*Sigh*

Apr. 2nd, 2010 02:24 pm
rivka: (Rivka P.I.)
[personal profile] rivka
I just got off the phone with my Program Officer at NIMH. He doesn't think my grant is going to be funded this time around. He says that I got a great score for the first submission... but I should prepare to resubmit. I more or less expected that to happen, so I'm not crushed.

The part of the discussion I didn't expect had to do with when I should resubmit. There are three deadlines per year for AIDS-related applications: January 7, May 7, September 7. The review cycle is such that the earliest possible start date is about six months in the future; for my January submission, I proposed a start date of July 1.

My PO said that, given the level of the critiques I need to respond to, he would normally encourage me to reapply at the next deadline: May 7. That is totally what I had expected to do. However, as I've mentioned before, NIH has completely revamped their application structure. I'll need to substantially modify my application - including cutting the length in half. And, my PO suggested, that might take me more than a month.

We talked about the pros and cons for a while. He does say that May is "not out of reach." Advantages of trying for May: (1) I know myself to be a fast and good writer. (2) It might be politically difficult for me here at work to let a deadline go by without a submission. (3) The sooner I resubmit, the more likely it is that I'll get the same primary reviewers - who basically liked my idea, and who saw my longer more-detailed initial application and will know that any areas that I have to skim over to meet the new page limits did at one point exist in more fleshed-out form.

Advantages of waiting: (1) These days you only get two chances to submit a grant. (It used to be three.) If I don't get funded this time around, I can never resubmit this application or anything "substantively identical" to it. So it might make sense to take more time to get this submission perfect. (2) The new application format is going to shake things up, and it would probably be safer to not be one of the first people reviewed under the new system, by peer reviewers who are suddenly getting half as much detail as they expected. (3) My work pace preparing the resubmission would be substantially more humane.

I have written to my external mentor, and am drafting a letter to my collaborators on the grant to get their input.

Date: 2010-04-02 07:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jonquil.livejournal.com
Well, *poop*.

Good luck with the decision; it sounds very complex.

Date: 2010-04-02 07:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ratphooey.livejournal.com
Given the fact that your submission was generally well-received, and the likelihood of getting the same primary reviewers, I'd imagine that they would be predisposed to give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the new structure, no?

It might even be helpful to them to have the chance to review your submission both before and after the restructuring.

Date: 2010-04-02 08:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jinian.livejournal.com
It's also possible that others will chicken out on submitting first under the new guidelines, thus giving you an improved chance of funding. Seems like it could go either way. I'd go for it.

Date: 2010-04-02 11:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ex-serenejo.livejournal.com
Rats. I think that your points as listed would probably make me lean toward May, but wow, what a position to be in. I trust that you will do something wise and good, as usual. I think it rocks that your first effort was/is so highly regarded!

Date: 2010-04-03 10:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] selki.livejournal.com
Could you re-write it for May just in case, and see how strong it looks to you and others before actually deciding about submitting it then or taking more time with it?

Date: 2010-04-04 03:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] perceval.livejournal.com
Drugmonkey has lots of grant writing advice (http://scienceblogs.com/drugmonkey/2010/04/clustering_under_the_new_nih_s.php) - in case you're not already reading him.

Good luck!

Date: 2010-04-04 06:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mactavish.livejournal.com
Sounds like so much of the work you do is asking for funding with which to do it. :/

Profile

rivka: (Default)
rivka

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 1st, 2025 04:11 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios