[Lauren Ullrich] Hi and welcome to the NIH Blueprint Diversity Specialized Predoctoral
to Postdoctoral Advancement in Neuroscience, also known as the D-SPAN, Award webinar.
This is an F99/K00 mechanism.
So today, I just wanted to give you a few quick notes before we start.
A recording of this webinar and the slides will be available on the NINDS website and
the NIH Neuroscience Blueprint website a few weeks after the webinar.
The presentation itself will last for around an hour and then we'll have the rest of the
time for questions.
So, during the webinar itself you will be muted and we're going to ask you to type your
questions into the Q&A box which should be on the right side of your screen and the Q&A,
like I said, will be at the end of the webinar.
If your question wasn't answered during the webinar, please email us so we can help you.
So today, we'll go through the introduction of our two speakers, we'll talk about what
the NIH Blueprint is, as it is a little different than mechanisms that are funded solely by
an institute or center.
We will go through the eligibility requirements for the F99/K00, the program goals, we'll
go through all the application components, and the review criteria, and then we'll have
our Q&A.
OK, so our speakers today are Dr. Nancy Desmond who is the Associate Director of Research
Training and Career Development and Chief, Neuroendocrinology and Neuroimmunology Program
in the Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science at the National Institute
of Mental Health and Dr. Michelle Jones London, Chief, Office of Programs to Enhance Neuroscience
Workforce Diversity at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
Take it away, Michelle.
[Michelle Jones-London] First, thank you all again for your interest and for making time
to attend this webinar today.
I think we can all agree that the field of neuroscience over the recent years has achieved
many new exciting research advances and the data shows that the trainees that have increased
in terms of receiving PhDs in neuroscience has reflected that.
However, when it comes to diversity, diversity remains an issue across the biomedical workforce,
and neuroscience is unfortunately no different in terms of smaller numbers.
According to NSF, the data shows that only about eleven percent of those enrolled in
U.S. neuroscience graduate programs were from diverse groups.
NIH believes that engaging trainees and researchers from every segment of the American society
is necessary to leverage the U.S. intellectual capital.
The diversity of our country's population is an extraordinary resource, this potential
can only be realized by fully engaging the talent, intelligence, and drive all of its
members regardless of race, ethnicity, or disability.
Also, studies show that this is the right thing to do from a standpoint of science;
that a diverse workforce results in higher quality scientific research through greater
innovation, creativity, and discovery.
So now that we've talked about the need, let's look talk a little bit about why this initiative.
While many are excited about the research areas blooming within the field of neuroscience,
many trainees--perhaps even you yourself who are listening to this webinar--may feel that
the current research environment is very challenging, and perhaps have even gone back and forth
on whether the research career is even a desirable one.
The goal of this initiative is not to convince you that this is the right path for you, but
to provide support, mentorship, and resources for those who do see this as becoming an independent
neuroscience researcher as a viable pathway to use your talents, your passion, and the
goal of this initiative really does align with the NIH diversity goal to create a seamless
transitions for biomedical career advancement and progression.
Keep in mind, as Lauren already cited, that this new pilot program is bigger than just
one neuroscience NIH Institute.
It is being funded by the NIH Blueprint as a collaborative and coordinated effort.
On the right side of the slide and at the top of the funding opportunity announcement,
or the RFA, you can see a list of the 13 participating NIH institutes and centers.
By pulling resources and expertise, NIH blueprint is taking advantage of economies of scale
and confronting challenges too large for any single NIH Institute or Center.
Blueprint eligible programs are cross-cutting and benefit the broader neuroscience community.
The goal for increasing diversity in the neuroscience aligns with this mission, and aligns with
the overarching goals and purpose of the NIH Blueprint.
This D-SPAN, which we call it, or the F99/K00 award is intended for individuals who have
demonstrated an interest in any neuroscience research career and in an NIH blueprint mission-relevant
area, and for this particular announcement, we've also included perhaps something that
you've heard about: the BRAIN Initiative.
The BRAIN Initiative research areas are also eligible.
The BRAIN Initiative, or Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies, is
part of a public-private collaborative effort aimed at developing new experimental tools
that will revolutionize our understanding of the brain.
You can learn more about the NIH Blueprint and also the BRAIN Initiative by going to
their respective home pages.
So now back to what is the D-SPAN?
The NIH Blueprint D-SPAN program really does seek to increase the levels of participation
of diverse trainees transitioning from graduate student to postdoctoral positions.
It'll do this by providing a continuum of support throughout what we consider a very
critical post-graduate career stage.
We will do this by creating accountability, a structured process for ongoing assessment,
enhancing mentorship that you receive in both phases, and empowering diverse trainees to
choose postdoctoral environments that match your skills and your scientific interest without
worrying about financial constraints.
This two-phase award will facilitate completion of the doctoral dissertation and transition
talented graduate students to strong neuroscience research postdoctoral positions.
And also, not only the research components, but the career development opportunities relevant
in getting you to the long-term career goal of becoming an independent neuroscience researcher.
Now, probably the most important part--and I hope we don't lose people along the way--we
don't want anyone investing time in writing an application that does not match the NIH
policy or eligibility requirements.
If that happens, the application will end up being withdrawn and not considered for
review.
The first: this is a diversity award.
You must be a member of one of the recognized NIH diversity groups based on under-representation
on a national basis appropriate for this career stage.
You can either be eligible based on under-representation by race or ethnicity, NSF data shows that
the following groups would be included in this category for neuroscience: that's African
Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and other
Pacific Islanders.
The other category of eligibility includes those individuals with disabilities.
That's defined as those with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits
one or more of your major life activities.
The other thing is that, to apply, you must also be a US citizen or permanent resident
by the time of the award.
Current F31 awardees and appointees on T32s are eligible to apply, but of course you cannot
hold two training awards at the same time.
If you receive the D-SPAN, you would have to end your appointment on either the F31
are the T32.
For dual-degree or professional doctorate students such as MDs, MD/PhDs, you are not
eligible because this training timeline that we have is really not compatible with your
current training that you would receive for this dual degree.
At the time of award, applicants are expected to have one to two years to complete their
PhD dissertation research--that is the F99 phase--before transitioning to the mentored
postdoctoral research training phase--and that's the K00.
In this case, if we look at that from the one to two years, this typically means that
an applicant should be in their third or fourth year of graduate school when you apply.
If you're outside of that range, you are allowed to apply, but you must make a strong case
for why you will either finish early or need additional training in the lab beyond the
six years.
Instead, we recommend that perhaps you consider applying for the new NINDS F32, or also the
BRAIN Initiative has an F32, which allows you to apply up to a year before you actually
enter your postdoc lab.
To ask about the exceptions to the third and the fourth year eligibility, please feel free
to just contact me.
Some examples of acceptable exceptions can include someone who had a documented leave
of absence due to your health, or for someone applying in year two who's had an MS degree,
and is expected to graduate within two years.
