March 6, 2020 • 45 mins
Learn how NINDS monitors grant performance from Program Directors Drs. Jane Fountain and Michael Oshinsky and Health Program Specialist Dr. Emily Carifi.
Building Up the Nerve is a podcast from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke for neuroscience trainees that takes you through the life cycle of a grant from idea to award at NINDS with the people who make it happen. We know that applying for NIH funding can be daunting, but we’re here to help—it’s our job!
This episode has been edited since its original publication.
Transcript: http://ninds.buzzsprout.com/558574/2896012-episode-11-monitoring-grant-performance
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Lauren Ullrich (00:02):
Welcome to the National Institute of
Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
Building up the nerve, a podcastfor neuroscience trainees that takes
you through the life cycle of agrant from idea to award at NINDS
with the people who make it happen.
We know that applying forNIH funding can be daunting.
But we're here to help.
It's our job.
Marguerite Matthews (00:22):
Hello, I'm Marguerite Matthews, a health
program specialist at NINDS.
Lauren (00:25):
And I'm Lauren Ullrich, a scientific program manager at NINDS
and we're your hosts for this episode.
So last time we discussed theissuance of the grant award and
how to read a notice of award.
Marguerite M (00:37):
Now we're going to talk about monitoring grant performance.
How does NINDS keep track of whatresearchers are doing with their
funding and ensure we are responsiblestewards of taxpayer money?
Laur (00:49):
As always, I want to state the disclaimer that everything we talk
about may only be relevant for NINDS.
So if you're applying to a differentNIH institute, it's always best to
check with them about their policies.
Marguerite Matthews (01:04):
In joining us for today's episode are Dr Jane
Fountain a program director in theneural environment cluster, Dr Michael
Oshinsky, a program director in theSystems and Cognitive Neuroscience
cluster, and Dr Emily Carifi, a programspecialist in the neurogenetics cluster.
So can each of you introduce yourselves?
Jane Fountain (01:26):
Hi, My name's Jane Fountain.
I'm in the neural environment cluster.
I oversee the brain tumor grant portfolio.
This portfolio is shared between NINDSand NCI, so have a lot of interactions
with the staff over on the NCI side.
And overall, I would say, NINDSoversees about 20% of the brain
(01:46):
tumor grant portfolio at NIH.
So I've worked at NINDSfor almost 15 years now.
I was previously at NCI for fiveyears, and before that I was
an associate professor at theUniversity of Southern California.
Um, I have three teenagers, soI think that's enough said right
(02:06):
there about what I do outside work.
One's been in college for one monthnow, so last year was a full time job
just figuring out where she was goingto college, and the other two are
16 and have their driver's permits--
Lauren Ullrich (02:20):
uh-oh
Jane Fountai (02:20):
so I spend most of my time in the passenger seat--
Marguerit (02:23):
scared for your life?
Jane (02:25):
--White-knuckled, telling my son to apply the brake more often.
Michael O (02:30):
I'm Michael Oshinsky.
I'm the program director for painand migraine research at NINDS.
I've had been with NIH since Augustof 2014, so that's about five years.
And before I came to NIH, I was facultyat Thomas Jefferson University for 14
(02:50):
years.
Emily Carifi (02:51):
Hi, Emily Carifi, I'm a health program
specialist, neurogenetics cluster.
I support two program directors, onewho is responsible for basic fundamental
neuroscience, Dr Bob Riddle, and Dr GlennKnuckles, who has the muscular dystrophy
and spinal muscular atrophy, CMT andother, well, both neurodegenerative
(03:13):
and neurodevelopmental disorders.
I've been here about three years.
I was a post doc in the NINDSintramural program before I got here.
Hobbies, I don't have time for thembecause I have two,very young children.
Lauren Ullrich (03:36):
Last episode sort of ended right at the
issuance of the notice of award.
So once the applicant has theiraward, what do they need to know?
Jane (03:46):
So the first thing I would say is, keep an open dialogue with us.
So often times we're working withapplicants a lot, frequently, up until
they submit their first application.
Then it goes through review, they get apromising or meritorious score, they get
the application and they sort of go away.
Or maybe they feel that ourinteraction has now ended.
(04:06):
It's actually, in most cases, just begun,because we're potentially going to be
engaged with this junior investigatorfor maybe their entire career.
So just keep an open dialogue, I think.
With changes or any questions thatyou have and if we can't personally
answer them, we're gonna eitherfind out the answer ourselves or
direct you to somebody who can.
Michael Osh (04:27):
I completely agree.
Contact program.
You know, once you get your award, itcould be just to hear congratulations
for us, and that's good, too, that'sthe beginning of the dialogue.
But there are lots of questions you'regoing to have, and reaching out to
people in your institution is good.
But also it's good to bounce thosethings that you're going to do based on
(04:48):
that guidance off your program officer.
Working with program staff can help you atall stages of your career, not just before
your first application is accepted, butalso every junction point going from early
career to midcareer to your first renewal.
Everything there, we can help you with.
And it's our job to do that.
(05:08):
We're happy to do it.
Marguerite Matt (05:09):
What do program officers and grant specialists
do to monitor grant performance?
Michael Oshinsky (05:14):
So we do monitor publications.
We read the literature just like you do.
We're very involved in the portfoliosthat we're responsible for, and not only
seeing the publications that you put inyour progress report, which we'll read
each year after you put that together, butalso following the publications because
there's certain journals in our fieldsof expertise that we read regularly.
(05:38):
We also get notified of press releasesthat are put out associated with
your publications, and we see those.
And we go to meetings, too, and we'llwalk by your poster and speak to your
graduate students or your postdocswhile they're presenting it and hear
what's the next stage of the experimentsand maybe make some comments on the
(05:58):
data that you're presenting there.
So progress reports, publications, pressreleases and going to meetings, watching
your talks and seeing your posters.
Lauren Ullrich (06:08):
And you can also come to us at a lot of meetings.
If we have a booth, like at societyfor neuroscience, there's an entire
NIH booth where program directorshave basically office hours.
So if you don't necessarily have arelationship with them yet, that's a
good place to to meet and have a chat.
Michael Oshinsky (06:25):
So find that sign up sheet and sign up because
the slots fill really quickly.
Emily Carifi (06:30):
Also I know the Gordon Research Conferences often
have a NIH program directors andI have done lunch and learns.
So attend these sessions, the great forthe more informal questions at any stage.
Lauren Ull (06:48):
So, Michael, I think you mentioned the progress report,
which is now called the ResearchPerformance Progress Report or RPPR.
What is the RPPR and what kindsof things are required in that?
Michael Oshinsky (07:01):
So each year, you're required to report on
the progress of your award.
Now that has multiple components.
One part of it is gonna be filledout by your institutional signing
official and the budget officials,and that's gonna be associated with
the financial part of the grant.
There's a scientific portion of theprogress of your grant that you're
(07:23):
going to have to report yourself.
There's many different ways you canbreak that down to give us a good
feel for the work that you've donein the last reporting period, which
is usually the last year and howthat progress is being communicated
to the greater scientific community.
So one part of that, it could bebreaking it up into your specific
(07:46):
aims and telling us the progressof the experiments in there.
And it could be this didn'twork, that didn't work, and
the other thing didn't work.
All of that is really helpful.
Please do not just give us a list of yourpublications and say all my data is there.
That's not a good progress report.
A good progress report is a dialogueof what's been going on in the previous
(08:09):
year, broken up in some format thatwe can evaluate about whether or
not you're working on only a partof the grant, or whether or not
you made progress in multiple partsof the grant in the previous year.
Then there's a formal part of the progressreport where you report your publications
and your progress in communicating themthrough NIH's formal system of making
(08:33):
data public, which is called a publicaccess, right, NIH public access.
And it's a database for that.
Jane do you want to add?
Jane Fountain (08:41):
So I just want to say in the progress report, the main
thing I'm looking for is a coupleparagraphs that very concisely tell
me what you did in the past year.
Similar to what Michael said, things thatwent well, things that didn't go well,
if the project is steering in a differentcourse, that's what I want to see there.
I do not want to see any part ofthe original application cut and
pasted into the progress report.
(09:01):
I do not want to see any progressreport from the past, cut and pasted
into the current progress report.
Michael (09:07):
Please do not do that.
We do remember.
Jane Fountain (09:09):
And I do not want to see just figures sort of taken
from a publication and put intothe progress report with no text.
So take it seriously.
It is taxpayers' money.
It's a reasonable chunk of changethat everybody is getting on
their grants or their fellowships.
And just spend an hour or twoessentially writing down what
you've done for that year.
(09:29):
I think it might also be very helpfulfor discussions that you have with
your mentors or colleagues as far asif you have individual performance
plans and things like that, you canuse the progress report, just sort of
document what you've done that year.
And then, lastly, if you are getting aPhD, working towards a degree, I sort of
want to see a little bit of informationon where you are, when you anticipate
(09:52):
you're gonna graduate, you know, whenyou anticipate you're going to get
your first 1st author publication out.
All those things are really importantto us to just assess where you
are at this stage in the game.
Michael Oshinsky (10:03):
And that dialogue is really helpful.
It should be reporting whathappens--what has happened in
the previous year in a narrativeform, or it could be bullets, too.
