WriteEdit-Grant Questions Blog

Syndicate content
Customized Customer Support for Biomedical Researchers
Updated: 6 hours 13 min ago

By: writedit

Tue, 10/03/2017 - 14:35

Wait until you receive your summary statement and then talk with your PO, since I expect the reviewer comments will be as important as the score in answering that question (not a funding decision made on score alone). However, your PO will not have definitive guidance until the FY18 budget shapes up in December, but he/she will know NCI’s general plans with regard to funding more ESI applicants if the appropriation they anticipate (FY17 levels or higher) comes to fruition.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: SaG

Tue, 10/03/2017 - 09:30

I would suggest working out all of the details before you speak with the PO. If your school and all of the players are on board and you can show that the proposed science will be sustained then you can present it to the PO.

Dr. C should not be in contact with the PO. The PO should only be speaking to you and your school. Do you even need Dr. C on the grant?

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: R01 NEW INVESTIGATOR

Tue, 10/03/2017 - 00:13

Hello Writedit,
I just received a percentile of 24 for my application. It is with NCI.I am new investigator but not early investigator. Is there any opportunity to receive funding? Additionally, this application has a secondary assignment with NIBIB.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: R01 NEW INVESTIGATOR

Mon, 10/02/2017 - 13:16

Hello Writedit,
I just received a percentile of 24 for my application. It is with NCI.I am new investigator but not early investigator. Is there any opportunity to receive funding?

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: writedit

Mon, 10/02/2017 - 10:40

I don’t think Dr. C’s actions will torpedo your chances of an award, and your boss’s support is excellent. The intramural-extramural dynamics within an IC can be interesting, and it could be Dr. C is using your application to leverage more funding for his intramural lab but does not intend to interfere with your getting the award or refuse to do the work. You could contact your PO before the teleconference to say your institution is willing to help you reconfigure the work to be done in-house vs by Dr. C, if there appears to be insurmountable differences at the time of the call (ie, in unlikely case Dr. C refuses to participate without more $ from the IC). If the IC took you up on that suggestion, it’s unlikely you would be able to renegotiate the budget to offset some of the additional costs you take on as a result, but it’s not impossible (though it would not come from Dr. C’s portion, since funds don’t cross the intramural-extramural fiscal barrier, so to speak).

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: writedit

Mon, 10/02/2017 - 10:17

NIMH has been funding 35% or more of K01 applications, so I suspect 25 is within the realm of possibility (you probably won’t get a percentile). When you receive your summary statement, you can touch base with your PO about how the discussion went and whether you should resubmit (for insurance). He or she won’t have any idea about FY18 paylines until the federal budget passes (or gets close to finalization), which won’t happen until December at least.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: writedit

Mon, 10/02/2017 - 10:11

I am glad to hear your PO was supportive (though silent) all these months. Your application can still be funded, even though the FY has changed, and perhaps he can negotiate an FY18 award at a lower budget level. Since the FY has changed, all ICs will be in a holding pattern until the federal budget passes, which will not happen until December at the earliest. If you had a secondary IC assigned to your application, you could touch base with the PO there about interest in your proposal, but you should not expect anyone else to pick up the RFA application at this point (especially if you have never communicated with the PO there). All other ICs have lots of unfunded proposals of their own to consider if money becomes available, so yours would not be a priority (score is not enough to make it appealing) – especially since NCI has the largest budget at NIH (other ICs prefer to let NCI pick up applications relevant to NCI mission). In the meantime, I would strongly suggest that you submit the proposal as a new R01; if you do contact POs at other ICs, you could take into account any suggestions they have, but I would focus on ensuring the application is of interest and priority to NCi, since it sounds as though your PO there has your back, and you want to help him make your case at NCI (for both the RFA application and a new R01).

