3 Comments
So you’re wearing your lucky shoes and are ready to take a first look at the results of your grant review. Whether you are anticipating doing a victory dance or getting ready to head out to the nearest kickboxing class, it’s a good time to think about what comes next.
Some of you have noticed that the summary statements now include a link to a new online resource to address just this question. Especially if you are new to NIH funding, I encourage you to check out this “Next Steps” page, which was put together to help NIH grant applicants with the “What’s next?” questions following receipt of the summary statement.
If you aren’t in the position to be preparing Just-in-Time information for an award, but instead are considering resubmission, you may want to consider some of the data that have appeared in my previous blog posts, in addition to the resources available on grants.nih.gov. For example, in the post “Correlation Between Overall Impact Scores and Criterion Scores”, I show how approach, innovation, and significance factor heavily into the overall impact scores. As you look at your summary statement, talk to your NIH program official, and discuss your ideas with colleagues, it might be useful to keep this in mind.
Additionally our podcast series, All About Grants, includes conversations with NIH staff to help you understand how your grant is reviewed, such as these two episodes on summary statement basics and resubmission advice.
Whether you’re new to the grant application process or an experienced applicant, we hope you find these resources useful.
We are nearly finished with a STTR phase II application. Our program directer advised to reread and respond to reviewer comments of the first Phase I (the 2nd was awarded). Although this was unusual I suspect that it was because of a particular reviewer who we cannot seem to convince on 2 separate STTR projects. I will read your suggestions above with great interest. We have time to digest and respond.
Thank You,
Dr. K
Dear Sally,
I am rather puzzled by all the “happy talk” in the Rock Talk. NIH funding right now is in a serious crisis. Why isn’t the NIH, you and its Directors screaming to Congress about the dismal funding levels leading to dismal paylines? Layoffs of personnel are happening across the country due to loss of NIH grant funding. Interim paylines at NIAID are at 6% and some other institutes are no better or worse! The system will soon implode at these funding levels and we will lose many investigators particularly at the junior faculty level. As a seasoned investigator I have seen budgets rise and fall, but the future for funding looks poor for the foreseeable future, regardless of the outcome of the election. As scientists we need to be advocates for funding, but we need the NIH to back us, not tell us that everything is rosy. We need the NIH leadership to step up and tell Congress that a disaster is in progress that will further distance us from the rest of the world in science and lead to further job losses and reduced domestic spending. Perhaps those in power do not realize that the grant money we receive is spent primarily on people and supplies, the latter purchased from many American companies. There are long-term consequences that will result from the ongoing crisis that soon will be irreversible. So please, stop with the positive outlook- it doesn’t play in Peoria or anywhere else. Talk to some scientists and ask them what the sentiment is around the country and you will see the reality of the funding crisis.
Thank you for your consideration.
Leo Lefrancois, PhD
Dept of Immunology
UCONN Health Center