Now, what I'm afraid that some peopledo is that they copy and paste, as Jane
mentioned from their publications, and itbecomes really mired in individual details
(10:27):
of the project, which are exciting,don't don't get me wrong and important,
but we're really looking for an overallgestalt view of what's happened during the
previous year in the progress you made.
If there is a key piece of data thatyou want to communicate to us, feel
free to put one or two figures in there.
We're excited about thescience, too, we're scientists.
Emily Car (10:47):
Something you haven't mentioned is
clearly the most important part,many of the people who hopefully
are listening are trainees, and theyhave an additional requirement to
put in the career development they'regetting from their institution.
And when I do, um, the first pass,because I'm not a program director, so
I do (11:09):
"Are there any red flags?" first is
That's the most time where Isee no new information from
application to progress report.
And it is your institution'srequirement to train you.
So make sure that that is also updated.
That if you're getting responsibleresearch conduct training and if
(11:31):
you've attended a class or you'vegone to a training, put that in, too.
It's not great just to see, again, whatyou put into your application which is at
this point probably 18 months out of date.
Michael Oshi (11:44):
For those mentored training awards, there's also a component
from the mentor, and that mentor letterwe always look closely at, too, and
it should clearly say how often thatmentor is interacting with the trainee.
And it could be once a week, and youknow, that you presented the data, or
(12:05):
once a month that the data is presentedat the lab meeting, something like that.
That's one of the things I'm looking for.
And then, you know, I'm also lookingfor details of the mentor commenting
on the skills that are being acquiredby the mentee and not just the data.
(12:25):
Almost every letter says the experimentsare going really great, they presented
at a meeting, which is nice to see, also;we can see that in other parts there.
But some of the interpretationof the progress should be
reported in that mentee letter.
Marguerite Ma (12:41):
What would happen if there is not a lot of progress
happening in the career development?
Maybe there seems to be a bit of, um,a delay or perhaps that trainee is
actually not getting the mentoringor the training that they need.
How should that beconveyed to program staff?
Jane Fountain (13:00):
So I guess it depends on how serious it is.
If there's a really serious issuewhere the trainee feels like they are
not moving forward, they should have aphone conversation with us, and we're
going to try to see if there's a way forthem to move forward in their current
situation or we're going to encouragethem to move to a new laboratory.
(13:23):
If it's just like the fact that theproject is not panning out as they
originally proposed, that can be detailedin the progress report and just tell
us sort of what's the new direction?
And if it's really differentthan the specific aims that were
originally proposed, we need somerevised specific aims, and they do
need to get sort of prior approvalto really change the specific aims.
(13:46):
That's one thing that you should contactyour program director--if the project
has changed substantially--to discusswhat the new aims are and to make sure
that they appear to still be in scope.
Michael Oshins (13:58):
If you have some question about whether or not a new
direction you want to go in is withinscope of the grant, you can reach out to
us, not just at the time of the progressreport but even anytime during the year.
Let me give you some hints forhow to communicate with program.
First of all, don't call us first.
Margu (14:17):
[Laughter] no cold calls.
Jane Fountain (14:17):
Yes, exactly, no cold calls.
Michael Oshinsk (14:19):
Well, it's just really hard to fit into our schedules
because they're usually pretty booked.
A much better way to communicate with usis to send us an email, short paragraph,
a few sentences, "I'd like to discussX, Y or Z." Maybe have an attachment
if there's some document we would likeus to review before we discuss it.
(14:40):
And you say, "Is there a time that wecould talk?" if that's what you think is
needed, or just an answer to a question.
Now, if you have 10 questions or 15questions, it's gonna be difficult to
answer all of those in an email, allright, and if we do talk, we'll probably
narrow it down on which of the mostimportant ones to fit into that half hour.
But (15:02):
to send us an email, short summary of what you'll need, and
then ask us for a time to talk.
And then including something that'swritten in order for us to evaluate, if
there's gonna be a change of aims or ifyou want us to know if an idea for a grant
is a good idea to put it in, the way tocommunicate with us is really not your
(15:25):
abstract, it's your specific aims page.
That's the meat of your grant.
That's the one page that summarizesall the activities that you want to
do and maybe even discuss some of thetechniques and the rationale for them.
So you know that's you know, frommy perspective, the most important
document to communicate your scientificideas and what you want to do next
(15:45):
is in the form of specific aims page.
Lauren Ullric (15:47):
So, Jane, you had mentioned that, you know, if the
lab situation, it's just not workingout, something needs to change.
But they are on an F31.
The student has fundingfor a specific project.
Maybe they feel like now they haveto do that project with that mentor.
But is there a way for trainees toswitch labs or switch institutions?
(16:09):
And how does that process work?
Jane Foun (16:10):
So that's a very rare circumstance to begin with, when F31
would change a lab or institution.
Usually what I would do internally firstis I would go and talk to the training
office and, um who are the folks here,and we would discuss the situation and
sort of together, come up with someguidance for the trainee and make a
(16:33):
decision how to handle the situation.
We might also reach out to the mentor.
That's, of course, dependent onwhat's going on with the trainee.
The trainee may be uncomfortablewith us reaching out to the mentor.
So we try to be sensitiveto all situations in helping
resolve whatever the issue is.
And you can ultimately potentiallytransfer labs, though I have to
(16:57):
say, personally, I have not dealtwith a situation where I've had an
F move to another lab, have you?
Michael Oshinsky (17:03):
Yeah, so I do have experience with that.
So the idea I want to get out thereis: if you're in a situation where
you feel trapped and you're worriedabout your career moving forward and
it's not a good place, you shouldknow you're not trapped, okay?
There are options for you to move todifferent labs, your grant can move.
If it's an individual F31 orif you're on a T grant, a T32
(17:27):
or something, it can happen.
And if you don't feel comfortableinitially going through your
chair or the head of your graduateprogram, you can contact us.
But I will recommend you doreach out to those first.
It doesn't have to be evensomebody in your own department.
(17:48):
Usually your university has anombudsperson or a trainee office that
might be a little bit separate fromthe situation, and you can say, "Hey,
you know this isn't working out, youknow, is there a possibility to move?"
If they tell you no, that's the wronginformation, but they can help you
(18:09):
mediate internally how to do that.
I had a graduate student who neededto move from one lab to another and
they moved into my lab, and they hadjust had awarded an F31 from another
institute than--it was different thanthe institute that I had my R01 in and
we worked with the program officer,wrote up a new set of specific aims that
(18:29):
were, not exactly in scope, but closeenough, and they had them internally
reviewed through program and the graduatestudent moved into my lab, and now she's
faculty, you know, she really movedalong in her career, so it can happen.
It can't happen.
And there's a whole slew ofreasons why people move from a lab.
It might be the funding level in that lab.
(18:52):
Or it might be a personal interaction.
There's just a huge numberof things you're not trapped.
Just know that you're not trapped.
Marguerite Matthe (18:57):
So just to go back a little bit, so say things are
going fine training-wise, but as wesort of mentioned a little bit before,
the project may have taken a differentturn or needs to take a different turn
because it's not, um, very fruitful, orit just seems that things might not work.
How should an awardee deal withchanging the direction of a project?
(19:19):
Do they have to complete the work thatthey mentioned in their specific aims?
Do they need to apply for a new grant?
What should happen?
Jane Fountain (19:26):
So they should contact us as soon as possible.
So just a quick email and says, youknow, this is what my project was on,
this is where it's headed right now.
Before they submit a progress report wherethere's a publication that doesn't make
sense, given what the science is on or youhave something in the public domain, too.
We're all sort of social media freaksnow, so you have something in the public
(19:49):
domain that doesn't make sense either.
So you shouldn't be being trainedon sort of one topic, but yet
have some other public postingthat suggests you're involved in
a completely different activity.
So it's better to tell usbefore things get to that point.
We're flexible.
I think that's what people don'tunderstand on the outside is they
(20:12):
think that we're not flexible, and ourmain job is to figure out, like how
to take the grant back away from you.
Marguerite Matthews (20:18):
Right?
Like we're ogres under a bridge.
Jane Fountain (20:21):
That's not what we're trying to do.
We're trying to figure out whateveris reasonable is sort of common sense.
We're gonna move forward with helping you,you know, change your aims so that you
are going to end up being a successfulscientist and you're gonna graduate.
You're going to get on tothe next step in your career.
Michael Osh (20:36):
The perception from outside is that NIH is a black box.
I look at one of my goals asbeing a program director is
really making that box clear.
You should know how wemake decisions here.
You should know what type of informationwe could give you that can really
help you move your career forwardand help you with your grants.
We are here to help.
We're here to serve thescientific community.
(20:58):
We're not a regulatory agency.
They're our regulatory agenciesthat do oversee science.
There's OLAW, there's FDA,there's the CDC, these are
making regulations and oversight.
Whereas we are promoting thescience, that's our perspective.
Marguerite Matthe (21:13):
That's great.
I like that we'repromoting science at NIH.
Lauren Ullrich (21:17):
So what about if an awardee has more mundane
questions, like, if something isallowable in the budget or not.
I think especially in the trainingsphere, there are sometimes restrictions
on what the money can be used for.
