scholarly journals Strategies for writing a successful National Institutes of Health grant proposal for the early-career neurointerventionalist

2020 ◽  
pp. neurintsurg-2020-016964
Author(s):  
Peter Kan ◽  
Maxim Mokin ◽  
William J Mack ◽  
Robert M Starke ◽  
Kevin N Sheth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cerebrovascular Disease ◽  
Grant Proposal ◽  
Early Career ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Detailed Knowledge ◽  
Grant Application ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Research Grant

ObjectiveThe goal of this article is to provide a succinct review of the key components of a NIH grant application and the NIH reviewprocess for the early career neurointerventionalist.MethodsThe authors reviewed NIH rules and regulations and also reflected on their own collective experiencein writing NIH grant proposals in the area of cerebrovascular disease andneurointerventional surgery.ResultsKey components of theresearch strategy include specific aims, significance, innovation and approach.The specific aims page is the most important page of the application and should be written first. The NIH review isbased on these key components along with an assessment of the appropriatenessof the investigators and environment for the research.ConclusionDetailed knowledge ofthe key components of the research grant is critical to a successful application.The information in the article may aid in the grant writing for early careerneurointerventionalists.

scholarly journals National Institutes of Health grant opportunities for the neurointerventionalist: preparation and choosing the right mechanism

2020 ◽  
pp. neurintsurg-2020-016743
Author(s):  
Peter Kan ◽  
Michael R Levitt ◽  
William J Mack ◽  
Robert M Starke ◽  
Kevin N Sheth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cerebrovascular Disease ◽  
Early Career ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Grant Application ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Preparation Stage ◽  
Collective Experience ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
The Right

ObjectiveThe goal of this article is to provide recommendations for the early career neurointerventionalist in writing a successful grant application to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and similar funding agencies.MethodsThe authors reviewed NIH rules and regulations and also reflected on their own collective experience in writing NIH grant proposals in the area of cerebrovascular disease and neurointerventional surgery.ResultsA strong proposal should address an important scientific problem where there is a gap in knowledge. The solution offered needs to be innovative but at the same time based on a strong scientific premise. The proposed research must be feasible to implement and investigate in the researcher’s environment.ConclusionSuccessful grant writing is critical in funding and enhancing research. The information in the article may aid in the preparation stage of grant writing for early career neurointerventionalists.

scholarly journals How to get and keep your lab funded

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 2519-2521
Author(s):  
Jonathan Chernoff
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Decisive Factor ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Grant Review

Much has been written about the seemingly capricious manner by which grant proposals are ranked and awarded by the National Institutes of Health and similar agencies, yet some scientists are able to maintain stable funding over long periods of time. While raw luck may certainly play a role in this process, particularly when paylines are tight, it is also possible that skill—in the art of grant writing at least—could represent a decisive factor. Here, I submit that, even as we attempt to reform and one day perfect the grant review process, there are actions that applicants can take today to get better results from the system we have.

scholarly journals Navigating the Road to Success: Guidelines for Preparing Competitive Grant Proposals

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn L. Langille ◽  
Theresa Mackenzie
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The Road ◽  
Grant Applications ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Research Grant

Purpose - Difficulty in securing research funding has been cited as one barrier to the involvement of more librarians and information professionals in conducting original research. This article seeks to support the work of librarians who wish to secure research funding by describing some key approaches to the creation of successful grant applications. Approach - The authors draw on more than 15 years experience in supporting the development of successful research grant proposals. Twelve grant-writing best practices or ‘key approaches’ are described, and a planning timeline is suggested. Conclusions - Use of these best practices can assist researchers in creating successful research grant proposals that will also help streamline the research process once it is underway. It is important to recognize the competitive nature of research grant competitions, to obtain feedback from an internal review panel, and to use feedback from funding agencies to strengthen future grant applications.

scholarly journals The Keys to Preparing Successful Research Grant Proposals

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 605-612
Author(s):  
Mary A. Marchant
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Application Process ◽  
Department Of Agriculture ◽  
Grant Programs ◽  
Research Initiative ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Research Grant

AbstractThis article seeks to demystify the competitive grant recommendation process of scientific peer review panels. The National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program (NRICGP) administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Cooperative State Research, Extension, and Education Service (USDA-CSREES) serves as the focus of this article. This article provides a brief background on the NRICGP and discusses the application process, the scientific peer review process, guidelines for grant writing, and ways to interpret reviewer comments if a proposal is not funded. The essentials of good grant writing discussed in this article are transferable to other USDA competitive grant programs.

