Grant Writing Tips for Translational Research

Methods in Molecular Biology - Molecular Profiling ◽

10.1007/978-1-60327-216-2_25 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 379-389 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Lindsay Wescott ◽

Michael Laskofski

Keyword(s):

Translational Research ◽

Grant Writing

Download Full-text

2305

Journal of Clinical and Translational Science ◽

10.1017/cts.2017.171 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 1 (S1) ◽

pp. 47-47

Author(s):

Gayathri Devi ◽

Ranjan Sudan ◽

Stephanie Freel ◽

Laura Fish

Keyword(s):

Focus Groups ◽

Translational Research ◽

Interdisciplinary Approach ◽

Health Care Research ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Grant Writing ◽

Team Science ◽

Translational Science ◽

Duke University ◽

The Impact

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To improve translational research, we have developed a program called Duke Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Translational Sciences (Duke MERITS). Duke MERITS will facilitate cross-disciplinary collaboration among faculty involved in foundational, clinical and/or health care research and in turn also prepare them to train the next generation of translational researchers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The program aims are (1) to define metrics and outcomes measures so faculty can track their progress and identify impact of their collaborative research in translational sciences; (2) to offer a multi-modal faculty development series to promote team science, improve didactic teaching, and incorporate innovative resources to promote interdisciplinary approach to translational research; (3) to provide module-based hands-on-training sessions in bench to bedside research and training in translational grant writing to facilitate the development of multidisciplinary research collaborations. The present study describes results from Aim 1 and includes (a) development of baseline outcome assessment tools necessary to gauge the impact of our programs on both the participating faculty and the research culture within Duke University, (b) impact of a specific course offering in Translational Medicine. In order to achieve this, we conducted multiple focus group sessions with faculty self-identified as junior-, mid-, or advanced-career, a mixed group at any career level and included a group of graduate students and postdoctoral trainees to study the impact of a graduate level course in Translational Aspects of Pathobiology. The activities during these translational science focus groups were designed to define what successful translational science is, to determine what resources support translational Science at Duke, and to decide what resources we need in order to enhance Duke’s position as a leader in research and scientific education. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We identified that translational science is changing standards while incorporating leadership, teamwork, collaborations, and movement primarily focusing on the overall goal of improving all aspects of health. Participants categorized their field of study and the fields of their coparticipants most frequently as basic discovery and a combination of intervention and health services. The most frequently identified pros/benefits of performing translational science at Duke include industry connections, collaborations with other departments resulting in disciplines being bridged, improving patient care, and access to resources as well as money. The most frequently identified cons/barriers of performing translational science includes the expensiveness, silos, and lack of resources willing to absorb risks. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The identification of these defined factors from the focus groups has allowed us to issue a comprehensive, sliding Likert scale-based anonymous survey from the secure RedCap system and is being rolled out throughout Duke University, including schools of medicine, nursing, Trinity, biomedical engineering. We envision that Duke MERITS education program will facilitate interprofessional efforts, which we define as a team science approach to identify the clinical “roadblock” and then seek an innovative approach or technology to help overcome this “roadblock”? It can facilitate institutional and departmental recognition in faculty career development. The common goal is to gain fundamental new insights that will result in significant improvement of the existing “standard of care” and meet the challenges of dwindling extramural support.

Download Full-text

KL2 mentored career development programs at clinical and translational science award hubs: Practices and outcomes

Journal of Clinical and Translational Science ◽

10.1017/cts.2019.424 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 43-52 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Christine A. Sorkness ◽

Linda Scholl ◽

Alecia M. Fair ◽

Jason G. Umans

Keyword(s):

Career Development ◽

Translational Research ◽

Early Stage ◽

Grant Writing ◽

Translational Science ◽

Development Programs ◽

Graduate Degrees ◽

Training Opportunities ◽

Career Development Award ◽

Clinical And Translational Research

AbstractIntroduction:NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) include KL2 mentored career development awards for faculty commencing clinical and translational research. A survey of KL2 leaders revealed program practices, curricular elements and compelling data about scholar characteristics and outcomes.Methods:We conducted a literature review, framed the survey construct, and obtained input from across the CTSA consortium. A REDCap survey was emailed in fall 2016 to 61 active programs.Results:Fifty-five programs (90.2%) responded. Respondents had been funded from 3 to 11 years, including 22 “mature” hubs funded for ≥8 years. Program cohort sizes were 56% “small”, 22% “medium”, and 22% “large.” Hubs offer extensive competency-aligned training opportunities relevant to clinical and translational research, including graduate degrees, mentorship, and grant-writing. Seventy-two percent of hubs report parallel “KL2-equivalent” career development programs. All hubs share their training and facilitate intermingling with other early stage investigators. A total of 1,517 KL2 scholars were funded. KL2 awardees are diverse in their disciplines, research projects, and representation; 54% are female and 12% self-identified as underrepresented in biomedical research. Eighty-seven percent of scholars have 2–3 mentors and are currently supported for 2–3 years. Seventy-eight percent of alumni remain at CTSA institutions in translational science. The most common form of NIH support following scholars’ KL2 award is an individual career development award.Conclusions:The KL2 is a unique career development award, shaped by competency-aligned training opportunities and interdisciplinary mentorship that inform translational research pathways. Tracking both traditional and novel outcomes of KL2 scholars is essential to capture their career trajectories and impact on health.

Download Full-text

Experience With Grant Writing: Where Do I Even Begin?

Perspectives on School-Based Issues ◽

10.1044/sbi11.1.21 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 21-24

Author(s):

Nicole M. Mancini

Keyword(s):

Lessons Learned ◽

Economic Situation ◽

Grant Writing ◽

Personal Journey ◽

Know How ◽

Daunting Task

Abstract At first, grant writing may look like a daunting task. You may ask yourself, “Is it really worth the time and effort?” With today's economic situation, teachers and therapists need ways to supplement their programs and grants provide such an opportunity. However, many of us do not know how to get started. After a few experiences and many lessons learned, I have come to enjoy researching and writing grants to supplement my students' learning. It is well worth the time and effort. This article provides information about a personal journey, lessons learned, and resources to get you started.

Download Full-text