So if they have questions aboutthat, who should they go to?
Jane Fountai (21:37):
I think you should always start with your program director,
so I'm thinking of this situationwith Ks where you get a stipend and
that sort of a separate bucket offunds from the research dollars.
So again, start with the programdirector if the program directors
unable to answer your question, they'regonna pull in the grants management
specialist or somebody from thetraining office who can help address
(22:00):
the policy issue that your question is.
Michael Osh (22:03):
So don't think that you're just being kicked around if your
email is forwarded to somebody else.
What we're doing thereis not passing the buck.
We're trying to get you correctinformation that is most up
to date and accurate, okay?
So if you need some information,don't wait till the last possible
minute and give it some time for thoseemails to move around through several
(22:26):
individuals because NIH is a very biginstitution with lots of rules and
lots of different, different programs.
And it's hard for each program directorbe an expert in each one of them.
But our job is to really findthe information for you and to
connect you to the right person.
Emily Ca (22:43):
I would like to add as a health program specialist, I'm not a
program director, so my name is nowhere.
You will not be able to find me.
I might be in the staff directory.
If you get an email from yourprogram director and there's a
couple more people cc'd, reply all.
Because I have morebandwidth on a given day.
(23:05):
So if it's a quick question that I dohave the expertise to answer, I will
move it forward, probably more quickly.
But if you don't reply all, I don'tsee it until my program director goes,
"Hey, Emily, Can you handle this?"So I know, generally don't reply all.
This is the one case.
Go ahead, let your questions goto all the people on that email.
Michael Oshinsky (23:31):
I want to, you know, ditto that, because there's
so many times where I add peopleto the emails and just do a reply.
Sometimes it's just that I'm replyingfrom my phone because it is a
particular issue that needs a quickreply and on my phone, I'm not able
to track all the information down.
So I'll do a reply, adding people'snames, and I know that I have support and
(23:57):
other experts here at NIH, like Emily,that I'll add to the grant and I know
that they'll see it and answer it, okay?
Marguerite (24:04):
That's great advice.
Lauren Ull (24:05):
Does one of you want to talk about the resources that might
be available at the institution toanswer questions about grant policies?
Michael Oshins (24:15):
Sure, so at your institution, in addition to your mentor,
who will be the person and hopefully youbuild that relationship so that you can
ask them on a daily basis if you havequestions, you can just pop into their
office and ask them questions; theymight not have the all of the answers,
especially when it comes to budgetaryissues or what's allowable on grants.
(24:37):
So you should know that in yourinstitution there is a grants
management office there also.
It might be an Office ofResearch Administration, it
might have different names.
But in that office, there is aninstitutional signing official, who is
usually a director, you don't necessarilyhave to reach out to them first, but you
can, if you don't know where the officeis, and they'll connect you to the people
(25:02):
that are in your Office of ResearchAdministration or grants management
office that are responsible for the grantsfrom your department or your division
or your school inside your university,and they're the ones that directly
communicate with the budgetary and grantmanagement people at NIH or at NINDS.
(25:23):
So they have an interaction with therules and regulations and as they're
changing much more than your PI does.
Your PI is really focused on thescience and the business official
or the signing official dealswith those business aspects.
There's no reason why you can't reachout to those, especially if you approach
(25:45):
your PI and they don't have the answer,but feel free to say to them, "Hey, Dr.
Such and Such, I need this, you know,particular information." And they say,
"I'm not sure I have that," you canask the question, "Is there somebody
in the grants management or the officerresearch administration that you work
with that I can send this email to?"That would be a good way to address it.
Marguerite Matthews (26:04):
So a lot of research awards allow for administrative
supplements to an already awarded grant.
Can you tell us about administrativesupplements and what they're used for?
Jane Fo (26:16):
We don't usually give a lot of supplements to Ks, no supplements
to Fs, Ts, maybe a couple, but thatwould be the director of the T32 grant.
So mostly with our R01s, ouradministrative supplements or somewhat
restricted to emergency sort ofsituations, like you have a piece
of equipment that has broken down oryou have a mouse colony that's died
(26:41):
or you've had a flood, somethinglike that, that's impacted your
ability to even do research at all.
We don't generally consider supplementsfor just essentially augmenting the
science that you're already doing.
And we do tend to get requestsfor supplements like that a lot.
If we gave out those types ofsupplements our pay line, to be
(27:04):
quite honest, would go down prettyrapidly because everybody wants one.
Everybody would apply for one.
Michael Oshinsky (27:11):
There are other types of supplements other
than administrative supplements.
What Jane was just referring to areadministrative supplements on the R
grants, on the R01s, R21s, et cetera.
Sometimes there are institutes or officesat NIH puts out a request for supplements
on a particular topic, like the Office ofResearch on Women's Health sometimes puts
(27:34):
out supplements to add female animals oraddressing sex as a biological variable
in experiments that weren't specificallyaddressing those questions earlier.
So there were different types ofsupplements that have a formal application
process and a request for those proposals.
(27:55):
Adding those type of experimentsto an ongoing project would not go
through the administrative supplementrequest or funding announcement.
Those would be specific announcementsthat were published on grants.gov,
and you can search them out,um, and then find them that way.
Another great idea, if you're notcurrently on this email subscription
(28:17):
list for grants.gov, it's just anotheremail that comes in your box once a week
or several times a month, but as thenew funding announcements are published
and there are just a few every week,you get to see them in your email box
right when they're published, and thenyou get to just take a glance at them
(28:38):
and see whether or not they're pertinentfor your research and click on them.
Otherwise, there's really noway to find out about them other
than being on that email list.
Lauren Ullrich (28:45):
Right.
And you can subscribe through theNIH Guide if there are specific
keywords that you're interested in,or if you're interested in just all
the FOAs that a specific institutepublishes because you know you're
never gonna apply to, NCI, for example,and so you just want to know about
NINDS-published things or NIH-wide things
Michael Oshinsky (29:06):
or just the neuroscience institutes
Lauren Ull (29:07):
or just neuroscience institutes, exactly, so you can
subscribe to keywords, to specificmechanisms, there's a lot of different
options, and it's a great resource.
Jane Fountai (29:18):
So with the parent supplement sort of solicitation,
we now have a new form of sort ofnotice is called NOSIs, notices of
special interest, and those can beassociated with parent requests.
So in those cases, if you'reapplying to a special like NOSI,
(29:39):
you want to make absolutely surein box 4B of the application that
you put the notice number in there.
If you don't, then we can't internallytrack your submission as associated
with that NOSI, and it will not beconsidered for funding or go through
the appropriate review process.
(30:00):
So I just wanted to say that'sa new kind of nuance to our
notice and supplement system.
Michael Oshinsky (30:07):
You don't have to hit rewind on the podcast.
It's box 4B, okay?
Lauren Ullri (30:12):
Yeah, I think that kind of alludes to something that has
been a bit of a theme throughout thepodcast, which is that there are some
things that we at NINDS control andpolicies that we establish and that
we might have some flexibility on.
And then there are some things thatcome from the office of the director,
building 1, that we have no control over.
(30:35):
And so if you don't put that that noticein that box 4B, our hands are tied,
there is really nothing that we can do!And same thing with like
the appendix policy.
If you don't follow thoseinstructions, it will get kicked
out, and there's nothing we can do.
And we don't like to see that.
We want to get your application.
We want to read your ideasand be able to evaluate them.
(30:56):
Um, and so it really hurts us whenwhen that kind of stuff happens.
So just make sure toread the instructions.
And if you have anyquestions, let us know.
Emily (31:05):
And since we're speaking about the administrative supplements,
if you're going to do something that'snot that traditional pathway and you
know it's going to affect your presentaward, contact your program director.
Let them know this is coming in.
Because some of these slightly strangeprograms, they are using the system set
(31:31):
in place in ways they weren't originallydesigned, so things can start not going
to the correct people in the right way.
I had a case where we wereinvolved in a special program.
They used the parent administrativesupplement and it was very hard to make
(31:51):
sure we got all of the correct supplementsand got them all to the right people
because the PIs just sent them in.
And we had to go digging.
And so, like, basically, if you're like,this notice of special interest, I want
to apply to, send an email to your programdirector, so then again, probably the
(32:14):
health program specialist, will go find itand make sure it goes to the right people.
Jane Fountain (32:19):
I completely agree with what Emily just said.
So I've had a very complicatedsituation with a supplement.
Took hours of sort of my time and thetime of other folks here at NINDS,
trying to figure out, like, whatparticular notice it was associated with.
And once we figured it out, the PI wasnot eligible to apply for that supplement.
(32:40):
So just to save yourself time innot doing something that's not time
effective on your end and applying foran activity that you are not eligible
for and to save our time, it's best tocontact us even before you submit it.
Just say exactly what Emily said,"I'm planning on submitting this.
Does that make sense to you?"
Michael Oshinsky (33:00):
When you're communicating to us about a grant that
you wanna put in or one that you'vealready put in, it's really helpful if
you put that grant number in the subjectline and then in the text, tell us the
program announcement or notice, the NOT,or the NOSI that you're responding to.
(33:21):
And then we really have all theprogrammatic information for us to
know whether or not you're responsive Alot of time there's just an assumption
that we know what it is becausewe're going to evaluate your science
and know which one it fits into.