Part of your application will contain verification by your institution that you're at the dissertation
phase, and are currently in a PhD program that is neuroscience-relevant, and that you
yourself have a desire to have a career as an independent investigator in neuroscience
research.
And finally, when it comes to eligibility, a really important component of this is that
you must have mission relevance to at least one of the neuroscience institutes listed
on the FOA, as I previously described on slide number seven.
As always, if you have any specific questions about your eligibility, we're more than happy
to receive your questions.
Just email us.
In terms of award details, this mechanism involves two phases of funding: it provides
1-2 years of support for completing your PhD dissertation in the F99 phase, and up to four
years of support for postdoctoral training in the K00 phase.
Awardees will receive the F99 funding near the end of the dissertation research, and
can then bring the four years of the K00 to the selected postdoc at any US institution.
You do not have to have a postdoctoral position or mentor established at the time of your
application submission.
In the majority of cases, your K00 postdoc will be at a different institution and with
a different mentor.
The application includes career goals, objective, the applicant's plans for career development
training activities during your award period, and your biosketches, and other documents.
If approved, the K00 support will go for four years of the postdoctoral research, but it's
not automatic to receive just this K00 just because you had the F99.
As I stated, you'll have to put in an application to get prior approval.
If you begin--if the applicant begins a postdoctoral position or completes all of your PhD dissertation
requirements before an F99 award is actually made, neither the F99 award nor the K00 award
will be issued.
This slide just highlights what we've talked about already in terms of career stage eligibility,
but also gives you a little bit more detail in terms of the funding that you would expect
to receive if you are an awardee.
The stipend level is the same as for the F31, it includes tuition and fees allowable at
this phase only, and an institutional allowance including things like insurance, supplies,
etc.
The K00 phase, as I mentioned already, is up to four years: you get up to $50,000 towards
the salary of your career, and $3,000 towards the research development costs.
For this initiative or for this application we are requesting a letter of intent.
The letter of intent, the purpose is to help anticipate and manage the review panel.
NIH policy is that letters of intent are non-binding, but we really do encourage you to submit one.
The other thing is that, perhaps in your travels, or through talking to peers, or your mentor,
you've heard of the other F99 that NIH has: the one that's at NCI or the National Cancer
Institute.
Unlike the NCI F99, more than one person may apply from any institution.
We highly encourage everyone who is eligible to apply, even if others from your institution
are also applying.
So before you start, keep these things in mind, and you should be discussing this with
your mentor.
The first thing is really think about your career goals.
Define your career goals and the area of your research interest, keeping in mind that, once
again, it has to fit one of the NIH Blueprint research interests or the BRAIN Initiative
research areas.
The second thing is to outline the technique skills, knowledge, and relationships necessary
to achieve your career goals.
What will you need to make that transition to a postdoc and beyond?
The third, and a very important thing is, it's a good thing to identify your strengths,
but it's also a good thing to do a gap analysis and decide: What skills are lacking?
What skills do you need to be developed?
The fourth is define your research plan: How will the two phases of your research, the
F99 and the K00, build off your existing strengths and provide you with the skills, techniques,
and data that will lead you to success.
The fifth, build a training plan that is tailored to you: don't have a training plan that is
borrowed from other awards that may be in the lab or from other people.
The training plan should really speak to your needs, your talent.
This is something that really has to be specific for you.
Number six, assess guidance and mentorship that is needed: what will you learn from the
identified mentor?
And keep in mind that what we see a lot of in terms of the training world is that sometimes
it's more than one mentor: it could be a co-mentor, or a mentoring team, and are all the areas
of your development covered?
So, just in general, for the F99 phase, you're going to be provided support to finish the
dissertation research.
We expect an outstanding application to articulate a thoughtful research project that has a clearly
stated rationale, goes beyond experimental details, and offers perspective about the
work's expected outcomes and significance.
For the K00, you know, most applicants will not have, and probably shouldn't have, a commitment
to a postdoc lab.
We don't expect a whole lot of detail, but we expect the applicant to articulate in broad
strokes the future research direction and what is needed to develop the career through
to the next stage.
Now, Dr. Nancy Desmond from NIMH will detail the application components and provide guidance
for submitting a competitive application in response to this unusual type of mechanism.
[Nancy Desmond] Great.
Thanks, Michelle.
I want to talk about some of the nuts and bolts of this application and first provide
some very general guidance.
First, in the next few slides, I'll be talking about particular sections of the application.
These sections refer to where you may find instructions in the application guide.
Some of the instructions are in the general application guide; some of them are in the
fellowship specific guide.
There's an important point to keep in mind, and it's a little confusing, there is a hierarchy
that you need to know about when you're reading all of these instructions and figuring out
which instructions to follow.
So, first you have the NIH Application Guide, which gives you very general instructions,
kind of like the highest level kind of instruction.
And second, there are very specific instructions for particular types of applications.
For example, for individual fellowships, they are covered in section 9 of the Application
Guide.
And then third, there is the specific funding announcement to which you are applying: in
this case, the RFA for D-SPAN.
If there is different advice offered in each of these particular instructions, it's important
to remember that the RFA always would overrule the Application Guide.
And so, if there is an apparent conflict in the instructions, you follow the instructions
in the RFA itself.
So, it's very important that you read the entire FOA carefully, including the review
criteria, as well as reading the fellowship instructions as you're putting your application
together.
So this is what the grants.gov website page will look like when you view a funding opportunity.
You need to download the application package and the instructions for this RFA; there are
links in the RFA that will allow you to do this, or you can use assist.
Both of these are available in the FOA.
An important point: if you don't already have a commons ID account, you need to get one
now, because you cannot submit an application if you don't have a commons ID.
Your institutional official is the one to go to, they will help you obtain this important
ID.
You also need to refer to the table of page limits for fellowships, which will tell you
how many pages you're allowed to have for each section of your application.
There appear a number of different application software packages that are available to help
you in terms of putting together an NIH application.
Each institution typically has their preferred software package.
But regardless, the application components are the same.
So specific instructions for your applications.
You need, use the SF424 (R&R) fellowship package, this is the same one used for all fellowships
at the NIH.
However, the Specific Aims and Research Strategy Sections for this particular RFA follow a
non-traditional format which we will talk about more during the webinar.
Other sections are much more similar to the predoctoral fellowship program application.
So, there are a number of required forms, and this slide shows you a list of these forms.
There are mandatory forms, five of those, and then there are several optional forms.
Each form has several parts.
The first form is called SF424 R&R, the second: the fellowship supplemental form, etc., and
we're going to go through each one of these in subsequent slides.
There are also two optional forms for the planned enrollment report and the PHS 398
cumulative inclusion enrollment report.
These are related to projects in which research using human subjects is proposed.
For research involving human subjects or vertebrate animals, stem cells, or select agents, what
you choose in one form will influence the other forms, and we'll talk about these at
the end of this section of the webinar, but for now, let's focus on the mandatory sections
of the application.
