Advice on R15 NIH Grant Proposal in a Psy.D. Program

[PSYDNEUROGUY]

I attend a Psy.D. program located in a small private (non-profit) university setting that offers mostly professional programs and a small selection of undergraduate programs. With that being said, my advisor within the neuropsychology concentration has asked me if I would be interested in writing up a proposal for a R15 NIH grant. Roughly speaking, the grant is given to universities/PI's that are non-profit with no prior NIH funded grants who are trying to establish a research environment at said university.

I have read all of the various pages and supporting information to apply for this grant, but my real question is to those who either have applied for such a grant or any other NIH grant for that matter to tell me what I might expect. The R15 grant itself doesn't require preliminary data; for the purposes of our grant application, we are focused on conducting a study on implementing a cognitive rehabilitation treatment strategy in a predominately Hispanic and African American population (South Florida). Without disclosing too much of the specifics, I believe there are significant implications for our proposed study.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[EmotRegulation]

I've applied for an R15, though not gotten one (yet?) and I have a couple of friends with active R15s right now.

Applying for any grant is a lot of work, and the R15 is no different, though the R15 has some additional components of trying to sell how this project will increase the research environment of your institution. Institution often matters with NIH, and they want to know that if you get this grant you will have the resources to be able to carry out the project, and that you'll be able to give research experiences to grad AND undergraduate students who otherwise might not get it.

All that said, I'm not sure of what your question is...."what you might expect" in terms of what? That's a pretty broad/vague question!

 

[PSYDNEUROGUY]

I've applied for an R15, though not gotten one (yet?) and I have a couple of friends with active R15s right now.

Applying for any grant is a lot of work, and the R15 is no different, though the R15 has some additional components of trying to sell how this project will increase the research environment of your institution. Institution often matters with NIH, and they want to know that if you get this grant you will have the resources to be able to carry out the project, and that you'll be able to give research experiences to grad AND undergraduate students who otherwise might not get it.

All that said, I'm not sure of what your question is...."what you might expect" in terms of what? That's a pretty broad/vague question!

Hi there,

Very true, my question is pretty broad, which reflects that I am interested in finding out any possible or notorious obstacles and mistakes people make and encounter when applying for these [NIH] grants. I am also looking at the percentage of those who apply vs. those who are awarded the grant to get some insight overall. Your answer is very insightful in general, so I thank you and appreciate your input. If there's anything else you might want to share or any resources (other than the NIH resources) you would recommend, I am very much open to any and all help/advice.

Thanks again.

 

[Ollie123]

The questions are unfortunately really difficult to answer when they are so vague. Its a little like asking "How do I do science?" I could give you a million different answers/resources and maybe one of them would be useful but maybe not. Grant writing is a skill that takes time to hone. There are an infinite number of possible mistakes that vary from failure to apply a proper statistical correction in your analysis plan to calling your institute director a dingus in the cover letter (don't do either of those, but especially not the latter). I (we) have no way to know which ones are most likely in your case.

The only real advice I can offer is to find someone who knows how to write grants and either bring them on board or ask REALLY REALLY nicely for them to mentor you. I can't imagine going through the process without examples and I still collect sample grants from everyone I know at every opportunity. I don't know the details of the R15 mechanism, but a well-established co-investigator at a very research-heavy institution might be helpful to have as a co-investigator or consultant on the project if its allowed in that mechanism. Mentorship on these things is key, so if you haven't written a grant and the person you are working with hasn't written a grant...its very unlikely this is going to be a successful grant. Success rates vary by mechanism, but can be as low as 5% (NCI R01's). They should be available on the NIH website. If your institution has your back on this and they are really pushing for increasing their research standing, perhaps they would be willing to cough up a few thousand dollars for a consultant or to send your application to one of the external 3rd party agencies that will "pre-review" applications and provide feedback for a fee. There are a lot of scammers and shoddy services out there, so make sure to do your homework on that end.

Good luck! Walk into it knowing that the odds are always slim and that persistence pays off. Most of us at large research institutes are submitting many, many grants each year in the hopes that even a couple will stick. So don't put all your eggs in one basket.

 

[entitlement]

What Ollie123 and others have stated is sound advice. I'd also add to do a search on the NIH Reporter website for active R15s through the particular IC(s) you are considering. It will provide you with a bunch of useful information including:

1) Topics typically funded through this mechanism
2) PIs who have been successful at acquiring funding. You may find a PI nearby who may be willing to speak to you and/or who you could write into your grant as a consultant.

Also, NIH Reporter has all the funding statistics (e.g., percentage of successfully funded apps) that you are looking for.

Once you narrow down a potential IC(s), put together a project summary/aims page (no more than a page or less), and figure out who the PO is at that particular IC(s). Send them an email and/or phone call, and talk to them about whether their particular IC is a good fit for your proposal. Judging from the brief description you provided above, NIMHD could be a good fit (although check NIMHD's page - they historically have not had the R15 mechanism but in the last few years there have been some R15 announcements I've come across. Double-check that these are still active and good fits for your project).

 

[MCParent]

The only real advice I can offer is to find someone who knows how to write grants and either bring them on board or ask REALLY REALLY nicely for them to mentor you.