But sometimes we're responsible forlarge initiatives that could include, you
know, dozens of funding announcements,and it just makes the process a lot
(33:43):
simpler if you tell us what you want to,it could be two or three choices, too.
"I'm thinking about these threefunding announcements, could help
me pick which one?" And you listthe number from each one and then
you include your grant number.
Oh, and there's one other point that youshould know if you're calling or emailing
and asking about a grant, all right?
You have to be the PI, okay?
(34:05):
We can't communicate anything to youabout a grant that you are not a PI on.
Now, if the PI would like us tocommunicate with you, that has
to be a request from the PI forus to really communicate to you.
And then we're going to cc themand send the email to the PI
and maybe cc you on it, right?
(34:25):
So but, you know, if your PI asked you,say, "Oh, you know, I put this grant
in last cycle, why don't you contactthe program officer and find out what
happened with it?" You're not gonna getany information unless that request comes
from the PI to communicate with you.
Jane Founta (34:40):
Also unlike we said earlier, where we want you to keep
everybody that's been cc'd on our sideon the email and respond to all, we will
take people off if you send us questionsbecause of what Michael just said.
We have very strictconfidentiality policies.
So if I see a whole bunch of names inthe CC line and I don't have a clue
(35:02):
who they are, if they're the signingofficial, that's fine, they can remain on.
But if there's a whole lot of otherpeople in there, I'm going to take
them off because of the confidentialityrules where I can't communicate
certain information to people otherthan the PI or the signing official.
I wanted to also second Michael,saying, put your grant number down
and everything on the communication,because oftentimes--we've already said
(35:24):
this--we will sometimes forward yourcommunication to like grants management.
They do not know you by your name.
They know you by your grand number.
It's very different and veryinteresting, internally, just
to come to grips with this.
We know everybody's name.
We have no idea what your grant numberis on the program side, and then grants
management only deals with numbers.
(35:44):
So it's really helpful if all thatinformation is on one email so that we can
forward it around and everybody knows thegrant or the activity we're talking about.
Marguerite Ma (35:53):
Help us help you.
Jane Founta (35:55):
I wanted to say one more thing just about FOAs in general.
So this is another example whereyou have to be very exacting.
So recently, the rules have changedwhere you have to identify the
correct funding announcement inregards to whether clinical trials
are required, optional, not involved.
(36:15):
So we had a leniency periodwhere internally we could change
funding announcement numbers.
We no longer have that leniencyperiod, and there is a chance that your
application might not get reviewed ifyou pick the wrong funding announcement.
So if you have questions aboutthat, please contact us, too,
because that's a very new thing.
Michael Osh (36:34):
Also, if you're not sure of which funding announcement that
your application falls into or if youmight have the erroneous idea that you
have to respond to an RFA in order to getfunded, know that that's not the case.
First of all, you could reach outto us, and we'll help you find one.
And if we tell you the rightfunding announcement is to
(36:54):
submit it to the parent R01.
I don't think that you have anyless chance of getting funded.
It's equal to any other PA.
Maybe it's different on anRFA, depending on the number of
applications that come in for that.
But the parent R01 is a good choicefor your proposal to come in on.
(37:15):
It will be directed to theright study section by CSR.
It will get a good professional review,and then the programmatic decisions will
not make a difference if it comes in on aPA or or that the parent one.
Again, it might be different withRFAs, but don't only apply to RFAs.
Your good science can getfunded on the parent R01.
Lauren Ullric (37:37):
Is there anything else that you wish applicants knew
about this process, or any commonmisconceptions that you'd like to counter?
Jane Foun (37:46):
Just for them to help them understand why we don't take sort
of cold calls is that most of us haveabout 150 grantees on board, and then
we're dealing with about 100 folks thatare going through review, their proposals
are going through review at this moment,and then we have another 100 or so folks,
and this is sort of the minimum number.
So that's like about 350individuals at any point in
(38:11):
time that could be coming at us.
So that's where, if you come fromit, come at us out of the cold, we
don't necessarily know your projectoff the top of our head, know what
your career stage is, all of thosethings, and we need to dig it out.
So we don't wanna push you off ornot address your question quickly.
It's just that we want to be able togive you as much information as possible
(38:33):
and be as helpful as possible when we doengage in some kind of exchange with you
Michael Oshi (38:38):
so the NIH program staff is here to help you with your
process, help you with your science,and help you find the best procedure
to put your grant in or which fundingannouncement to use to get funded.
Andthe information that you get from
your mentee or your mentor orfrom your peers might not be the same
(39:01):
information that you get from us, sothere's gonna be some decision-making
process you're gonna have to haveabout--whether or not your first grant
should be an R21 is a good exampleof something that there's a lot of
erroneous information out there.
(39:22):
From the program's perspective,somebody who's never applied for an
R01 before and they're still withintheir first 10 years of finishing their
terminal degree, like their PhD, sowe call that the ESI or their early
stage investigator status, should notconsider an R21 under any circumstances.
(39:42):
Except something, you know, a specific RFAmaybe R21 for their particular research.
But to get your research program started,you really have to start with an R01.
The R21 is not a gateway grant to the R01.
The way we like to think in our clusterabout R21s is that it really has to be
something paradigm changing, high risk.
(40:07):
Those are typically good R21 projectsthat you just want to try it out for a
year or two and then--committing a fullyear, five year project to that doesn't
make sense because of how risky it is.
But in most other situations, nearlyall of them, an R21 is not a good idea
Lauren Ullrich (40:28):
thank you all for sharing your wisdom today.
So can I ask each of you forone last piece of parting advice
for our future applicants?
Michael Oshinsky (40:37):
For me, it's really simple
Just send us an email.
If we're not the right person,we'll try to find the right person
or we'll direct you back to yourinstitution or your PI or mentor.
Don't think that we're intimidating.
Don't think that we're gonna judgeyou negatively on your next grant
(40:57):
because of some question you ask.
All these things that might keep you fromasking us a question, just push aside and
say, "You know what? I'm just gonna putit out there" because we're here to help.
Jane Fo (41:09):
For me, it's slow down, so as opposed to what kind of pressure
you're probably getting from yourinstitution or your mentor or your chair.
Usually, I see individuals reach successsooner if they take a slow approach
rather than a rapid, panicked approach.
(41:29):
So work a long time onthat first submission.
Really make sure it'sas great as it could be.
Rather than saying OK, I really haveone activity and I'm gonna put in
three different R01s because I'mgoing to be that superstar that's
going to get three R01s all at once.
What I will see is they'll havethree solid specific aims, then
(41:52):
instead of putting it into one grantapplication, they put it into three.
And all three of those grantapplications go down in flames, and
two years later, I'm talking to theindividual and they're back at square
one as to how to get an NIH grant.
Really focus all your energyon that first submission.
Make it as great as it can be.
(42:13):
And don't think about being a superstarbefore you even have one grant.
Emily Carif (42:19):
So mine's kind of a combination of the two, which is really
go into the NIH and the NINDS websitesfor information, especially if you
haven't put in an application and wekeep telling you to contact your program
director, you don't have one yet, butif you go to the CSR's website, they
(42:45):
will give you a place, it's calledmatchmaker and you can say, these are
mine proposed specific aims, put themin, and they'll tell you who to contact.
But most people don't knowthat the NIH has this resource.
So just go to the NIH page, go tothe NINDS page, click on the FAQs
and this really look around andsee what we already have told you
(43:12):
before you start, you know, makingdecisions that waste everyone's time.
Lauren Ullrich (43:18):
Marguerite, you have some advice?
Marguerite Matthews (43:20):
Yes.
Um, you're expected to be anexpert in your research area.
You're not expected to be an experton how NIH grants process works.
This is a long time from the timeyou conceive the idea, put the
application together, go throughreview, then get your notice of award.
There's a lot of thingsthat have happened.
And then there's a lot more thingsthat will happen afterwards.
(43:42):
So, um, take your time, but alsoask for help wherever you need it.
You aren't expected tohave all the answers.
There will be people whoare willing to help you.
What about you, Lauren?
Lauren U (43:53):
I would say, following up on that, we hear a lot of rumors and
misinformation that's out there regardingpolicies and procedures, and what NIH
will fund, and what you're eligible for.
And some of that comes from differentinstitutes having different policies and
people thinking that they apply acrossall of NIH, and some of it comes from
(44:15):
that the policies are always changing.
And so you're not the expert on that.
Even us in the room were not theexpert on all of these things, but
we are the ones that can connectyou and know who the expert is.
And so, if you have any questions or ifsomebody tells you something or your PI
tells you something and you think, "Ijust want to double check and confirm
(44:37):
that that's still the case." Just reachout to us because we can find the answer.
So that's all we have time fortoday on Building up the Nerve.
Thank you again to our guest thisweek for sharing their expertise, and
(44:57):
we'll see you next time on our lastepisode, when we tackle how NINDS
monitors its portfolio as a whole.
You can find past episodes of thispodcast and many more grant application
resources on the web at NINDS.NIH.gov.
Marguerite Mat (45:12):
You can email us questions at NINDSNervePod@nih.gov.
