Strategies for Personality and Social Psychology Researchers to Obtain NCI Funding Small Grants Prog

1
Strategies for Personality andSocial Psychology
Researchers to Obtain NCI FundingSmall Grants
Program for Behavioral Research in Cancer
ControlJuly 23, 2009
Veronica Chollette, RN, MSCoordinator Small
Grants Program for Behavioral Research Division
of Cancer Control and Population Sciences
2
Small Grants Program for Behavioral Research in
Cancer Control (R03)

• Program Goals
• Enable investigators to collect pilot or
  feasibility data
• Support a variety of small-scale projects with
  simplified application procedures.
• Enable new investigators, or those from
  institutions without well-developed research
  traditions or resources, to begin independent
  research activities.
• Increase the total number of Research Project
  Grants (RPGs) able to be supported by NCI and
  decrease the average costs of RPGs.

3
Research Examples

• Supports small research projects
• Pilot projects
• Development and testing of new methodologies
• Secondary data analyses
• Innovative projects that provide a basis for more
  extended research
• Feasibility studies

4
R03 Application Characteristics

• Two year maximum project period
• Maximum budget - 100,000
• New projects only
• One revisions of a previously reviewed R03 small
  grant application will be accepted
• The Research Plan (Specific Aims, Background and
  Significance, Preliminary Studies, and Research
  Design and Methods) of an application for a small
  grant may not exceed a total of 10 pages.
• NCI Special Review Committee

5
Facts to Know

• Funding Opportunity Announcement PAR-09-003
• Other R03 FOA
• Mentor Requirement
• Pre-Review Conference Call
• Specialized Review
• Annual Grantee Meetinghttp//cancercontrol.cancer
  .gov/smallgrants/2009_annualmeeting

6
Typical Timeline for a Small Grants Application
(R03)

• There are three overlapping cycles per year
• Submit in April (August, December)
• Review in June (October, February)
• Council in September (January, May)
• Earliest award in December (April, July)
• Cycle 1
• Cycle 2
• Cycle 3

7
Before You Apply!

• Contact a Program Officer/Director
• Know the Institute/Center (IC) priorities
• Know the current portfolio
• Advise about resources, approach, etc
• Listen to the reviews
• Explain emphasis and tenor of the review

8
Program Directors are your Friends

• Use our website to match Program/Branch/Staff
  with proposed research - e.g. NCIs DCCPS Web
  sitehttp//cancercontrol.cancer.gov/od/meet_staf
  f
• E-mail brief query about research interest and
  funding to Program Director
• Include If this area of research is not
  suitable for the Program/Branch/Office, please
  direct me to appropriate Program Director.
• Ask Program Director if you may
• E-mail abstract or specific aims
• E-mail or telephone to discuss grant mechanism
  and career objectives

9
Before Contacting NCI Program StaffSuggested
Background Reading

• DCCPS Small Grants Websitehttp//cancercontrol.c
  ancer.gov/smallgrants/research_smallgrants
• Current and previously funded grants
• Research Priorities and Examples
• Grant writing tips
• Post review information
• Evaluation Summary of the Small Grants Program
• http//cancercontrol.cancer.gov/smallgrants/NCI_Fi
  nalEvaluation_15Dec05.pdf

10
Getting Started with Electronic Submission
11
Registration

• Grants.gov
• Be sure your organization is registered! (one
  time)
• U.S. organizations obtain EIN from IRS (foreign
  applicants see next slide)
• Request DUNS from Dun Bradstreet
• Register with Central Contractor Registry (CCR)
  identify the eBiz Point of Contact (POC)
• Register the Authorized Organization Reps (AORs)
  who can officially sign the application and
  submit
• Grants.gov registration can take up to 8 weeks.
• START NOW!
• http//www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.js
  p

12
NIH Moves to Electronic Submission and New
Application Form

• SF424 Electronic Application Form
• http//era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/prepare_app

13
The Cornerstone of NCI/NIH Research Funding Peer
Review
14
Dual Review System for Grant Applications

• First Level of Review
• Scientific Review Group (SRG)
• Provides Initial Scientific Merit Review of Grant
  Applications
• Rates Applications and Makes Recommendations for
  Appropriate Level of Support and Duration of Award

• Second Level of Review
• Council
• Assesses Quality of SRG
• Review of Grant Applications
• Makes Recommendation to Institute Staff on
  Funding
• Evaluates Program Priorities and Relevance
• Advises on Policy

15
Core Review Criteria

• Significance
• Investigator(s)
• Innovation
• Approach
• Environment

Weaknesses
16
Review Criteria (effective 1/25/2009)