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: U)NCI

Sun, 10/01/2017 - 21:33

Hi writedit:
Finally, I talked to PO. It seems that he was try to push my application for funding. Now, he is suggestng to submit it again for new open RFA as a R01 proposal (one month later). However, upon my request to cut funds and time, he said that he will see what can be done. What do you think about that? As my grant has outstanding score, is it possible to ask some other institutes for funding?
I really appreciate your suggestions and based on my experience, I can say that you are really a big support system for newbies.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: Matt

Sat, 09/30/2017 - 13:43

Hi Writedit and SaG,

Thank you for your insights, which I followed and proceeded. Unfortunately, I was told by Dr. C (the intramural scientist that replaced Dr. B who left for industry) two days ago that he thought the commitment made by Dr. B was excessive. Dr. B did commit some tech time in addition to his own time. While Dr. C did not say outright that he will not honor Dr. B’s commitment to the project, he has asked for a teleconference among the PO, himself, the representatives of his institute and my university to discuss this further. Moreover, he has already alerted the PO about his cocerns before even speaking to me and the University!

So how should I approach this now? Will all these torpedo my grant award? How will a PO normally approach this kind of issue?

I have spoken to my boss, and he told me that in the worst case scenario, we can find someone who is qualified to do the work proposed for the NIH intramural scientists here at our university. My department will pay for the additional expenses if it cannot be covered by the current grant budget. (please do understand that the costs incurred by the intramural scientists are covered by their intramural budget, so they were not included in the grant budget. That being said, the amount is not astronomical either,) Should we let the PO know about this at the teleconference or will this create more problems?

As for the specific questions asked by SaG above, yes, Drs. A & B were listed as key personnel (unfortunately). You are right, I did not mean to take Dr. B out as he will remain as a non-paid consultant. So technically, there is no change in key personnel. But as far as the intramural institute is concerned, Dr. C was assigned to replace Dr. B, do I have to report this addition to the PO, right? I was merely following the advice from my own grant management officials at the University.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: NT

Fri, 09/29/2017 - 15:33

I got a 25 on a K01 resubmission to NIMH. Not sure what the chances of funding are since there’s no percentile and the payline for 2018 hasn’t been established yet.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: writedit

Thu, 09/28/2017 - 08:33

A 14-point improvement is good, but it depends on whether both panels had concerns about the significance of the work (ie, is it worth doing no matter how the approach reads), or if they mainly cited fixable issues with the research and/or training plan. It could be your mentor sees a lack of enthusiasm for the research you are pursuing – but this is important to clarify, since you do not want to continue down that path (if it is not sufficiently significant for a K, it won’t be sufficient for an R either). Your PO will be helpful in assessing reviewer enthusiasm and making suggestions on next steps since he/she will have heard the discussions and can comment from an IC perspective as well.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: writedit

Thu, 09/28/2017 - 00:04

If you haven’t asked your PO about funding likelihood and your score is good or close, then you can certainly check in for his/her take. However, they won’t be able to say anything definitive since no IC will have any idea about paylines until December or later, depending on when Congress passes a budget.

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: Neurite

Wed, 09/27/2017 - 20:53

Just got my K08 A1 score: 36. This score may be close but I am not so optimistic. According to my discussion with my PO before the submission, grants with scores < 30 were funded and 30+ were unclear. It is down from 50 (A0) but still kind of high.

I have tried to address all reviewers' comments. The main critique of A0 was the disease implication of the science (aim 3). Except for Research Plan, other scores were good. In the resubmission I provided a lot of data to address that.

My mentor thought I am moving in the right direction because the score improved. He encouraged me to fix it and submit another A0 if I don't get it this time. I am just worried that the Study Section were not so enthusiastic about my research because the score didn't improve significantly.

Thoughts?

Categories: NIH-Funding

By: newbie

Wed, 09/27/2017 - 17:04

Should you ask your PO about the possibility of funding after council review? Is there a “right” way to ask about this? My era commons status says “council review completed.”

Categories: NIH-Funding