Hopefully at this point you have read Part 1 of my NIH F31 series which gives an overview of the application process. In Part 2, I’m going to share tips and tricks I picked up through my own application process as well as the feedback I received from reviewers, to help you put forward the best application possible.
Figure out if there are internal deadlines: My university also required that the Research Office approved and submitted the application, so they had their own internal deadlines for all of the documents. This means, my application was actually due to my university 3 business days before the actual deadline, which definitely changed my timeline!
Read and Re-Read the Application Instructions: Throughout the instructions there are little orange boxes that say “Additional Instructions for Fellowship”. These are different than other NIH grants and super helpful (and important), so triple check you’re following the instructions for each document.
Choose co-sponsors and collaborators that fill a gap: If your PI has a gap in knowledge that is necessary to achieve your research goals, it may be helpful to have a co-sponsor or collaborator that you will work with to gain this knowledge. For example, I will be using EMGs to collect data and my PI has limited experience with these sensors. For my F31, I have a co-sponsor who is very familiar with the sensors and my analysis techniques (this individual is not formally a co-mentor for my degree, but is on my dissertation committee).
Co-sponsors can also increase confidence in your mentoring team: I have a young PI, who has not mentored a student with a F31 before. Multiple reviewers commented on this in my feedback. By adding a co-sponsor with more experience, we were able to alleviate those concerns.
Ask your recommenders for letters early, and follow-up frequently as the deadline approaches: Recommenders cannot be your mentor, co-sponsor, collaborators, or the individual who signs your Description of Institutional Environment and Commitment to Training document (typically the head of your department, though it can be someone else).
Don’t make your specific aims too aggressive or co-dependent: I submitted only two of my three proposed dissertation aims (for my graduation in two years) and still received feedback that it was too aggressive for the two-year funding timeline. Ask other professors and your collaborators for feedback on the feasibility. Also be sure that your aims are not co-dependent (i.e., if you have negative results for Aim 1, you can still do Aim 2-n).
Set up a meeting with your program officer: Program officers are NIH employees with scientific backgrounds that are responsible for administering grant portfolios. Your program officer will be able to provide feedback on whether your proposed work is appropriate for the institute you’re applying to. They also know what makes a great application; they may provide advice or ask clarifying questions that you could expect of a reviewer. I recommend having a draft of your Specific Aims and Biosketch to share with them.
Make sure you know and complete the Clinical Trial requirements: NIH recently changed their definition of a Clinical trial. If your work qualifies under this definition you will need 1) an approved clinical trial led by your sponsor or co-sponsor that you can conduct your research under (you CANNOT propose your own clinical trial) and 2) complete the supplementary clinical trial documents. These documents include things like recruiting approaches, data safety and monitoring, structure of study team, timeline, etc. Do not leave these documents to the last minute! How much you reference the approved clinical trial in your research strategy will depend on how much of the study design you are planning to use. I mentioned my mentor had an approved clinical trial once in the research strategy and again in the clinical trial documents, but everything else in the research strategy was my proposed work (which was a subset of the actual clinical trial).
Don’t be afraid to ask your PI, department, or research office for templates: I was able to get templates for Training in Responsible Conduct of Research and Description of Institutional Environment and Commitment to Training which saved a lot of time. I also was able to pull almost all the needed information of Equipment, Facilities and Other Resources, and the Clinical Trial documents from my PI’s previous grants. You do not have to start from scratch!
Use a reference manager!!!: This is true at any point in your PhD, but will become really important as you work on your research strategy. Using a reference manager that interfaces with your text editor (e.g., Word, LaTeX) will enable you to automatically update your bibliography as you add or remove references in the editing process.
Tie all of your documents and proposed work back to your long term goals: This is a long application and the reviewers read several applications each cycle; they’re not going to remember your career plans. Keep reminding them of how this research will help you achieve your specific goals. I included at least one sentence in my Specific Aims and Research Strategy that highlighted how this work will ultimately prepare me for a career as a post-doc and faculty member. In the Applicant Background and Training Plan, I made sure to highlight why each training goal was necessary for my long-term success.
Quote the NIH institute’s proposed research objectives or the NIH’s mission: The institute you’re applying to likely has proposed research objectives (e.g., NICHD) or an outlined strategic plan strategic plan. These may give guidance on what the institute’s funding priorities are. Don’t be afraid to directly quote these priorities or the NIH’s mission and highlight how your research relates to them in the Research Strategy or your Biosketch. You do not want the reviewers to be able to say your work does not align with the funding mechanism.
Highlight program requirements that may have prevented research progress: My program is course intensive for the first two years (12-18 credits/ semester) and required a 6+ month long comprehensive exam process at the completion of my first two years. As a result, I did not have many physical research outputs when I was working on my application and I was worried this would make me a less desirable candidate. In my Applicant Background and Training Plan, I discussed these requirements to qualify my research activity so far. I also made sure to mention what research I had been involved in, how that shaped my research interests, and manuscripts I was currently working on. This was well received by all the reviewers.
About the Author:
Ashley is a PhD Candidate at Boston University in Rehabilitation Sciences. She recently received an F31 fellowship to fund her doctoral dissertation work. Her research is focused on understanding the effect of walking with a soft robotic exosuit on neuromuscular control in individuals after stroke. When not in the lab, Ashley enjoys hiking, playing soccer, reading mystery novels, and advising the BU chapter of her sorority, Alpha Delta Pi.
Comments