I will review these forms in order, but will focus primarily on the specific parts that
are unique to the F99 part of the D-SPAN.
So, again, just to reiterate an important point, you need to recognize and accept that
the application instruction guide is always in a state of being updated.
And so it's best not to use a PDF of the application guide that you may have downloaded months
ago, because it may have changed since then.
And keep in mind, also, that there is that hierarchy that I mentioned before with the
very general application guide instructions, there is the more specific instructions for
individual fellowships, and then the instructions that are provided to you in the funding announcement,
where the funding announcement instructions always trump anything else.
You can always use the find function in Adobe to help you find all the relevant text that
is related to a particular question if you have particular things that you think you
don't fully understand what is what is going on in the various instructions.
So, we go on, I wanted to briefly mention an important component of the fellowship section:
the letters of reference.
You want to be asking people to write your letters of reference now, because they are
required, and if you don't have a sufficient number of letters of reference submitted at
the deadline for your application, your application will not move forward and cannot be reviewed.
There's an art to asking for letters of reference: you should always provide your reference letter
writers with all the information they need to write you a good letter.
This could include your complete CV, a link to the funding announcement so that they know
what you're applying for, a written description of your current research and your future plans,
and instructions on what aspects of your work or your training you would like them to comment
on.
I encourage you to think critically about who you're asking to write a letter for you,
and ensure that those individuals can speak to all of the different aspects on which you
will be judged.
You want to ask people to write letters of reference for you who actually know you, and
know about your qualifications as a scientist.
So, if we now move on to the so-called SF424 Form 1, which is also known as a cover sheet.
It's two pages, and it has a lot of details, nuts-and-bolts type information, but there
are some F99-specific components here.
For example, on item 12, the start date that you need to request in there is the start
of the F99 phase.
The earliest start date is September, 2017, so that would be the date that you would want
to put into that box on the cover sheet.
The second is the end date, that is the end date of the K00 phase, so basically, that
would be either five or six years after the start state, depending on if you're requesting
one year of F99 support or two years of F99 support.
You should request the total time you believe you need for each phase and what you believe
you can justify for the further research and training you're proposing to do.
Again, the maximum you can request is a total of six years.
Item 15 concerns the estimated project funding: this would cover both phases, both F99 and
K00.
You want to use the budget section in the RFA to help you with this entry.
This is an estimate only; don't stress about the exact number.
With help from grants people at your institution, you can use the information in the budget
section of the RFA to come up with your total requested budget.
You will have to guesstimate the K00 cost, considering what are the allowable costs there.
If an award is made, the NIH grants management specialist will verify the tuition and fees
and other expenses for the F99 phase.
And at the time of transition to the K00 phase, your K00 institution will be submitting a
new budget page as part of the transition application.
While there are directions for the transition application in the funding announcement, you
can ignore them now because they only apply at the time of the transition.
Item 21 is the cover letter.
In the cover letter, you want to cite the RFA, and to include the list of individuals
who will provide references for you, including their name, departmental affiliation, and
institution.
The list of referees is also an attachment in the application.
So now, I want to talk about part B: the PHS Supplemental Form.
This is--you can have up to six pages in this section, and in this section you want to be
sure to follow the RFA instructions.
Summarize your research and scientific experiences in chronological order.
Describe how your overall training goals will enhance your development and how they relate
to your career goal to become a productive an independent neuroscience researcher.
You want to discuss how the proposed research training plan for each phase, for the F99
phase, and the K00 phase, will enhance your conceptual knowledge, and technical and professional
skills.
And how that training plan for each phase is anticipated to facilitate your transition
to the next career stage.
I want to emphasize the importance of including both a timeline and milestones with it for
that timeline for both the F99 and K00 phases.
So, in Part C, so-called forms 2.
This is a very important section of the application: specific aims, research strategy, etc.
The specific aims and research strategy are very specific components for this, in the
way in which they are structured for this particular RFA, and I'd like to emphasize
the importance of following the instructions in the RFA for these two components.
"Selection of sponsor" section refers to your dissertation research advisor, that
is a your F99 sponsor or multiple sponsors, but it's for the F99 only.
Training in the responsible conduct of research is a required component for all fellowship
applications; it's important to pay attention to each of the five required points for training
and responsible conduct of research, particularly noting the duration of your proposed training
and its frequency.
You need to follow the instructions that are provided in the fellowship application guide
to complete that one page section.
So, if we now move to the specific aims page.
For the F99/K00 application, all applicants will use the structure of the three specific
aims that is shown here on this slide.
This particular format will ensure that applications address both the F99 and K00 phases, and it
will avoid any potential overlap problems for those who already have F31 awards, for
example, who are also now applying for the F99.
In addition, we believe that this structure will help reviewers focus on the potential
of applicants for this D-SPAN program.
Keep in mind the specific aims page is limited to a single page.
You can, of course, customize any other components of the text that you provide on this page
so that they are specific to your project, but you want to have aim one describe your
progress to date on your dissertation research project, aim two will discuss the work that
you need to complete on your dissertation project during the F99 phase, and aim 3 will
focus on the direction for your postdoctoral research.
The next section of the application is the research strategy.
For this section, you have six pages.
This is a structured in a bit of a different way from a traditional fellowship or research
grant application where typically there's a hypothesis, proposed experiment, and how
you will interpret the data.
Instead, we encourage here a broad, comprehensive viewpoint when you write this section, using
a narrative style.
You want to relate each of the aims to your career goals, and also to consider the review
criteria as you're writing this section.
Note that an innovation section is not required, and you do want to consider the significance
or importance of the overall question that you are addressing.
So now we're going to look at each of the specific aims, and talk about that component
of the research strategy section.
Aim 1: the dissertation research project.
What you have done so far: the goal, the rationale, the hypotheses, and the progress you have
made so far.
You want to highlight the skills and techniques that will contribute to your long-term career
goal.
The section will provide the background and significance for your dissertation project;
it is certainly appropriate to include research results obtained to-date, but you do want
to write this in a narrative style.
Aim 2 is about the work that you propose to do during the proposed F99 award phase, and
we anticipate that this is the aim that is going to receive the most scrutiny by the
reviewers.
So, incorporating some of the traditional format, that is, what is the hypothesis you
are testing, the proposed study that will examine that hypothesis, and how you will
interpret the data, and what you will do if the data turn out in a way different than
you anticipate, is recommended for this particular section.
Again, we encourage you to highlight the new skills that you're going to learn during the
remainder of your dissertation research project.
So, finally, the third aim focuses on the direction for your postdoctoral research.
Aim 3 should be written in a narrative style, since it's quite likely too early for you
to describe specific experiments that you would be conducting during the K00 postdoctoral
phase.
We don't believe that applicants should identify a specific postdoctoral mentor in this section.
It's unrealistic for you to have already identified the lab in which you would be conducting your
postdoctoral research if you need several more years of graduate training.