Make sure to subscribe to the podcaston Apple podcasts or your favorite
podcast app so you don't miss an episode.
We'll see you next time.
Welcome to the National Institute of
Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
Building up the nerve, a podcastfor neuroscience trainees that takes
you through the life cycle of agrant from idea to award at NINDS
with the people who make it happen.
We know that applying forNIH funding can be daunting.
But we're here to help.
It's our job.
Marguerite Matthews (00:22):
Hello, I'm Marguerite Matthews, a health
program specialist at NINDS.
Lauren (00:25):
And I'm Lauren Ullrich, a scientific program manager at NINDS
and we're your hosts for this episode.
So last time we discussed theissuance of the grant award and
how to read a notice of award.
Marguerite M (00:37):
Now we're going to talk about monitoring grant performance.
How does NINDS keep track of whatresearchers are doing with their
funding and ensure we are responsiblestewards of taxpayer money?
Laur (00:49):
As always, I want to state the disclaimer that everything we talk
about may only be relevant for NINDS.
So if you're applying to a differentNIH institute, it's always best to
check with them about their policies.
Marguerite Matthews (01:04):
In joining us for today's episode are Dr Jane
Fountain a program director in theneural environment cluster, Dr Michael
Oshinsky, a program director in theSystems and Cognitive Neuroscience
cluster, and Dr Emily Carifi, a programspecialist in the neurogenetics cluster.
So can each of you introduce yourselves?
Jane Fountain (01:26):
Hi, My name's Jane Fountain.
I'm in the neural environment cluster.
I oversee the brain tumor grant portfolio.
This portfolio is shared between NINDSand NCI, so have a lot of interactions
with the staff over on the NCI side.
And overall, I would say, NINDSoversees about 20% of the brain
(01:46):
tumor grant portfolio at NIH.
So I've worked at NINDSfor almost 15 years now.
I was previously at NCI for fiveyears, and before that I was
an associate professor at theUniversity of Southern California.
Um, I have three teenagers, soI think that's enough said right
(02:06):
there about what I do outside work.
One's been in college for one monthnow, so last year was a full time job
just figuring out where she was goingto college, and the other two are
16 and have their driver's permits--
Lauren Ullrich (02:20):
uh-oh
Jane Fountai (02:20):
so I spend most of my time in the passenger seat--
Marguerit (02:23):
scared for your life?
Jane (02:25):
--White-knuckled, telling my son to apply the brake more often.
Michael O (02:30):
I'm Michael Oshinsky.
I'm the program director for painand migraine research at NINDS.
I've had been with NIH since Augustof 2014, so that's about five years.
And before I came to NIH, I was facultyat Thomas Jefferson University for 14
(02:50):
years.
Emily Carifi (02:51):
Hi, Emily Carifi, I'm a health program
specialist, neurogenetics cluster.
I support two program directors, onewho is responsible for basic fundamental
neuroscience, Dr Bob Riddle, and Dr GlennKnuckles, who has the muscular dystrophy
and spinal muscular atrophy, CMT andother, well, both neurodegenerative
(03:13):
and neurodevelopmental disorders.
I've been here about three years.
I was a post doc in the NINDSintramural program before I got here.
Hobbies, I don't have time for thembecause I have two,very young children.
Lauren Ullrich (03:36):
Last episode sort of ended right at the
issuance of the notice of award.
So once the applicant has theiraward, what do they need to know?
Jane (03:46):
So the first thing I would say is, keep an open dialogue with us.
So often times we're working withapplicants a lot, frequently, up until
they submit their first application.
Then it goes through review, they get apromising or meritorious score, they get
the application and they sort of go away.
Or maybe they feel that ourinteraction has now ended.
(04:06):
It's actually, in most cases, just begun,because we're potentially going to be
engaged with this junior investigatorfor maybe their entire career.
So just keep an open dialogue, I think.
With changes or any questions thatyou have and if we can't personally
answer them, we're gonna eitherfind out the answer ourselves or
direct you to somebody who can.
Michael Osh (04:27):
I completely agree.
Contact program.
You know, once you get your award, itcould be just to hear congratulations
for us, and that's good, too, that'sthe beginning of the dialogue.
But there are lots of questions you'regoing to have, and reaching out to
people in your institution is good.
But also it's good to bounce thosethings that you're going to do based on
(04:48):
that guidance off your program officer.
Working with program staff can help you atall stages of your career, not just before
your first application is accepted, butalso every junction point going from early
career to midcareer to your first renewal.
Everything there, we can help you with.
And it's our job to do that.
(05:08):
We're happy to do it.
Marguerite Matt (05:09):
What do program officers and grant specialists
do to monitor grant performance?
Michael Oshinsky (05:14):
So we do monitor publications.
We read the literature just like you do.
We're very involved in the portfoliosthat we're responsible for, and not only
seeing the publications that you put inyour progress report, which we'll read
each year after you put that together, butalso following the publications because
there's certain journals in our fieldsof expertise that we read regularly.
(05:38):
We also get notified of press releasesthat are put out associated with
your publications, and we see those.
And we go to meetings, too, and we'llwalk by your poster and speak to your
graduate students or your postdocswhile they're presenting it and hear
what's the next stage of the experimentsand maybe make some comments on the
(05:58):
data that you're presenting there.
So progress reports, publications, pressreleases and going to meetings, watching
your talks and seeing your posters.
Lauren Ullrich (06:08):
And you can also come to us at a lot of meetings.
If we have a booth, like at societyfor neuroscience, there's an entire
NIH booth where program directorshave basically office hours.
So if you don't necessarily have arelationship with them yet, that's a
good place to to meet and have a chat.
Michael Oshinsky (06:25):
So find that sign up sheet and sign up because
the slots fill really quickly.
Emily Carifi (06:30):
Also I know the Gordon Research Conferences often
have a NIH program directors andI have done lunch and learns.
So attend these sessions, the great forthe more informal questions at any stage.
Lauren Ull (06:48):
So, Michael, I think you mentioned the progress report,
which is now called the ResearchPerformance Progress Report or RPPR.
What is the RPPR and what kindsof things are required in that?
Michael Oshinsky (07:01):
So each year, you're required to report on
the progress of your award.
Now that has multiple components.
One part of it is gonna be filledout by your institutional signing
official and the budget officials,and that's gonna be associated with
the financial part of the grant.
There's a scientific portion of theprogress of your grant that you're
(07:23):
going to have to report yourself.
There's many different ways you canbreak that down to give us a good
feel for the work that you've donein the last reporting period, which
is usually the last year and howthat progress is being communicated
to the greater scientific community.
So one part of that, it could bebreaking it up into your specific
(07:46):
aims and telling us the progressof the experiments in there.
And it could be this didn'twork, that didn't work, and
the other thing didn't work.
All of that is really helpful.
Please do not just give us a list of yourpublications and say all my data is there.
That's not a good progress report.
A good progress report is a dialogueof what's been going on in the previous
(08:09):
year, broken up in some format thatwe can evaluate about whether or
not you're working on only a partof the grant, or whether or not
you made progress in multiple partsof the grant in the previous year.
Then there's a formal part of the progressreport where you report your publications
and your progress in communicating themthrough NIH's formal system of making
(08:33):
data public, which is called a publicaccess, right, NIH public access.
And it's a database for that.
Jane do you want to add?
Jane Fountain (08:41):
So I just want to say in the progress report, the main
thing I'm looking for is a coupleparagraphs that very concisely tell
me what you did in the past year.
Similar to what Michael said, things thatwent well, things that didn't go well,
if the project is steering in a differentcourse, that's what I want to see there.
I do not want to see any part ofthe original application cut and
pasted into the progress report.
(09:01):
I do not want to see any progressreport from the past, cut and pasted
into the current progress report.
Michael (09:07):
Please do not do that.
We do remember.
Jane Fountain (09:09):
And I do not want to see just figures sort of taken
from a publication and put intothe progress report with no text.
So take it seriously.
It is taxpayers' money.
It's a reasonable chunk of changethat everybody is getting on
their grants or their fellowships.
And just spend an hour or twoessentially writing down what
you've done for that year.
(09:29):
I think it might also be very helpfulfor discussions that you have with
your mentors or colleagues as far asif you have individual performance
plans and things like that, you canuse the progress report, just sort of
document what you've done that year.
And then, lastly, if you are getting aPhD, working towards a degree, I sort of
want to see a little bit of informationon where you are, when you anticipate
(09:52):
you're gonna graduate, you know, whenyou anticipate you're going to get
your first 1st author publication out.
All those things are really importantto us to just assess where you
are at this stage in the game.
Michael Oshinsky (10:03):
And that dialogue is really helpful.
It should be reporting whathappens--what has happened in
the previous year in a narrativeform, or it could be bullets, too.
Now, what I'm afraid that some peopledo is that they copy and paste, as Jane
mentioned from their publications, and itbecomes really mired in individual details
(10:27):
of the project, which are exciting,don't don't get me wrong and important,
but we're really looking for an overallgestalt view of what's happened during the
previous year in the progress you made.
If there is a key piece of data thatyou want to communicate to us, feel
free to put one or two figures in there.
We're excited about thescience, too, we're scientists.
