Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Career Development Awards

Tracy L. Rankin, Ph.DProgram Director

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases

Paving the way to academic independence

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Training and Career Programs

F30 MD/PhD students

T32 for pre-docs

Diversity F31

T32 post-docs

F32 post-docs

K01

K08 K23

T35 short-term training

for med students

K99/R00Career Development Awards

NRSAs

LRP

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Transition to faculty:  K awards

• K01 – Ph.D. w/in 3 – 5 years of doctorate

• K08 – M.D. proposing basic research

• K23 – M.D. proposing clinical research

• K25 – doctorate in quantitative science, proposing biomedical research

• K24 – mid‐career mentor for physicians

• K99/R00 – Pathway to Independence; only option available to non‐US citizens

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

• Within 5 yrs of terminal doctorate (4 yrs as of 2014)

• Post‐doctoral fellow/non‐independent

• Close to independence

• Mature research plan

• Initiating job search within a 1‐2 years

• Non‐citizen

• Within 5 yrs of terminal doctorate (4 yrs as of 2014)

• Post‐doctoral fellow/non‐independent

• Close to independence

• Mature research plan

• Initiating job search within a 1‐2 years

• Non‐citizen

• Need longer period of protected time to develop research program/skills

• Clinician beginning research endeavors

• Basic scientist needing up to five more years of mentored support

• Need longer period of protected time to develop research program/skills

• Clinician beginning research endeavors

• Basic scientist needing up to five more years of mentored support

K99K

K99 v “regular” K

Eligible ≠A i

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Elements of a K proposal

• Candidate 

• Career development plan

• Institutional commitment and sponsor’s letters

• Mentoring team

• Research plan

• Other stuff‐‐animals, HS, budget, etc…

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Candidate• Who are you and why are you here?

– Institutional position title not really important—see FB post January 20th.

– General science background

– Why interested in this area of research?

– Any particular/special influences, personal or professional, that brought you to academics?

– Be direct, succinct, but not afraid of some self‐promotion!

– Can use personal statement in biographical sketch to detail any extenuating circumstances

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Career Development Plans

• No set formula• Should be tailored to address your specific needs and goals—think personal strategic plan

• Should be more than the usual routine– Coursework, if necessary– Grant‐writing workshops/professional development– Others

• Your plan should agree with your mentor’s plans for you!

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Choice of mentor

• Available; Interest 

• Personality, emotional needs, work habits– Do you prefer praise and positive feedback?

– Do you need rapid feedback?

– Someone of same race/gender/background? 

• Track record of mentor; current funding

• Concept of negative mentor—poor fit; neglectful; taking credit for mentee’s work

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Mentoring Team

• Track record of successful mentoring and research

• Committed to you & your career goals

• He/she need not be your research advisor

• More than one is OK! 

• Should have $$ (mostly important for 1o)

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Institutional commitment

• Should come from Dean/department chair

• To your time (explicitly stated for clinicians)

• To your professional development

• To your research efforts

• Mentor’s letters should provide equal support and be consistent with CDP

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Research Strategy

• Specific Aims– Critical!  Concise one‐pager and may be the only part of the proposal most of the reviewers read

• Significance and Innovation

• Approach

• Etc….

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Research Plan, con’t

• FOCUS

• Clear statement of testable hypothesis– Not so good:  “we hypothesize that testosterone is critical for spermatogenesis”

– Better:  “we predict that testosterone promotes the progression of germ cells through meiosis via a testosterone‐dependent, non‐genomic pathway mediated by src kinase”

• Specific aims support/refute question

• Did I mention focus?

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Significance and Innovation

• Sets the stage‐‐get the reviewers “out of bed.” Do not write it as a review article

• The overall research question should pass the So What? Test.  Just because something is “not known”doesn’t necessarily make it significant.

• Highlight controversies and critical gaps and how they will be addressed by the proposed experiments

• A visual model can help—particularly basic, mechanistic studies

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Preliminary Data

• Relevant to proposed research plan

• Demonstrate feasibility/availability of resources and critical reagents

• Incorporating into relevant Aim in Research Strategy is useful

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Approach

• The easy part!  Just fill‐in the blanks!

• No need for gory details 

• Present expected/alternative outcomes and interpretations

• Consider not only technical pitfalls and alternatives, but conceptual ones as well (what if I’m wrong?)

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Etc…

• Do not give these sections short shift!!

• Animals:  address all five points, particularly numbers needed (power analyses)

• Human subjects:  pay attention to inclusion of gender/minority/children

• Biohazards:  don’t forget!

• Monitoring plans:  required for Phase III.

• Best reference is the 424 Instruction Guide

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)

• Not considered in assigning an overall impact score, but will hold up award if “unacceptable”

• Must explicitly address each element described in NOT‐10‐019– Format

– Subject matter

– Faculty participation

– Duration

– Frequency

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

K review criteria

• The candidate: your background and potential to develop into an independent researcher 

• Career development plan: its components & how well it fits the research plan

• Research plan: its scientific merit, significance, feasibility & relationship to your career plans

• The mentor/mentorship team: his/her track record as both a researcher and mentor

• Institutional environment & commitment to the training/career development of the candidate

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Score Descriptor Additional Guidance on Strengths/Weaknesses

1 Exceptional Exceptionally strong with essentially no weaknesses

2 Outstanding Extremely strong with negligible weaknesses

3 Excellent Very strong with only some minor weaknesses

4 Very Good Strong but with numerous minor weaknesses

5 Good Strong but with at least one moderate weakness

6 Satisfactory Some strengths but also some moderate weaknesses

7 Fair Some strengths but with at least one major weakness

8 Marginal A few strengths and a few major weaknesses

9 Poor Very few strengths and numerous major weaknesses

Minor Weakness: An easily addressable weakness that does not substantially lessen impactModerate Weakness: A weakness that lessens impactMajor Weakness: A weakness that severely limits impact

Scoring DescriptionsScoring Descriptions

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Resources• NIH Guide:  subscribe to weekly digest

• NIH RePORT

• IC Program Officers:  call early, not too often ☺

• KUH Trainee FB page:  http://www.facebook.com/NIDDKKUHtrainee

• Grant writing tips (NIAID):  http://funding.niaid.nih.gov/researchfunding/grant/pages/aag.aspx

Tracy Rankin, NIH, 2013

Resources, con’t

• CSR website:  http://cms.csr.nih.gov/

• New Investigator page:  http://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/index.htm

• Mentors and colleagues

• Professional societies