• Significance Does the project address an
  important problem or a critical barrier to
  progress in the field?  If the aims of the
  project are achieved, how will scientific
  knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical
  practice be improved?  How will successful
  completion of the aims change . . . this field?
• Investigator(s) Are the, PD/PIs, collaborators
  and other researchers well suited to the
  project?  If ESI or NI do they have appropriate
  experience and training?  If established, have
  they demonstrated an ongoing record of
  accomplishments that have advanced their
  field(s)?  If the project is collaborative or
  multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have
  complementary and integrated expertise are their
  leadership approach, governance and
  organizational structure appropriate for the
  project? (Moved from Approach)

Weaknesses
17
Review Criteria (effective 1/25/2009)

• Innovation Does the application challenge and
  seek to shift current research or clinical
  practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical
  concepts, approaches or methodologies,
  instrumentation, or interventions?  Are the
  concepts, approaches or methodologies,
  instrumentation, or interventions novel to one
  field of research or novel in a broad sense?  Is
  a refinement, improvement, or new application of
  theoretical concepts, approaches or
  methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions
  proposed?
• Environment Does the scientific environment
  contribute to the probability of success? Are
  institutional, equipment and other physical
  resources available to the investigators adequate
  for the project proposed?

18
Review Criteria (effective 1/25/2009)

• Approach Are the overall strategy, methodology,
  and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to
  accomplish the specific aims of the project?  Are
  potential problems, alternative strategies, and
  benchmarks for success presented?   If the
  project is in the early stages of development,
  will the strategy establish feasibility and will
  particularly risky aspects be managed? If
  clinical research, are the plans for 1)
  protection of human subjects from research risks,
  and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of
  both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of
  children, justified in terms of the scientific
  goals and research strategy proposed?

19
Additional Review Criteria

• Protections for Human Subjects
• Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
• Vertebrate Animals
• Resubmission Applications
• Renewal Applications
• Revision Applications
• Biohazards

20
Priority Scores/Percentile Rank
Strengths
Weaknesses
21
Action

• Not discussed
• Application is unanimously judged to be in the
  lower half of applications reviewed by the study
  section or scientific review group. No priority
  score is assigned. The summary statement
  provided to the applicant is a compilation of
  reviewers comments prepared prior to the
  meeting.

22
Summary Statement

• Results are documented by SRO in a summary
  statement and forwarded to the PI and the
  assigned NIH Institute or Center for a funding
  decision.
• Summary of review discussion
• Essentially unedited critiques
• Budget recommendations
• Administrative notes
• Priority score and percentile ranking

23
NIH Peer Review Information on the Web

• National Institutes of Health (http//www.nih.gov)
  
• Office of Extramural Research (http//www.nih.gov/
  grants/oer)
• Grants Policy (http//www.nih.gov/grants/policy/po
  licy)
• Electronic Submission (http//era.nih.gov/Electron
  icReceipt) http//enhancing-peer-review.nih.gov/
• Center for Scientific Review (http//www.csr.nih.g
  ov)
• Resources for Applicants (http//www.csr.nih.gov/R
  esourcesforApplicants)
• CSR Study Section Rosters (http//www.csr.nih.gov/
  committees/rosterindex)
• Review Group Meeting Dates (http//www.csr.nih
  .gov/Committees/meetings/ssmeet1)
  

24
Helpful Handouts
Insiders Guide What Happens to
NIH Grant Application to Peer
Review Your Grant Application
Useful Web Links

http//cms.csr.nih.gov/publications/
25
Step-By-Step Grant Help

• Visit DCCPS Funding Opportunities Web section
  for Step-By-Step Grant Help with links to
  learning about
• Resources and opportunities for cancer control
  research funding
• Grant funding mechanisms
• Submission procedures
• Application receipt dates and review timelines
• Peer-review process
• Resources to help develop your idea
• Tips on writing a strong grant application
• Other possible funding sources
• Web site cancercontrol.cancer.gov/funding
  (application information)

26
Thank you

• Small Grants Website
• http//cancercontrol.cancer.gov/smallgrants/
• Final Evaluation Report
• http//cancercontrol.cancer.gov/smallgrants/NCI_F
  inalEvaluation_15Dec05.pdf
• Outcomes Evaluation Study
• http//cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/full/16/
  11/2459

27
Good Luck!

• If at first you dont succeed
• Revise and resubmit.

28
Veronica Chollette, RN, MS Program Director
Applied Cancer Screening Research Branch
Behavioral Research Program Division of Cancer
Control and Population Sciences National Cancer
Institute 6130 Executive Blvd., Room 4100
Rockville, MD 20852 301-435-2837 (voice)
301-480-6637 (fax) vc24a_at_nih.gov (e-mail)
Small Grants Website http//dccps.nci.nih.gov/s
mallgrants/