Emily Car (10:47):
Something you haven't mentioned is
clearly the most important part,many of the people who hopefully
are listening are trainees, and theyhave an additional requirement to
put in the career development they'regetting from their institution.
And when I do, um, the first pass,because I'm not a program director, so
I do (11:09):
"Are there any red flags?" first is
That's the most time where Isee no new information from
application to progress report.
And it is your institution'srequirement to train you.
So make sure that that is also updated.
That if you're getting responsibleresearch conduct training and if
(11:31):
you've attended a class or you'vegone to a training, put that in, too.
It's not great just to see, again, whatyou put into your application which is at
this point probably 18 months out of date.
Michael Oshi (11:44):
For those mentored training awards, there's also a component
from the mentor, and that mentor letterwe always look closely at, too, and
it should clearly say how often thatmentor is interacting with the trainee.
And it could be once a week, and youknow, that you presented the data, or
(12:05):
once a month that the data is presentedat the lab meeting, something like that.
That's one of the things I'm looking for.
And then, you know, I'm also lookingfor details of the mentor commenting
on the skills that are being acquiredby the mentee and not just the data.
(12:25):
Almost every letter says the experimentsare going really great, they presented
at a meeting, which is nice to see, also;we can see that in other parts there.
But some of the interpretationof the progress should be
reported in that mentee letter.
Marguerite Ma (12:41):
What would happen if there is not a lot of progress
happening in the career development?
Maybe there seems to be a bit of, um,a delay or perhaps that trainee is
actually not getting the mentoringor the training that they need.
How should that beconveyed to program staff?
Jane Fountain (13:00):
So I guess it depends on how serious it is.
If there's a really serious issuewhere the trainee feels like they are
not moving forward, they should have aphone conversation with us, and we're
going to try to see if there's a way forthem to move forward in their current
situation or we're going to encouragethem to move to a new laboratory.
(13:23):
If it's just like the fact that theproject is not panning out as they
originally proposed, that can be detailedin the progress report and just tell
us sort of what's the new direction?
And if it's really differentthan the specific aims that were
originally proposed, we need somerevised specific aims, and they do
need to get sort of prior approvalto really change the specific aims.
(13:46):
That's one thing that you should contactyour program director--if the project
has changed substantially--to discusswhat the new aims are and to make sure
that they appear to still be in scope.
Michael Oshins (13:58):
If you have some question about whether or not a new
direction you want to go in is withinscope of the grant, you can reach out to
us, not just at the time of the progressreport but even anytime during the year.
Let me give you some hints forhow to communicate with program.
First of all, don't call us first.
Margu (14:17):
[Laughter] no cold calls.
Jane Fountain (14:17):
Yes, exactly, no cold calls.
Michael Oshinsk (14:19):
Well, it's just really hard to fit into our schedules
because they're usually pretty booked.
A much better way to communicate with usis to send us an email, short paragraph,
a few sentences, "I'd like to discussX, Y or Z." Maybe have an attachment
if there's some document we would likeus to review before we discuss it.
(14:40):
And you say, "Is there a time that wecould talk?" if that's what you think is
needed, or just an answer to a question.
Now, if you have 10 questions or 15questions, it's gonna be difficult to
answer all of those in an email, allright, and if we do talk, we'll probably
narrow it down on which of the mostimportant ones to fit into that half hour.
But (15:02):
to send us an email, short summary of what you'll need, and
then ask us for a time to talk.
And then including something that'swritten in order for us to evaluate, if
there's gonna be a change of aims or ifyou want us to know if an idea for a grant
is a good idea to put it in, the way tocommunicate with us is really not your
(15:25):
abstract, it's your specific aims page.
That's the meat of your grant.
That's the one page that summarizesall the activities that you want to
do and maybe even discuss some of thetechniques and the rationale for them.
So you know that's you know, frommy perspective, the most important
document to communicate your scientificideas and what you want to do next
(15:45):
is in the form of specific aims page.
Lauren Ullric (15:47):
So, Jane, you had mentioned that, you know, if the
lab situation, it's just not workingout, something needs to change.
But they are on an F31.
The student has fundingfor a specific project.
Maybe they feel like now they haveto do that project with that mentor.
But is there a way for trainees toswitch labs or switch institutions?
(16:09):
And how does that process work?
Jane Foun (16:10):
So that's a very rare circumstance to begin with, when F31
would change a lab or institution.
Usually what I would do internally firstis I would go and talk to the training
office and, um who are the folks here,and we would discuss the situation and
sort of together, come up with someguidance for the trainee and make a
(16:33):
decision how to handle the situation.
We might also reach out to the mentor.
That's, of course, dependent onwhat's going on with the trainee.
The trainee may be uncomfortablewith us reaching out to the mentor.
So we try to be sensitiveto all situations in helping
resolve whatever the issue is.
And you can ultimately potentiallytransfer labs, though I have to
(16:57):
say, personally, I have not dealtwith a situation where I've had an
F move to another lab, have you?
Michael Oshinsky (17:03):
Yeah, so I do have experience with that.
So the idea I want to get out thereis: if you're in a situation where
you feel trapped and you're worriedabout your career moving forward and
it's not a good place, you shouldknow you're not trapped, okay?
There are options for you to move todifferent labs, your grant can move.
If it's an individual F31 orif you're on a T grant, a T32
(17:27):
or something, it can happen.
And if you don't feel comfortableinitially going through your
chair or the head of your graduateprogram, you can contact us.
But I will recommend you doreach out to those first.
It doesn't have to be evensomebody in your own department.
(17:48):
Usually your university has anombudsperson or a trainee office that
might be a little bit separate fromthe situation, and you can say, "Hey,
you know this isn't working out, youknow, is there a possibility to move?"
If they tell you no, that's the wronginformation, but they can help you
(18:09):
mediate internally how to do that.
I had a graduate student who neededto move from one lab to another and
they moved into my lab, and they hadjust had awarded an F31 from another
institute than--it was different thanthe institute that I had my R01 in and
we worked with the program officer,wrote up a new set of specific aims that
(18:29):
were, not exactly in scope, but closeenough, and they had them internally
reviewed through program and the graduatestudent moved into my lab, and now she's
faculty, you know, she really movedalong in her career, so it can happen.
It can't happen.
And there's a whole slew ofreasons why people move from a lab.
It might be the funding level in that lab.
(18:52):
Or it might be a personal interaction.
There's just a huge numberof things you're not trapped.
Just know that you're not trapped.
Marguerite Matthe (18:57):
So just to go back a little bit, so say things are
going fine training-wise, but as wesort of mentioned a little bit before,
the project may have taken a differentturn or needs to take a different turn
because it's not, um, very fruitful, orit just seems that things might not work.
How should an awardee deal withchanging the direction of a project?
(19:19):
Do they have to complete the work thatthey mentioned in their specific aims?
Do they need to apply for a new grant?
What should happen?
Jane Fountain (19:26):
So they should contact us as soon as possible.
So just a quick email and says, youknow, this is what my project was on,
this is where it's headed right now.
Before they submit a progress report wherethere's a publication that doesn't make
sense, given what the science is on or youhave something in the public domain, too.
We're all sort of social media freaksnow, so you have something in the public
(19:49):
domain that doesn't make sense either.
So you shouldn't be being trainedon sort of one topic, but yet
have some other public postingthat suggests you're involved in
a completely different activity.
So it's better to tell usbefore things get to that point.
We're flexible.
I think that's what people don'tunderstand on the outside is they
(20:12):
think that we're not flexible, and ourmain job is to figure out, like how
to take the grant back away from you.
Marguerite Matthews (20:18):
Right?
Like we're ogres under a bridge.
Jane Fountain (20:21):
That's not what we're trying to do.
We're trying to figure out whateveris reasonable is sort of common sense.
We're gonna move forward with helping you,you know, change your aims so that you
are going to end up being a successfulscientist and you're gonna graduate.
You're going to get on tothe next step in your career.
Michael Osh (20:36):
The perception from outside is that NIH is a black box.
I look at one of my goals asbeing a program director is
really making that box clear.
You should know how wemake decisions here.
You should know what type of informationwe could give you that can really
help you move your career forwardand help you with your grants.
We are here to help.
We're here to serve thescientific community.
(20:58):
We're not a regulatory agency.
They're our regulatory agenciesthat do oversee science.
There's OLAW, there's FDA,there's the CDC, these are
making regulations and oversight.
Whereas we are promoting thescience, that's our perspective.
Marguerite Matthe (21:13):
That's great.
I like that we'repromoting science at NIH.
Lauren Ullrich (21:17):
So what about if an awardee has more mundane
questions, like, if something isallowable in the budget or not.
I think especially in the trainingsphere, there are sometimes restrictions
on what the money can be used for.
So if they have questions aboutthat, who should they go to?
Jane Fountai (21:37):
I think you should always start with your program director,
so I'm thinking of this situationwith Ks where you get a stipend and
that sort of a separate bucket offunds from the research dollars.
So again, start with the programdirector if the program directors
unable to answer your question, they'regonna pull in the grants management
specialist or somebody from thetraining office who can help address
(22:00):
the policy issue that your question is.
Michael Osh (22:03):
So don't think that you're just being kicked around if your
email is forwarded to somebody else.
