Office of Research

Interactive Workshop for Research Grant Applications

Posted May 1, 2013 - Office of Research

<!--


-->

Cleveland State University's Office of Research is pleased to announce workshops to
help faculty enhance biomedical proposals directed to National Institutes of Health (NIH), National
Science Foundation (NSF), or other agencies.

The workshop is designed to last roughly two hours and will cover the topics per the agenda below. The
workshop offering dates will be in response to faculty needs. If you are interested, or have any questions,
please contact Joy Yard in the Office of Research at j.yard@csuohio.edu or 216-687-9364.

Antonio Scarpa, renowned scientist and former Director of the NIH Center for Scientific Review (CSR),
has agreed to provide the workshop. Dr. Scarpa served as a Director of the CSR at NIH between 2005
and 2011. CSR organizes the peer review groups that evaluate the majority of grant applications
submitted to the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Scarpa played a significant role in helping NIH design
and to implement the first major changes to NIH peer review in 65 years. Between 1983 and 2003 he
served as a permanent member of three NIH peer review committees as well as a member of peer review
committees for the American Heart Association.

Agenda

Federal Laws and Process

  • Fundamental Facts and Constraints
    • Appropriation
    • Departments
    • Federal Advisory Committees
    • Posting and Advertising
    • The View of Congress
  • Difference in Budget, Appropriation, Review and Funding between NIH, NSF, DOD
  • NIH Institutes and Centers
  • Scientific Review Officers and Program Officers
  • NIH review Structure: CSR, Institutes, IRGs and SRGs
  • Ownership of Peer Review
  • Program Announcements and Request for Applications (RFA)
  • RFA, R01, R21, R15, etc
  • Special Emphasis Panels (SEPs)
  • 3 Main Platforms for Review
  • Scoring and Percentiling
  • Institutes and Advisory Committees (Councils)

Writing a Grant Application

  • When to Apply
  • Selecting a “Mechanism” R01, R29, RFA, etc
  • Selecting the Institute and Study Section
  • Ensuring Review by the Appropriate Study Section or SEP
  • Addressing requests
  • Successful Writing
  • Impact and Significance
  • Common Errors and Weaknesses
  • Advice during Writing and before Submitting
  • Deadlines and Waivers

The Review

  • The Panel
  • Face to Face, Telepresence, Internet Assisted Review
  • Preliminary Scores
  • Posting Critiques and Scores
  • After the Review

  • Contacts, Appeals and Resubmission
  • The Revised Application
  • Request for Different Institutes or Study Sections

Q & A and Individual Situations