So, for aim 3, you should describe, again using a narrative style, the general research
direction for the K00 phase, including technical and career development skills that you propose
to acquire, as well as the plan that you're going to use to identify a postdoctoral mentor,
that is, to identify the best lab for you to achieve your goal.
So, you should not name a postdoctoral mentor, but we do suggest that you describe the attributes
of the institution and the mentor or mentors that you would seek for your postdoctoral
training.
If you receive an F99 award, you will, in the future submit a transition application
following the instructions in the RFA, prior to receiving the K00 award.
This application will be more like a traditional application, and would include specific aims
and research strategy for your postdoctoral project; it's going to provide the kind of
details that we're saying we aren't looking for in Aim 3.
Evaluation of the transition application down the road will be done by a project team from
the NIH Neuroscience Blueprint, and we'll look at your postdoctoral research plan in
terms of its focus on neuroscience, your progress during the F99 phase, and other variables.
But again, at this point, Aim 3 is a broader picture of your interest and your goals for
your research training as a postdoc.
So, the next section, part D:
sponsor and co-sponsor statement.
This is for the F99 phase.
This is a six-page section, no more than six pages.
This section is typically written by your sponsors; it is not written by you.
And the six pages should also include any information related to any co-sponsors you
may have.
There are five components to this section, and they are labeled A through E in the instructions.
The first is the research support that is available; you don't want to have your mentor
here recapitulate any information that is provided in the sponsor's biosketch, but
what is presented here is to list those grants that will be used to support your dissertation
research.
The next section is about prior trainees: this information is used by the reviewers
to help assess the sponsor's track record in successfully mentoring individuals.
So, your sponsor should be providing the number of prior trainees that each sponsor has trained;
they provide details for up to five previous trainees per sponsor.
The co-sponsor information may or may not be relevant, depending on their role in your
training project.
For example, if the co-sponsor will be providing clinical perspective, that individual's training
record may be less relevant.
But if your co-sponsor is going to provide extensive career mentoring, and, for example,
has trained many more students than your sponsor has, then it's very important that their information
be provided, so that a full picture is available to the review panel.
The third section is the training plan that is provided by the sponsors.
I'd like you to keep in mind that the training plan described by the sponsors should be in
agreement with the goals that you've previously described in Part D. If the sponsors' training
plan is out of alignment with your goals, the reviewers are going to question whether
all of you are actually talking to one another, and that won't serve you well at review.
So, this training plan should be personalized for your background and strengths, and should
be consistent with all aspects of the application.
It should address training areas where you need more development and should again, as
I said, be aligned with your career goals.
You want to make sure that the role of any co-sponsor is very clear here, and that the
inclusion of any co-sponsor is clearly adding value to your training plan.
While the training plan may be written solely by the primary sponsor, or by the sponsoring
team, or perhaps with each sponsor writing a separate section, it's important that it
be clear if the section is written as a collective that everyone has contributed to the development
of that.
I encourage the sponsors to just be very explicit about that, so that the reviewers understand
that the co-sponsors are actively engaged in your training.
The environment and research facilities: this is a section that, generally, sponsors are
very strategic about what they describe here, so that it doesn't merely repeat everything
that is stated in the other section entitled "Facilities and Other Resources."
The fifth section is the number of current trainees who will be supervised during the
fellowship period: important to include this for each sponsor.
Sometimes reviewers become concerned is the lab is really large; they will worry that
you will not receive adequate attention and mentoring by the sponsor.
So, if it is a large group in which you are working, we recommend that the sponsor describe
how the lab is structured, and the organization and the frequency of interactions between
the sponsor and you.
The last section concerns your qualifications, and this is the sponsor's chance to say what
a wonderful, outstanding, promising candidate you are.
The description here, of course, should match the training plan, so if the sponsor says
that you're wonderful in all aspects here, then the reviewers often wonder why it is
you need all this training.
Again, this could be written by the primary sponsor, by the team of sponsors, or by each
sponsor writing a separate section.
Regardless of how its organized, it all needs to fit within the six pages.
At this point, I want to remind everyone that there is no expectation that the F99 institutional
commitment includes a commitment of a postdoctoral position.
The commitment concerns the institutional commitment to you during your predoctoral
training, and transition in identifying the best postdoctoral position for you.
Typically, the postdoc is going to occur at a different institution in order to maximize
your training potential from that opportunity.
The next section, part D, is letters of support from collaborators, contributors, and consultants.
This is, again, another six-page maximum section.
The letters of support are not the same as reference letters; these are signed statements
from any individual who will be collaborating or consulting with you on this project.
The letters will state and confirm that they will participate in the project, and they
will describe the specific role of each collaborator and consultant.
If you have advisory committee members, they should also provide signed statements, or
alternatively, all of the members of the advisory committee could sign a single letter describing
how they are going to provide you with advice.
Again, these statements should confirm each individual's participation, describe their
roles, and document the expertise that they will contribute.
Generally, individuals on an advisory committee do not need to provide biographical sketches.
Part E of the application describes institutional environment and commitment to training.
Here, the institution will document a strong, well-established research program that is
related to your area of interest.
They should describe opportunities for intellectual interactions with other investigators and
other individuals in training, for example, courses that are offered that are relevant
to you, journal clubs, seminars, retreats, other opportunities for you to present.
This statement should also indicate facilities and other resources that will be available
to you for your career enhancement and for the research that is proposed in the application.
Now, getting back to these other research training plan sections.
Although we will touch base on the human subjects and vertebrate animals later, you must include
a resource sharing plan to the extent that resource sharing is relevant to the proposed
research, reviewers will comment on whether the data sharing plan, sharing model organisms,
and genomic data sharing plans are reasonable, or whether the rationale for not sharing these
resources is reasonable.
Note that you do not need to include and a plan to authenticate biological and/or chemical
resources.
Again, there is a part G for budget you want to be sure to check the box for tuition and
fees.
Part H concerns the appendix: you don't want to disobey the rules about appendices, because
that can lead to having your application not being reviewed.
And at this point in time, there are only an extremely limited number of circumstances
in which appendices are allowed.
So, I want to move now to talking about the senior and key personnel profile.
Fellowship awards require a primary sponsor, and there may also be co-sponsors, consultants,
and contributors.
Each individual who is committed to contribute to the scientific development and execution
of the project, including sponsors and co-sponsors, should be identified in your application as
senior/key personnel, even if they do not commit any specific measurable effort to the
project.
Each one of these individuals also needs to provide a commons user name.
You of course, are the most important person here, and need to include your profile as
well.
You will use a different biographical sketch form page than does your sponsor, and we encourage
you to take a look at the sample biosketch that is available online, so that you provide
the information that reviewers will expect to see in that component.
Under Other Project Information, there are a couple of important points.
Although foreign institutions are not eligible to apply for this funding opportunity, foreign
components are committed.
So, item 6, international activities, may apply to your application.
There are two other attachments that are described in the RFA: the so-called nomination letter
and additional educational information, and also the certification letter, and we will
go through each of these now.
So, the nomination letter comes from the institution and it confirms that you are at the dissertation
stage of your graduate training, and in a Ph.D. program in a neuroscience field, and
finally that you seek a career as an independent investigator in neuroscience.
The name of your primary sponsor and the affirmation of the institution's commitment to your training
and research career goals should also be a part of this letter.
Note that this letter would be provided by the head of your graduate program, and must
be signed both by this individual and by your institution's organizational representative.
This is important that this letter be included, a signed letter be included, as part of your
application for it be fully responsive to the RFA.
The letter may not be more than one page in length.
Additional educational information is requested for this RFA.
This attachment should include a description of your graduate program that explains the
structure of the program, required milestones, their usual timing, and average time to degree
over the past 10 years.
In addition, we encourage that the following information be included: the frequency and
methods by which your program is formally monitoring and evaluating the progress of
graduate students and resources available to you, including those typically associated
with an office of graduate education.
Finally, this section should describe your progress and status in the graduate program
to date, and to relate that to the typical timeline for your graduate program.
It's important that the name of the individual who has provided this information be included
at the end of the description; typically this information is provided by the director of
the graduate program.
Another required component is the certification letter.
This letter is from the institution and it certifies your eligibility for support under
the D-SPAN program.
The statement must include a clear description of how the appointment of you to the D-SPAN
program will expand the pool of under-represented individuals within science on a national basis.
Populations that are nationally under-represented for the purposes of NIH diversity programs
are identified in the NIH notice of interest in diversity, which is available on the NIH
webpage.
NIH relies on data compiled and analyzed by the National Science Foundation using an evidence-based
method that reviews the representation of populations across the STEM pipeline.
The institutional certification letter must state the basis for your eligibility by reference
to NSF national data.
In addition to these data, the certification letter may also address how you would further
diversity in the neuroscience workforce.
Since certification takes place at the academic institution, and not at the NIH, the information
contained in the certification letter adds a level of transparency in alignment with
program goals for the reviewers.
The certification letter from your institution must be on institutional letterhead and scanned
so that an official institutional signature is visible on the letter.
We request that you--that this letter be in PDF format and it have a specific name: diversity
eligibility letter, and this is described in the funding announcement.
Again, this is a required component for the application, if it is missing from the application,
your application would not be considered complete, and could not be reviewed.
We're getting down to the last few slides here.
R&R Other Project Information.
In both the project summary abstract and in the project narrative section, be sure to
address both phases of the D-SPAN award, both F99 and K00.
While items 9, 10, and 11 are not explicitly required, it is typical for fellowship applications
to include these sections, and we recommend that you do so also.
Please note that there are specific circumstances in which information can be submitted after
your application has been received by the NIH.
These are so-called post-submission materials, and these are sort of like just-in-time-before-review
kinds of information that may be submitted on your behalf by your institutional official
to the scientific review officer.
And there are two particular types of information that can be very important for you to consider
providing if it comes in after your application has been submitted.
One is information about sponsor funding.
For example, if your sponsor received news of an NIH grant award after your application
is submitted, and that is relevant to your particular project, that is the kind of information
it that reviewers would want to know about.
Another particular category that can be important is if you have news of a paper that has been
accepted for publication.
So, in those kind of circumstances, you would want to contact the program officer who is
assigned to your application or to the scientific review officer to find out how to provide
that information.
Generally, that information must be provided no less than 30 days before the review meeting.
Okay, performance sites.
So, here, you want to list all sites where the research will be done.
Typically, the primary site is where the institution is submitting the application, but in some
cases, there may be an additional institution or location that is involved in your research,
and they would be listed as a secondary site.
Now, I want to turn this back over to Michelle, and she's going to talk about the review criteria.
[Jones-London] Hello again.
Thank you Nancy.
I think that was extremely helpful and detailed, not only for the F99, but also perhaps learning
just about the NIH process.
Now, I'll quickly highlight components of the review criteria.
Keep in mind that all of what I will highlight has already been detailed by Nancy from the
perspective of the input, and now you'll be getting it from the perspective of the assessment
by the study section.
How you'll be judged by the reviewers is really not a secret: we tell folks that all the time
that when it comes to the training awards.
It is included in the FOA, and once you finish writing your application, the best advice
is for you and your mentor to check what you have written against this published review
criteria.
It can be found in Section 5.
Let's take a quick look at the sections: the first is applicant.
In the applicant--and I won't just go and read the slide; this has been copy and pasted
from the FOA itself--The gist in terms of what they're looking for in terms of the applicant
is that they really will be looking at your past productivity, what you're doing currently
in with respect to your dissertation research, and what are your plans for the future?
That is, what does your prior training show about you in terms of your potential, and
based on your current work, do they protect predict future success?
And do you seem committed to a neuroscience research career?
Basically, will your current "point A" help you get to "point B?"
Second, sponsors, collaborators, and consultants: that is the team around you.
The reviewers will be looking at does it make sense, this team that you've assembled?
Are these the right talent agents to help you get to the next step?
Can they support you financially, and also with respect to your professional development?
Can they provide the right support?
Nancy and I both mentioned the fact that you could have not only one mentor, but perhaps
a co-mentor, or even a mentoring team.
If you have that, you should clearly describe how all will coordinate the mentoring of you,
the candidate.
The next is the research training plan.
Like any other research that NIH would invest in, does this project have scientific merit?
Is the proposed research project sufficiently distinct from your sponsor's funded research
for your career stage, is it appropriate?
Is the proposed research relevant to your stated career objectives?
That is, does the research training plan align with the goals of the career development plan?
It should once again make sense.
And in broad strokes, have you developed a sound game plan for determining the next step,
of the selection of your postdoc mentor for the K00 phase?
For the training potential and development plan, as I stated, for the research training
plan, do the two align?
Will you get the skills that you actually need?
Does the plan prepare you for a successful transition?
These are the questions that the reviewers will be asking.
Also, have you convinced reviewers that you have a plan that takes advantage of not only
your strength, but also really addresses the gaps in your needed skills.
That is, why do you need this training?
Why does this matter to your development?
The institutional environment and commitment to training.
In general, is the institution demonstrating commitment to your current success, and will
they facilitate and foster your future preparation for the transition?
Once again, reviewers will not be looking for a commitment from your current institution
for them to promise you a postdoc position.
That is not the purpose of this award.
They really are focused on what they're doing for you at the F99 phase, and also, how are
they going to help you to get to the next step.
And speaking of next step, this is just our little take-home messaging.
The first part: confirm your eligibility.
You definitely don't want to waste your time putting together an application for something
that you're not eligible for.
The second: talk to your current mentor and devise a timeline to submit a competitive
application by April 8th.
This is an RFA, we do not have any multiple receipt dates.
Right now, April 8th is it, and so the purpose of having this webinar now is to give you
the time to put together your mentoring team, and to have that back and forth to decide
if this was the right fit for you in terms of the D-SPAN.