What we're doing thereis not passing the buck.
We're trying to get you correctinformation that is most up
to date and accurate, okay?
So if you need some information,don't wait till the last possible
minute and give it some time for thoseemails to move around through several
(22:26):
individuals because NIH is a very biginstitution with lots of rules and
lots of different, different programs.
And it's hard for each program directorbe an expert in each one of them.
But our job is to really findthe information for you and to
connect you to the right person.
Emily Ca (22:43):
I would like to add as a health program specialist, I'm not a
program director, so my name is nowhere.
You will not be able to find me.
I might be in the staff directory.
If you get an email from yourprogram director and there's a
couple more people cc'd, reply all.
Because I have morebandwidth on a given day.
(23:05):
So if it's a quick question that I dohave the expertise to answer, I will
move it forward, probably more quickly.
But if you don't reply all, I don'tsee it until my program director goes,
"Hey, Emily, Can you handle this?"So I know, generally don't reply all.
This is the one case.
Go ahead, let your questions goto all the people on that email.
Michael Oshinsky (23:31):
I want to, you know, ditto that, because there's
so many times where I add peopleto the emails and just do a reply.
Sometimes it's just that I'm replyingfrom my phone because it is a
particular issue that needs a quickreply and on my phone, I'm not able
to track all the information down.
So I'll do a reply, adding people'snames, and I know that I have support and
(23:57):
other experts here at NIH, like Emily,that I'll add to the grant and I know
that they'll see it and answer it, okay?
Marguerite (24:04):
That's great advice.
Lauren Ull (24:05):
Does one of you want to talk about the resources that might
be available at the institution toanswer questions about grant policies?
Michael Oshins (24:15):
Sure, so at your institution, in addition to your mentor,
who will be the person and hopefully youbuild that relationship so that you can
ask them on a daily basis if you havequestions, you can just pop into their
office and ask them questions; theymight not have the all of the answers,
especially when it comes to budgetaryissues or what's allowable on grants.
(24:37):
So you should know that in yourinstitution there is a grants
management office there also.
It might be an Office ofResearch Administration, it
might have different names.
But in that office, there is aninstitutional signing official, who is
usually a director, you don't necessarilyhave to reach out to them first, but you
can, if you don't know where the officeis, and they'll connect you to the people
(25:02):
that are in your Office of ResearchAdministration or grants management
office that are responsible for the grantsfrom your department or your division
or your school inside your university,and they're the ones that directly
communicate with the budgetary and grantmanagement people at NIH or at NINDS.
(25:23):
So they have an interaction with therules and regulations and as they're
changing much more than your PI does.
Your PI is really focused on thescience and the business official
or the signing official dealswith those business aspects.
There's no reason why you can't reachout to those, especially if you approach
(25:45):
your PI and they don't have the answer,but feel free to say to them, "Hey, Dr.
Such and Such, I need this, you know,particular information." And they say,
"I'm not sure I have that," you canask the question, "Is there somebody
in the grants management or the officerresearch administration that you work
with that I can send this email to?"That would be a good way to address it.
Marguerite Matthews (26:04):
So a lot of research awards allow for administrative
supplements to an already awarded grant.
Can you tell us about administrativesupplements and what they're used for?
Jane Fo (26:16):
We don't usually give a lot of supplements to Ks, no supplements
to Fs, Ts, maybe a couple, but thatwould be the director of the T32 grant.
So mostly with our R01s, ouradministrative supplements or somewhat
restricted to emergency sort ofsituations, like you have a piece
of equipment that has broken down oryou have a mouse colony that's died
(26:41):
or you've had a flood, somethinglike that, that's impacted your
ability to even do research at all.
We don't generally consider supplementsfor just essentially augmenting the
science that you're already doing.
And we do tend to get requestsfor supplements like that a lot.
If we gave out those types ofsupplements our pay line, to be
(27:04):
quite honest, would go down prettyrapidly because everybody wants one.
Everybody would apply for one.
Michael Oshinsky (27:11):
There are other types of supplements other
than administrative supplements.
What Jane was just referring to areadministrative supplements on the R
grants, on the R01s, R21s, et cetera.
Sometimes there are institutes or officesat NIH puts out a request for supplements
on a particular topic, like the Office ofResearch on Women's Health sometimes puts
(27:34):
out supplements to add female animals oraddressing sex as a biological variable
in experiments that weren't specificallyaddressing those questions earlier.
So there were different types ofsupplements that have a formal application
process and a request for those proposals.
(27:55):
Adding those type of experimentsto an ongoing project would not go
through the administrative supplementrequest or funding announcement.
Those would be specific announcementsthat were published on grants.gov,
and you can search them out,um, and then find them that way.
Another great idea, if you're notcurrently on this email subscription
(28:17):
list for grants.gov, it's just anotheremail that comes in your box once a week
or several times a month, but as thenew funding announcements are published
and there are just a few every week,you get to see them in your email box
right when they're published, and thenyou get to just take a glance at them
(28:38):
and see whether or not they're pertinentfor your research and click on them.
Otherwise, there's really noway to find out about them other
than being on that email list.
Lauren Ullrich (28:45):
Right.
And you can subscribe through theNIH Guide if there are specific
keywords that you're interested in,or if you're interested in just all
the FOAs that a specific institutepublishes because you know you're
never gonna apply to, NCI, for example,and so you just want to know about
NINDS-published things or NIH-wide things
Michael Oshinsky (29:06):
or just the neuroscience institutes
Lauren Ull (29:07):
or just neuroscience institutes, exactly, so you can
subscribe to keywords, to specificmechanisms, there's a lot of different
options, and it's a great resource.
Jane Fountai (29:18):
So with the parent supplement sort of solicitation,
we now have a new form of sort ofnotice is called NOSIs, notices of
special interest, and those can beassociated with parent requests.
So in those cases, if you'reapplying to a special like NOSI,
(29:39):
you want to make absolutely surein box 4B of the application that
you put the notice number in there.
If you don't, then we can't internallytrack your submission as associated
with that NOSI, and it will not beconsidered for funding or go through
the appropriate review process.
(30:00):
So I just wanted to say that'sa new kind of nuance to our
notice and supplement system.
Michael Oshinsky (30:07):
You don't have to hit rewind on the podcast.
It's box 4B, okay?
Lauren Ullri (30:12):
Yeah, I think that kind of alludes to something that has
been a bit of a theme throughout thepodcast, which is that there are some
things that we at NINDS control andpolicies that we establish and that
we might have some flexibility on.
And then there are some things thatcome from the office of the director,
building 1, that we have no control over.
(30:35):
And so if you don't put that that noticein that box 4B, our hands are tied,
there is really nothing that we can do!And same thing with like
the appendix policy.
If you don't follow thoseinstructions, it will get kicked
out, and there's nothing we can do.
And we don't like to see that.
We want to get your application.
We want to read your ideasand be able to evaluate them.
(30:56):
Um, and so it really hurts us whenwhen that kind of stuff happens.
So just make sure toread the instructions.
And if you have anyquestions, let us know.
Emily (31:05):
And since we're speaking about the administrative supplements,
if you're going to do something that'snot that traditional pathway and you
know it's going to affect your presentaward, contact your program director.
Let them know this is coming in.
Because some of these slightly strangeprograms, they are using the system set
(31:31):
in place in ways they weren't originallydesigned, so things can start not going
to the correct people in the right way.
I had a case where we wereinvolved in a special program.
They used the parent administrativesupplement and it was very hard to make
(31:51):
sure we got all of the correct supplementsand got them all to the right people
because the PIs just sent them in.
And we had to go digging.
And so, like, basically, if you're like,this notice of special interest, I want
to apply to, send an email to your programdirector, so then again, probably the
(32:14):
health program specialist, will go find itand make sure it goes to the right people.
Jane Fountain (32:19):
I completely agree with what Emily just said.
So I've had a very complicatedsituation with a supplement.
Took hours of sort of my time and thetime of other folks here at NINDS,
trying to figure out, like, whatparticular notice it was associated with.
And once we figured it out, the PI wasnot eligible to apply for that supplement.
(32:40):
So just to save yourself time innot doing something that's not time
effective on your end and applying foran activity that you are not eligible
for and to save our time, it's best tocontact us even before you submit it.
Just say exactly what Emily said,"I'm planning on submitting this.
Does that make sense to you?"
Michael Oshinsky (33:00):
When you're communicating to us about a grant that
you wanna put in or one that you'vealready put in, it's really helpful if
you put that grant number in the subjectline and then in the text, tell us the
program announcement or notice, the NOT,or the NOSI that you're responding to.
(33:21):
And then we really have all theprogrammatic information for us to
know whether or not you're responsive Alot of time there's just an assumption
that we know what it is becausewe're going to evaluate your science
and know which one it fits into.
But sometimes we're responsible forlarge initiatives that could include, you
know, dozens of funding announcements,and it just makes the process a lot
(33:43):
simpler if you tell us what you want to,it could be two or three choices, too.
"I'm thinking about these threefunding announcements, could help
me pick which one?" And you listthe number from each one and then
you include your grant number.
Oh, and there's one other point that youshould know if you're calling or emailing
and asking about a grant, all right?
You have to be the PI, okay?
