MSTP grant process

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

wpneuro

Full Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
213
Reaction score
660
One of the schools I interviewed with is not an MSTP, but says they're in the "second stage of the grant process and expect to hear back this year." Since it's pretty standard for schools to claim they're close to getting MSTP funding, is there a way to assess the likelihood of this program gaining MSTP funding? Or regarding MD/PhD programs in general--I checked out the NIH's criteria in the new FOA, but I don't think I picked up much insight that'd be helpful here.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Getting a MD/PhD program to be established, competitive, and have a sustained track record of excellence is a process that takes several years. The T32 MSTP applications are reviewed by a team of "peer" program directors. Even for a new program, they are expecting that some of their trainees matched at research-intensive institutions, have continued to publish during residency, and earned positions as Assistant Professor. Hopefully, some of them have reach out to the stage of being awarded research grants and established themselves as independent investigators. As you can tell, this is a process that takes 20-25 years (from recruiting to Associate Professor outcomes). The truth is that what happened 25 years ago might be unrelated to the current training happening now... but that is the standard (kind of like, "past performance predicts future performance"). As indicated previously in a thread, the NIH launched a new FOA which is in the process of revision at the moment. They indicated release during the Spring 2021. Grants can be submitted any time during the year, reviewed in one of 3 dates and ranked by impact scores, then, the NIGMS council (and program) determine who gets funded and by how many slots based upon the critiques from the study section. You are not given a "stage". However, if your grant was not funded, you can resubmit addressing the critiques (within 3 years). For some, they might perceive that being given a score but not funded as a favorable stage or launching pad for resubmission. If you read the MSTP T32 FOA and scroll down to section V, there are a series of questions about the Scoring Review Criteria... These are the critical questions that you need to be asking as you interview with a program as you examine the quality of the MSTP leadership, Faculty mentors, training environment, etc...

I suspect that this PD is moderately hopeful of their current submission.
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks, that's really insightful!

A follow-up question: is there a location component to the application at all? For example, is it a point in their favor for a program if they were located in an area with no MSTPs (e.g. American Southwest - Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada...) versus in a city that already has multiple MSTPs (e.g. Chicago, NYC, Boston)?
 
Absolutely, location will matter to NIGMS program officers who need to reply to inquiries from congressional staffers (selecting between two proposals with impact scores of 30% vs 32%). However, the primary determinant for funding is the impact score of the study section, which is likely mostly unaffected by program location.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top