The third is submit a letter of intent by March 9th.
Let us know that you have an intention of applying to this mechanism.
This helps us for planning purposes, and to make sure we have the right reviewers.
And finally, receive feedback.
Don't work in isolation with putting together this application.
Take advantage of not only your mentor or mentoring team, perhaps peers.
Get feedback on the application itself, revise your work, and re-watch this webinar as necessary.
Nancy did an excellent job of going point-by-point in terms of what the FOA is stating in terms
of what we're looking for.
A lot of times, people have challenges understanding just the, perhaps, the "NIH speak" that's
written in the FOAs.
This webinar has hopefully taken a step-by-step detailed overview of what we are looking for.
So, the suggestion would be to once you have the application or a draft, is to look at
the webinar again and see if you're hitting the points that we mentioned.
Our goal today is to help you put together a competitive application: we want you to
succeed.
This webinar will be archived and you'll be able to look at it.
We'll have it archived on the various NIH Blueprint Institutes' websites, also the
NIH Blueprint website itself, and then also our moderator, Lauren, will be sending you
a direct link once the webinar has the ability to be shared.
Finally, we want to hear from you, we want to hear not only today what your questions
and issues are, but also in the future beyond today.
I'm the initial point of contact; you're free to send me an email about eligibility, or
anything else that you have questions.
And, so, speaking questions, now let's open it up: Lauren will moderate.
[Ullrich] Okay, so, we've had some questions come in over the course of the webinar, and
I want to encourage you to keep submitting, and we will keep the webinar going for as
long as we have questions to answer.
Well, until three o'clock, at least.
So, in addition to our speakers, we also have Ashlee Van't Veer, who is a program officer
at NIMH, in the Office of Research Training and Career Development, and Edgardo Falcon-Morales,
who is in the Diversity Office with Michelle and I at NINDS, as well as Liz Webber, who
is a charge of some of the review that we do at NINDS in the training program.
So all of us are here, available to answer your questions.
So, our first question is, can a candidate hold a diversity supplement award, or an F31,
and still qualify for the F99 K00 award? [Jones-London] Yes, as we stated, having an award like an
F31, and appointment on a T32, or a diversity supplement does not disqualify you for applying
for the F99.
You are still eligible.
[Ullrich] Can you talk a little bit more about the level of research experience in neuroscience
that might be expected by reviewers?
So, let's say you have a background in engineering, but you're doing neuroscience research: could
you still apply for the D-SPAN?
[Desmond] Absolutely: as long as your project would be seen by staff as being relevant to
neuroscience, and the part of the Institutes at the NIH, who are participating in this
funding opportunity, yes indeed.
I would encourage folks to contact Michelle, and confirm that the topic area falls within
the scope of what ICs signed responses to this RFA terms of the proposed science before
you complete your application.
[Jones-London] And that's a great point, Nancy.
The other part is that we've talked about neuroscience pretty broadly, but not all neuroscience
Institutes at the NIH are represented on this particular FOA, meaning that even though it
may be the neuroscience, it may not be an Institute that's participating.
So, the safest way to go is to just send out your specific aims, and we'll assure you whether
it is a go or not.
[UIlrich] What kind of preliminary data should be included in the D-SPAN application? [Jones-London]
So, because of the way and the timing of this award, the fact that an individual is applying
typically in their third or fourth year, and that it's during the dissertation phase, the
expectation is that you have some level of preliminary data, that you have some evidence
of feasibility with respect to your project, and can demonstrate that in the application.
[Ullrich] So, what kind of guidance is provided to the graduate students when they're doing
the transition to the K00?
So, let's say you have the F99, and how do they know what to do during the transition?
[Desmond] Well, before the transitions, while you're completing your dissertation, you need
to be thinking about what it is that you want to do as a postdoc.
And begin to think about that in very concrete terms because you need to begin to identify
potential postdoctoral mentors, institutions that you might consider doing a postdoc at,
because all of that process of identifying and of obtaining a commitment to a postdoctoral
position is part of what you're going to be doing during the F99, the first phase of the
D-SPAN award.
The K00, the second phase, starts when you begin in the postdoctoral lab, so the transition
itself, in a sense, is part of the F99.
And there, you will have your mentor team, and you're also going to probably be taking
advantage of feedback from NIH staff about things to think about as you're looking for
postdocs.
[Ullrich] We've had two questions about health insurance coverage, so is health insurance,
are funds provided for health insurance in both phases?[Desmond] So, you know in a fellowship
award, there is a standard allowance that is provided that would include funds for health
insurance.
During the K99, sorry, K00 phase, this would be part of the fringe benefit contribution
that the NIH would provide to support your K00, because you will be an employee of a
postdoctoral institution, and this would be part of your benefits as an employee.
[Ullrich] And, just to reiterate, do applicants need to be in the dissertation phase, or post
qualifying exams at the time of submitting the application? [Jones-London] So, the language
is that, by the time the application is submitted, you must have a nomination letter stating
that you are in the dissertation phase.
It could be for unique situations that currently, you are not.
Say, it's January now, and by April you could transition to that.
It's by the time of submission, and you have to have the ability for your institution
to be able to write you that nomination letter saying that you are in the dissertation phase.
[Desmond] So, let me just add on to Michelle's response to this, and depending, there may
be some distinctions among different disciplines in terms of the dissertation stage, if you
will, and what that means, so that if you have questions about this particular point
based on an idiosyncrasy of your graduate program, I would suggest that you consult
with Michelle before you were beginning to develop your application to make sure that
everyone is on the same page about this point.
[Ullrich] And another question here asked how closely should we work with our mentor
to prepare our application.
[Jones-London] This is a mentored award, you should work very closely with your mentor.
As Nancy has highlighted, there are actually some components where they should be writing
it.
We've called it "sponsor," but in terms of the language that should be synonymous
with the mentor.
Your mentor should be helping you through this.
This is, perhaps, your first time submitting an individual NIH award, but hopefully for
your mentor, that is not their first time, and so a good mentor will help you, give you
the room to develop this on your own, and to use this as a training and a lesson for
you to grow, but also, will use this as a time to give you feedback, to help you revising
it, not writing it for you, but giving you feedback.
Your mentor should be a partner in this process.
[Ullrich] And so, another question, several questions coming in about sponsors and co-sponsors.
So, do co-sponsors need to be faculty at the same institution that the applicant is at?
And also, could someone at a staff researcher level to be listed as a co-sponsor? [Jones-London]
Well, in terms of being at the institution that you're at, certainly, we would think
what is typical is that your primary mentor would reside where you are, but in terms of
co-mentors, there could be examples, I mean, you know, schools in certain areas that are
basically down the street, co-located, people that perhaps, are already on your defense
committee, or, you know, there could be really good cases for why you would have someone
that is not exactly at your primary institution.
The key here, and what we highlighted, was in terms of the training plan, and in terms
of where they talk about the relationship between the sponsor and you:you have to outline.
