations, particular monoclonal antibodies, etc.).

Research Strategy: Approach

This section, previously titled “Research Design and Methods,” is obviously central to the application and will receive heavy scrutiny during review. However, the emphasis of the reviewers will vary depending on the type of grant. For training grants (F and K series), this section will be judged primarily on whether these experiments will be a useful exercise in learning skills and providing experience that will foster independence as an investigator; for independent investigator grants (R series), the emphasis will be on the appropriateness of the plans to address the stated specific aims. In all of these cases, this section should be highly organized and clear.

Research Strategy: Innovation

This is an entirely new section that was not part of the prior NIH grant format. Because innovation is a major criterion for evaluation and scoring of grant applications, this section was created both to make it easier for reviewers to assess this criterion and to allow applicants to highlight this aspect of their projects. This section is contrived and difficult to write, because unlike the other sections conveying facts and plans, the “Innovation” section is your explanation of why your proposed project is innovative. In effect, you are evaluating and touting your own work to the reviewers.

Bibliography and References Cited

The “Bibliography and References Cited” section contains all of the citations from the scientific portions of the proposal. This documentation is an important aspect of the application. As mentioned earlier, your application should provide an overview of your research area to establish a context for your project. Additionally, you may refer to your own published research showing support for the rationale behind your proposed project, or your technical capability to perform techniques in the project. Referring to the appropriate publications in support of what you have written is essential. This ties your ideas to the state-of-the-art in the field, and allows the reviewers to fact-check or brush up on the field by going to the original sources.

Anatomy of the NIH Grant Application

The scientific description of all NIH grant applications follows a highly standardized format to which you should strictly adhere.

Non-NIH Grants

The principles of writing an effective grant application for the NIH are universal and are generally applicable to applications to other organizations. In fact, many foundations and other granting institutions adopt the NIH format exactly or with minor modifications and organize review panels that score applications in the same manner as NIH. When applying for these grants, it is crucial to be familiar with the instructions concerning format, style, administrative requirements, and other details of the application. Despite any differences from NIH, however, the strategies and goals in writing are usually the same.

Resubmitting an Application

The majority of grant applications are not funded due to competition for limited funds, so it is common to resubmit after initial rejection. Applications are allowed two chances (one resubmission) for review, with the exception of RFA/PA responses, which may be one-time or time-limited. For resubmission, success will depend on whether the IRG initially felt the project is worthwhile and whether the IRG perceives that the identified weaknesses have been corrected in the revised application.

Types of NIH Grants

The list of types of grants is long and runs the gamut from small awards to encourage and train new researchers, to huge grants covering groups of senior scientists in collaborative projects. These grants are divided into multiple series. All have in common, however, the same presentation format for the scientific plans (see Chap. 5). Each series has a general theme, and individual grants in the series have a focused goal, whether to support postdoctoral training projects or to fund established researchers doing advanced research. The most common series are F, K, and R awards:

Administrative Sections and Submission Process

The administrative sections of your application are absolutely required for the grant application to be accepted for review and funding, and errors in these sections can cause delays and even rejection of applications without review. It is thus critical that you give proper attention to completing these sections according to NIH regulations and instructions. Familiarizing yourself with the requirements listed in the NIH guidelines for writing grant applications should be one of the first steps you take. The instructions for each administrative section can vary for different grants, so refer to the specific instructions for your application.

Use of Appendices

Regulations regarding appendices have evolved over the past few years to become stricter due to applicants using appendices as a means to circumvent page limitations. Now only very specific items can be included as appendices: letters from collaborators/consultants in support of your project, manuscripts that are accepted but not yet published, or information that legitimately cannot be incorporated into the main text (e.g., moving images, epidemiological survey tools that will be utilized in the project).