(34:05):
We can't communicate anything to youabout a grant that you are not a PI on.
Now, if the PI would like us tocommunicate with you, that has
to be a request from the PI forus to really communicate to you.
And then we're going to cc themand send the email to the PI
and maybe cc you on it, right?
(34:25):
So but, you know, if your PI asked you,say, "Oh, you know, I put this grant
in last cycle, why don't you contactthe program officer and find out what
happened with it?" You're not gonna getany information unless that request comes
from the PI to communicate with you.
Jane Founta (34:40):
Also unlike we said earlier, where we want you to keep
everybody that's been cc'd on our sideon the email and respond to all, we will
take people off if you send us questionsbecause of what Michael just said.
We have very strictconfidentiality policies.
So if I see a whole bunch of names inthe CC line and I don't have a clue
(35:02):
who they are, if they're the signingofficial, that's fine, they can remain on.
But if there's a whole lot of otherpeople in there, I'm going to take
them off because of the confidentialityrules where I can't communicate
certain information to people otherthan the PI or the signing official.
I wanted to also second Michael,saying, put your grant number down
and everything on the communication,because oftentimes--we've already said
(35:24):
this--we will sometimes forward yourcommunication to like grants management.
They do not know you by your name.
They know you by your grand number.
It's very different and veryinteresting, internally, just
to come to grips with this.
We know everybody's name.
We have no idea what your grant numberis on the program side, and then grants
management only deals with numbers.
(35:44):
So it's really helpful if all thatinformation is on one email so that we can
forward it around and everybody knows thegrant or the activity we're talking about.
Marguerite Ma (35:53):
Help us help you.
Jane Founta (35:55):
I wanted to say one more thing just about FOAs in general.
So this is another example whereyou have to be very exacting.
So recently, the rules have changedwhere you have to identify the
correct funding announcement inregards to whether clinical trials
are required, optional, not involved.
(36:15):
So we had a leniency periodwhere internally we could change
funding announcement numbers.
We no longer have that leniencyperiod, and there is a chance that your
application might not get reviewed ifyou pick the wrong funding announcement.
So if you have questions aboutthat, please contact us, too,
because that's a very new thing.
Michael Osh (36:34):
Also, if you're not sure of which funding announcement that
your application falls into or if youmight have the erroneous idea that you
have to respond to an RFA in order to getfunded, know that that's not the case.
First of all, you could reach outto us, and we'll help you find one.
And if we tell you the rightfunding announcement is to
(36:54):
submit it to the parent R01.
I don't think that you have anyless chance of getting funded.
It's equal to any other PA.
Maybe it's different on anRFA, depending on the number of
applications that come in for that.
But the parent R01 is a good choicefor your proposal to come in on.
(37:15):
It will be directed to theright study section by CSR.
It will get a good professional review,and then the programmatic decisions will
not make a difference if it comes in on aPA or or that the parent one.
Again, it might be different withRFAs, but don't only apply to RFAs.
Your good science can getfunded on the parent R01.
Lauren Ullric (37:37):
Is there anything else that you wish applicants knew
about this process, or any commonmisconceptions that you'd like to counter?
Jane Foun (37:46):
Just for them to help them understand why we don't take sort
of cold calls is that most of us haveabout 150 grantees on board, and then
we're dealing with about 100 folks thatare going through review, their proposals
are going through review at this moment,and then we have another 100 or so folks,
and this is sort of the minimum number.
So that's like about 350individuals at any point in
(38:11):
time that could be coming at us.
So that's where, if you come fromit, come at us out of the cold, we
don't necessarily know your projectoff the top of our head, know what
your career stage is, all of thosethings, and we need to dig it out.
So we don't wanna push you off ornot address your question quickly.
It's just that we want to be able togive you as much information as possible
(38:33):
and be as helpful as possible when we doengage in some kind of exchange with you
Michael Oshi (38:38):
so the NIH program staff is here to help you with your
process, help you with your science,and help you find the best procedure
to put your grant in or which fundingannouncement to use to get funded.
Andthe information that you get from
your mentee or your mentor orfrom your peers might not be the same
(39:01):
information that you get from us, sothere's gonna be some decision-making
process you're gonna have to haveabout--whether or not your first grant
should be an R21 is a good exampleof something that there's a lot of
erroneous information out there.
(39:22):
From the program's perspective,somebody who's never applied for an
R01 before and they're still withintheir first 10 years of finishing their
terminal degree, like their PhD, sowe call that the ESI or their early
stage investigator status, should notconsider an R21 under any circumstances.
(39:42):
Except something, you know, a specific RFAmaybe R21 for their particular research.
But to get your research program started,you really have to start with an R01.
The R21 is not a gateway grant to the R01.
The way we like to think in our clusterabout R21s is that it really has to be
something paradigm changing, high risk.
(40:07):
Those are typically good R21 projectsthat you just want to try it out for a
year or two and then--committing a fullyear, five year project to that doesn't
make sense because of how risky it is.
But in most other situations, nearlyall of them, an R21 is not a good idea
Lauren Ullrich (40:28):
thank you all for sharing your wisdom today.
So can I ask each of you forone last piece of parting advice
for our future applicants?
Michael Oshinsky (40:37):
For me, it's really simple
Just send us an email.
If we're not the right person,we'll try to find the right person
or we'll direct you back to yourinstitution or your PI or mentor.
Don't think that we're intimidating.
Don't think that we're gonna judgeyou negatively on your next grant
(40:57):
because of some question you ask.
All these things that might keep you fromasking us a question, just push aside and
say, "You know what? I'm just gonna putit out there" because we're here to help.
Jane Fo (41:09):
For me, it's slow down, so as opposed to what kind of pressure
you're probably getting from yourinstitution or your mentor or your chair.
Usually, I see individuals reach successsooner if they take a slow approach
rather than a rapid, panicked approach.
(41:29):
So work a long time onthat first submission.
Really make sure it'sas great as it could be.
Rather than saying OK, I really haveone activity and I'm gonna put in
three different R01s because I'mgoing to be that superstar that's
going to get three R01s all at once.
What I will see is they'll havethree solid specific aims, then
(41:52):
instead of putting it into one grantapplication, they put it into three.
And all three of those grantapplications go down in flames, and
two years later, I'm talking to theindividual and they're back at square
one as to how to get an NIH grant.
Really focus all your energyon that first submission.
Make it as great as it can be.
(42:13):
And don't think about being a superstarbefore you even have one grant.
Emily Carif (42:19):
So mine's kind of a combination of the two, which is really
go into the NIH and the NINDS websitesfor information, especially if you
haven't put in an application and wekeep telling you to contact your program
director, you don't have one yet, butif you go to the CSR's website, they
(42:45):
will give you a place, it's calledmatchmaker and you can say, these are
mine proposed specific aims, put themin, and they'll tell you who to contact.
But most people don't knowthat the NIH has this resource.
So just go to the NIH page, go tothe NINDS page, click on the FAQs
and this really look around andsee what we already have told you
(43:12):
before you start, you know, makingdecisions that waste everyone's time.
Lauren Ullrich (43:18):
Marguerite, you have some advice?
Marguerite Matthews (43:20):
Yes.
Um, you're expected to be anexpert in your research area.
You're not expected to be an experton how NIH grants process works.
This is a long time from the timeyou conceive the idea, put the
application together, go throughreview, then get your notice of award.
There's a lot of thingsthat have happened.
And then there's a lot more thingsthat will happen afterwards.
(43:42):
So, um, take your time, but alsoask for help wherever you need it.
You aren't expected tohave all the answers.
There will be people whoare willing to help you.
What about you, Lauren?
Lauren U (43:53):
I would say, following up on that, we hear a lot of rumors and
misinformation that's out there regardingpolicies and procedures, and what NIH
will fund, and what you're eligible for.
And some of that comes from differentinstitutes having different policies and
people thinking that they apply acrossall of NIH, and some of it comes from
(44:15):
that the policies are always changing.
And so you're not the expert on that.
Even us in the room were not theexpert on all of these things, but
we are the ones that can connectyou and know who the expert is.
And so, if you have any questions or ifsomebody tells you something or your PI
tells you something and you think, "Ijust want to double check and confirm
(44:37):
that that's still the case." Just reachout to us because we can find the answer.
So that's all we have time fortoday on Building up the Nerve.
Thank you again to our guest thisweek for sharing their expertise, and
(44:57):
we'll see you next time on our lastepisode, when we tackle how NINDS
monitors its portfolio as a whole.
You can find past episodes of thispodcast and many more grant application
resources on the web at NINDS.NIH.gov.
Marguerite Mat (45:12):
You can email us questions at NINDSNervePod@nih.gov.
Make sure to subscribe to the podcaston Apple podcasts or your favorite
podcast app so you don't miss an episode.
We'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The MeatEater Podcast
Building on the belief that a deeper understanding of the natural world enriches all of our lives, host Steven Rinella brings an in-depth and relevant look at all outdoor topics including hunting, fishing, nature, conservation, and wild foods. Filled with humor, irreverence, and things that will surprise the hell out of you, each episode welcomes a diverse group of guests who add their own expertise to the vast world of the outdoors. Part of The MeatEater Podcast Network.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.