scholarly journals Grant application outcomes for biomedical researchers who participated in the National Research Mentoring Network’s Grant Writing Coaching Programs

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. e0241851
Author(s):  
Anne Marie Weber-Main ◽  
Richard McGee ◽  
Kristin Eide Boman ◽  
Japera Hemming ◽  
Meldra Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ethnic Disparities ◽  
The United States ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Grant Writing ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Grant Application ◽  
Research Mentoring ◽  
Research Workforce ◽  
Reported Data ◽  
Racial Ethnic

Background A diverse research workforce is essential for catalyzing biomedical advancements, but this workforce goal is hindered by persistent sex and racial/ethnic disparities among investigators receiving research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In response, the NIH-funded National Research Mentoring Network implemented a Grant Writing Coaching Program (GCP) to provide diverse cohorts of early-career investigators across the United States with intensive coaching throughout the proposal development process. We evaluated the GCP’s national reach and short-term impact on participants’ proposal submissions and funding outcomes. Methods The GCP was delivered as six similar but distinct models. All models began with an in-person group session, followed by a series of coaching sessions over 4 to 12 months. Participants were surveyed at 6-, 12- and 18-months after program completion to assess proposal outcomes (submissions, awards). Self-reported data were verified and supplemented by searches of public repositories of awarded grants when available. Submission and award rates were derived from counts of participants who submitted or were awarded at least one grant proposal in a category (NIH, other federal, non-federal). Results From June 2015 through March 2019, 545 investigators (67% female, 61% under-represented racial/ethnic minority, URM) from 187 different institutions participated in the GCP. Among them, 324 (59% of participants) submitted at least one grant application and 134 (41% of submitters) received funding. A total of 164 grants were awarded, the majority being from the NIH (93, 56%). Of the 74 R01 (or similar) NIH research proposals submitted by GCP participants, 16 have been funded thus far (56% to URM, 75% to women). This 22% award rate exceeded the 2016–2018 NIH success rates for new R01s. Conclusion Inter- and intra-institutional grant writing coaching groups are a feasible and effective approach to supporting the grant acquisition efforts of early-career biomedical investigators, including women and those from URM groups.

Creation of a comprehensive training and career development approach to increase the number of neurosurgeons supported by National Institutes of Health funding

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Russell R. Lonser ◽  
Luke G. F. Smith ◽  
Michael Tennekoon ◽  
Kavon P. Rezai-Zadeh ◽  
Jeffrey G. Ojemann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Career Development ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Early Career ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Academic Departments ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Grant Support ◽  
Development Approach ◽  
Comprehensive Programs ◽  
Nih Funding

OBJECTIVETo increase the number of independent National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded neurosurgeons and to enhance neurosurgery research, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) developed two national comprehensive programs (R25 [established 2009] for residents/fellows and K12 [2013] for early-career neurosurgical faculty) in consultation with neurosurgical leaders and academic departments to support in-training and early-career neurosurgeons. The authors assessed the effectiveness of these NINDS-initiated programs to increase the number of independent NIH-funded neurosurgeon-scientists and grow NIH neurosurgery research funding.METHODSNIH funding data for faculty and clinical department funding were derived from the NIH, academic departments, and Blue Ridge Institute of Medical Research databases from 2006 to 2019.RESULTSBetween 2009 and 2019, the NINDS R25 funded 87 neurosurgical residents. Fifty-three (61%) have completed the award and training, and 39 (74%) are in academic practice. Compared to neurosurgeons who did not receive R25 funding, R25 awardees were twice as successful (64% vs 31%) in obtaining K-series awards and received the K-series award in a significantly shorter period of time after training (25.2 ± 10.1 months vs 53.9 ± 23.0 months; p < 0.004). Between 2013 and 2019, the NINDS K12 has supported 19 neurosurgeons. Thirteen (68%) have finished their K12 support and all (100%) have applied for federal funding. Eleven (85%) have obtained major individual NIH grant support. Since the establishment of these two programs, the number of unique neurosurgeons supported by either individual (R01 or DP-series) or collaborative (U- or P-series) NIH grants increased from 36 to 82 (a 2.3-fold increase). Overall, NIH funding to clinical neurological surgery departments between 2006 and 2019 increased from $66.9 million to $157.3 million (a 2.2-fold increase).CONCLUSIONSTargeted research education and career development programs initiated by the NINDS led to a rapid and dramatic increase in the number of NIH-funded neurosurgeon-scientists and total NIH neurosurgery department funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document