This is my advice too. You NEED a funded mentor on the project, ideally from the get-go.

 

[PSYDNEUROGUY]

The questions are unfortunately really difficult to answer when they are so vague. Its a little like asking "How do I do science?" I could give you a million different answers/resources and maybe one of them would be useful but maybe not. Grant writing is a skill that takes time to hone. There are an infinite number of possible mistakes that vary from failure to apply a proper statistical correction in your analysis plan to calling your institute director a dingus in the cover letter (don't do either of those, but especially not the latter). I (we) have no way to know which ones are most likely in your case.

The only real advice I can offer is to find someone who knows how to write grants and either bring them on board or ask REALLY REALLY nicely for them to mentor you. I can't imagine going through the process without examples and I still collect sample grants from everyone I know at every opportunity. I don't know the details of the R15 mechanism, but a well-established co-investigator at a very research-heavy institution might be helpful to have as a co-investigator or consultant on the project if its allowed in that mechanism. Mentorship on these things is key, so if you haven't written a grant and the person you are working with hasn't written a grant...its very unlikely this is going to be a successful grant. Success rates vary by mechanism, but can be as low as 5% (NCI R01's). They should be available on the NIH website. If your institution has your back on this and they are really pushing for increasing their research standing, perhaps they would be willing to cough up a few thousand dollars for a consultant or to send your application to one of the external 3rd party agencies that will "pre-review" applications and provide feedback for a fee. There are a lot of scammers and shoddy services out there, so make sure to do your homework on that end.

Good luck! Walk into it knowing that the odds are always slim and that persistence pays off. Most of us at large research institutes are submitting many, many grants each year in the hopes that even a couple will stick. So don't put all your eggs in one basket.

Thanks Ollie for the insight; I have other faculty members who I think have had experience applying for and possibly even successfully been awarded some type of grant in the past. We are thinking that we might collaborate with two other larger institutions in the area (one is a well known public university and the other is a medical center here in Miami) so that we can increase our chances of getting the grant. I will be meeting in the next couple of weeks with my PI after I've reviewed more of the literature on our study and how we will operationalize it, so I will have a better idea of our plan of action going forward.

What Ollie123 and others have stated is sound advice. I'd also add to do a search on the NIH Reporter website for active R15s through the particular IC(s) you are considering. It will provide you with a bunch of useful information including:

1) Topics typically funded through this mechanism
2) PIs who have been successful at acquiring funding. You may find a PI nearby who may be willing to speak to you and/or who you could write into your grant as a consultant.

Also, NIH Reporter has all the funding statistics (e.g., percentage of successfully funded apps) that you are looking for.

Once you narrow down a potential IC(s), put together a project summary/aims page (no more than a page or less), and figure out who the PO is at that particular IC(s). Send them an email and/or phone call, and talk to them about whether their particular IC is a good fit for your proposal. Judging from the brief description you provided above, NIMHD could be a good fit (although check NIMHD's page - they historically have not had the R15 mechanism but in the last few years there have been some R15 announcements I've come across. Double-check that these are still active and good fits for your project).

This is great information; this was the type of stuff I was going after but didn't know existed (that may sound stupid, but it is what it is).

This is my advice too. You NEED a funded mentor on the project, ideally from the get-go.

This would certainly be most ideal, but at the moment, we have to work with what we have. It's exciting to be part of a process that will help grow our program and university, no matter the outcome, this will be a process that not too many people get to go through, especially in Psy.D. programs.

Thanks again everybody for your input, every little bit helps.

 

[MCParent]

This would certainly be most ideal, but at the moment, we have to work with what we have. It's exciting to be part of a process that will help grow our program and university, no matter the outcome, this will be a process that not too many people get to go through, especially in Psy.D. programs.

Then find someone not in the program who can be on the grant as a consultant, and is NIH funded. It's not "ideal," it's mandatory if you want it. i.e., my first sub on a small grant, I got dinged for feasibility.... to collect data from a population I've already published data on. With a mentor, last revision went way smoother.

 

[str63]

Then find someone not in the program who can be on the grant as a consultant, and is NIH funded. It's not "ideal," it's mandatory if you want it. i.e., my first sub on a small grant, I got dinged for feasibility.... to collect data from a population I've already published data on. With a mentor, last revision went way smoother.

I completely agree. You are not going to be considered if you do not have someone on your team who is grant funded. If there's nobody at your institution, recruit someone from a different place with very similar research experience and a history of NIH grant funding. If you don't have this, there is an extremely high likelihood of rejection. It would be awful to spent all that time and energy in developing a grant that does not stand a chance.

 

[PSYDNEUROGUY]

Hi all,

Then find someone not in the program who can be on the grant as a consultant, and is NIH funded. It's not "ideal," it's mandatory if you want it. i.e., my first sub on a small grant, I got dinged for feasibility.... to collect data from a population I've already published data on. With a mentor, last revision went way smoother.

Apologies, for some reason I interpreted it as something different; we will be collaborating and having other contributors from the other institutions I was speaking of as co-PI's in order to apply for this grant (who have been funded), that much I know. Going from that point, I will check back in when we know more.