How will they interact with you?
How will they meet with you?
How will they contribute to your development?
The more remote a person is from where you're residing, there's going to be skepticism about
what is the real relationship?
Is this a name only, or is this a real mentorship?
You have to state the case and prove the case.
[Desmond] So, the other question was with regard to whether someone who is at a staff
researcher level could be a co-sponsor.
Again, I think this is the kind of question that we often answer with the phrase, "Well,
it all depends on the particular case."
So again, it would be important to build the case for the skills and knowledge that that
individual would be providing to help mentor you.
I could imagine a scenario where an individual in a core resource center, for example, who
has a very specialized skill set that you need to learn to complete your dissertation
research, may provide a strong component to your mentor team or group.
But again, it all depends on the circumstances of your particular application.
[Ullrich] So, another question about the sponsor.
So, does the sponsor have to be funded by one of the participating NIH Institutes?
So, let's say the sponsor is NIH-funded, and the work is responsive, but they don't actually
have funding from one of the Blueprint ICs on the FOA.
But that's not an issue, even with our F31s, we've seen cases where the research that the
trainee is focused on, has perhaps moved from where the parent grant, or not the parent
grant, but the mentors' original scope of research was.
The fact is that a lot of our Institutes also have research areas that almost touch each
other.
So, that's not a real issue.
In terms of the NIH funding itself, you can also imagine someone who had HHMI funding,
DOD funding, so that's not a criteria.
However, the dissertation project that you describe, and that you're working on, the
reviewers at NIH have to see that this isn't just a case of you trying to morph the project
to fit the funders, that this is something that truly stands as something that's relevant
to the NIH Blueprint Institutes.
[Ullrich] Another question.
If somebody is awarded an F99, are they still able to keep other NIH training funding, or
would they have to give that training funding up?
[Desmond] So, that's an easy question to answer, the answer is that you would not be able to
retain the other streams of NIH funding if you were to be awarded an F99.
[Ullrich] Okay, another question about mentors: Are international co-mentors allowed?
[Desmond] Again, it's the same principle: it all depends on the particular case of your
situation.
I would generally imagine that an international mentor would provide a very unique, although
perhaps that's a ridiculous phrase, but quite a unique resource that one could not—that
did not exist.
Because again, in the case of an international mentor, the reviewers may have more questions
about the actual integration of that individual into your mentoring, and the frequency and
quality of your interaction.
Not to say you shouldn't do it, but there needs to be a really good plan.
[Ullrich] In terms of choosing reference letters, should they come solely from faculty, or could
recommendations come from other people that you know, can speak to your expertise, say
a staff scientist? [Jones-London] I hate to use this word again but, it all depends.
But remember, the point of the references is that the study section is comprised of
people that are well-known in the field, who have stature.
And so, they want to hear from other people, who are their peers, about how great you are
and how you have this potential.
And these people should be people that not only know you, know your work, can speak to
you as a person not in generic terms, but also, a person to whom you would view that,
if they're sitting around, if the committee is sitting around and looking at a letter
from their peer, that there would be a level of respect about what they're saying about
you.
So, that would be the answer on that I would give, and I think that goes beyond just the
title of the person, but how they're known within, either you specific research area
community, or neuroscience in general.
[Ullrich] So, another question here, about the transition.
So, if awarded the F99, is the K00 portion guaranteed upon completing the application,
or is it a competitive process?
[Jones-London] So, it is administratively reviewed, meaning you won't, in terms of how
we use the word, "competitive," that would mean going back out to review, and going to
a study section.
That is not the case.
However, the K00 is not automatic, internally, as Nancy mentioned, the NIH Blueprint training
team will look at the application that you submit, and these components are outlined
in the FOA.
Right now, you wouldn't worry about that as you're applying for this initial F99, but
say you receive the award, you would look that over, and know that when it came time
for you to transition to the postdoc, you could put together a more traditional application.
You'll have the specific aims, you'll have the environment, the mentoring team, a training
plan, and this will all be reviewed in-house, or in administrative review.
And once again, it's not a guarantee, we will look at the suitability for the transition.
Is it still neuroscience relevant?
Is it a competitive environment?
Do we believe that this offers you the opportunity to get to what is the end goal, that is, a
successful independent research career?
[Ullrich] Okay, I'd like to have you guys talk a little bit more about the different
aims, so specifically, can you talk about aim two, and sort of the research to be completed,
versus in three, and how you might not know exactly who the mentor is going to be, so,
how should you frame this in the different aims when you're putting your application
together?
[Desmond] Well, I think that aim two is perhaps the most traditional, if you will, or conventional
piece of the application.
It would be more like if you've seen other fellowship applications what you might expect
to see in a research strategy section of an individual pre-doctoral fellowship application.
So, you're going to talk about the project, the studies remaining in your dissertation,
the hypotheses, how you're going to test them, how you're going to analyze the data,
keeping in mind the importance of data rigor, and how you're going to interpret the data.
And if the data don't turn out the way you expect, how that might alter the next study
in the proposed project?
Aim three is, I would call it more like a 10,000 foot view, if you will, of what you
want to do, the direction for your postdoctoral research.
Aim two is kind of down in the weeds of your dissertation project, and the specific experiments
that you want to do, in order to complete the PhD dissertation.
Aim three is, you're going to step back if you will, and it's more of a thought experiment.
To provide a context for--you've done this research as a graduate student and been driven
by an interest in some particular question on a scientific topic area, and as you think
about where you want to go, what you want to learn as a postdoc, then you're going to
be talking about what I want to do in very broad strokes.
This is not saying I want to, you know, "the first study I'm going to do as a postdoc is
I'm going to do fiber photometry in the basolateral amygdala because I want to test
this specific hypothesis related to anxiety-like behavior in female animals."
That's way too granular.
So, you need to step back, and think about what is the general question that is interests
me that I want to pursue as a postdoc?
What are the new skills that I want to learn?
Some people when they go into postdoc, may have as a graduate student, for example, done
very sophisticated electrophysiology in tissue culture and slices and they decide that they
want to gain a broader perspective on the physiology of the brain and they want to learn
how to do really sophisticated multi-unit and multiple electrodes recording, do fiber
photometry, you know, have hundreds of electrodes in the brain of an awake behaving animal so
they can ask questions a different level of analysis.
But in order to write aim three, you have to have an idea of what you want to do.
Not a detailed idea, because we also, I think, expect people might change their minds in
some way, because, of course, there's always new knowledge coming out, new tools being
developed that people want to learn and apply to a particular question, but in thinking
about what is the question that is driving my interest in neuroscience?
What do I need?
What do I want to do next?
[Jones-London] Yeah, and I think aim three, is really, if probably many of you, or some
of you have done an individual development plan and then you'll be asked for your short-term
and your long term goals or five-year planning goals: that's aim three.
You're really taking a look and saying, you know, I have ownership of my science.
I have ownership of where I'm going.
Where do I want to end up?
What do I want to gain out of this training experience?
So really, like Nancy said, we don't want to pigeonhole you.
The expectation isn't that aim two and aim three match together.
It could be that for your postdoc research direction, you're taking a piece of the techniques,
the things that you learned during your graduate training, and maybe going into another avenue.
That's what often happens in postdocs.
And so I think aim three is really you taking a step back and saying, with this neuroscience
training that I have, what do I want to do?
And how will I show the reviewers that, once again, I really have taken ownership of my
science, and that I thought about it, and that I have the potential to develop into
independence?
[Desmond] So, let me just remind you of one of the questions in the review criteria under
"research training plan."
There are a number of them and I think they're all very important questions, but in terms
of this particular question from one of our viewers, the question that the reviewers are
asked to consider is the following: Is the research direction outlined for the K00 phase
appropriate to the applicant's anticipated stage of development and as a vehicle for
developing the research skills described in the career development plan?
This is not a question about real granular.
It's a fairly macro-level question.
You're going to be outlining your research direction and how is that going to help you
learn the skills that you believe you want to acquire as a postdoc.
And remember you only have six pages in this section for aims 1, 2, and 3.
Six pages is not a lot of pages.
[Ullrich] Okay, so we have one more question in the queue, so if anybody else listening
has any questions, please send them in as soon as possible, otherwise we will wrap up.
So the last question is: for the introduction page of the specific aims, should there be
a focus on who we are as a scientist or focus on our project?
[Desmond] So I'm not sure what the question means about the "introduction page" of
the specific aims because the specific aims is one page in length, so I'm wondering perhaps
the question refers to, like, the beginning, before you say specific aim 1, blah blah blah
blah? [Jones-London] Or is it the fellowship application?
[Ullrich] I think it's probably referring to the extra text that might contextualizes
the specific aims page, the introductory paragraph.
[Desmond] So, typically on a specific aims page, just in general, not unique to this—yes,
intro paragraph.
Ok, so typically in a specific page, regardless of the particular funding announcement to
which someone is responding, people provide some context for the specific aims.
Scientific context for why this is important, how this relates to biomedical research, improving
health, et cetera.
[Jones-London] The CV it's going to be you, on your biosketch that's where you would talk
more about you as a scientist and how are, you know, what your perspective and what you're
bringing to the project.
[Desmond] And your contribution to date.
But the specific aims page is really more, is typically about the science and the project,
although of course, I think in this particular funding announcement there is more, in my
opinion, it seems like there's more integration with the specific training goals, if you will,
there may be more discussion related to that.
But in this introductory paragraph, generally its most about the science, although there,
if you have room I think it's great if you can integrate, make it really clear to the
reviewers the specific skills you're going to acquire and what they are because generally
reviewers read the specific aims pages aren't assigned to provide a full review of your
application, so it can provide a nice one-page snapshot, if you will, for them.
[Ullrich] So, I guess to wrap up, we've had a couple of questions sort of asking, you
know, how large is the application pool?
What's the award rate going to be?
And things of that nature, so just wanted to say that this is the first time that the
Blueprint is offering this award, so we don't know how many applications we will get, and
so we can't really give you any historical statistics.
And also to reiterate what Michelle said, that currently this is an RFA, so there's
only one application deadline of April 8th, and we don't know what the future may hold.
[Jones-London] Exactly, and this is, I mean, this is a very exciting opportunity for someone
to get this type of support.
You know, two years at the most at the graduate phase, up to four years at the postdoc level
and so, this is a time to gamble.
This is a time to focus on putting the most competitive application you can put together,
and not worry about statistics.
If you put together a competitive, compelling, strong application, it could be you.
And so, for something like this, these one-time shots, I would worry about putting together
the competitive application and not worry so much about the statistics.
[Desmond] And, you know, if you don't apply, you're not going to get any money.
[Jones-London] Exactly.
[Desmond] Give it your best shot.
[Ullrich] Is there anything else that our speakers would like to emphasize before we
sign off?
[Jones-London] We're really looking forward to a nice response to this FOA.
We thought long and hard about this initiative and we really would like the positive outcomes
from it.
We're here to help you, we're here to answer any questions that you may have regarding
eligibility, Nancy brought up a great point about dissertation, about mission relevance,
these are all things that if you're in doubt just ask us.
Don't necessarily take yourself out of the game, we're more than willing to answer your
questions and to work with you.
The other thing that I mentioned before is that this was a long webinar, but our hope
was that, you know, you'll be able to come back to it, it will be archived and it'll
be a great resource for you as you draft the application to come back and to listen.
And so thank you; I don't know if Nancy has parting words as well.
[Desmond] So I want to thank you for your persistence, shall we say, for the duration
of the webinar and really to reinforce Michelle's statement about that we are here to help;
if you don't ask questions, you can take advantage of our technical assistance and feedback to
you.
So don't assume, ask questions if you aren't one hundred percent sure.
[Jones-London] Get writing!
Bye!
[Ullrich] Thank you.
The recording should be posted in a couple weeks.
For more infomation >> Incontri Principali + Compravendita! (SBC Tutorial Economico)| Fifa17 - Duration: 8:34. 
For more infomation >> GRAMMY®s LIVE
For more infomation >> Infiniti FX 50 S Premium Aut. | Rijklaarprijs - Duration: 1:41. 
For more infomation >> MMD - Hans The Storyteller | Elsa and Hans from Frozen (+Motion DL) - Duration: 1:03. 
For more infomation >> Seat Leon 1.6 Businessline High - Duration: 1:33. 
For more infomation >> La Clé du Crépuscule - Episode 11 : Le Pouvoir - Duration: 3:25. 
For more infomation >> Le Bruit Dans La Ville - Bruit D'Ambiance Pour Se Concentrer - Étudier - Relaxer - Duration: 1:02:27. 
For more infomation >> Peugeot Partner 190C 1.9 D AVANTAGE - Duration: 0:52. 
For more infomation >> Kia pro_cee'd 1.6 GDI DynamicLine GT LOOK. - Duration: 0:59. 
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz CLA-Klasse CLA 180 d Shooting Brake Lease Edition - Duration: 1:15. 
For more infomation >> Citroën Saxo 1.5 D FURIO/Let op dit is een aangepaste auto speciaal voor hele kleine mensen!!! - Duration: 1:49. 
For more infomation >> Meet our coach ! - Duration: 4:05. 
For more infomation >> JW Library - Conhecendo o aplicativo - Duration: 1:40. 
For more infomation >> Toyota Land Cruiser V8 4.5 D-4D EXECUTIVE 7P. Navigatie | Luchtvering | 20" LM-velgen - Duration: 0:42. 
For more infomation >> Former Big Brother winner Pete Bennett turns to cleaning - Duration: 2:16. 
For more infomation >> Vente directe par réseau - L'essentiel - Duration: 2:07. 
No comments:
Post a Comment