NIH Career Development(K) Awards:

Taking Your Research Careerto New Heights

The following audience questions and expert comments are from Principal Investigators Associations’ Webinar, “NIH Career Development (K) Awards,” presented by Dr. Christopher Dant.

For more information about this On-Demand Webinar please visit: http://www.principalinvestigators.org/nih-career-development-k-awards-taking-your-research-career-to-new-heights

My question is in regards to NIH K Awards typically requiring 75% effort devoted to the research project and to career development for 3-5 years. If I am at a research institute, can I just say 100% is towards the Development Plan if what I am doing is the research in the Research Plan?

# 1Attendee Question

Expert Comments

Yes. The main thing is that you have the time, at least nine person months or 75% time. You have to state that in your application. I would just keep it to that. I would say, “I can commit at least 75%, possibly full-time, to this work.” The work, again, is not only the research you’re doing or what you propose; it’s also all the training that you’re going to be doing. It’s everything in a sense.

The problem comes in, for example, for clinicians who are at full-time faculty. They’re on staff, and they’re seeing patients, and they want to do a K Award. They usually have to be released from some of those duties to be able to do the research and receive mentoring.

If they can somehow combine the work that they’re doing with patients to a K23, for example, then it works. I wouldn’t say, “I can commit 100%.” I would just say 75% is the goal, and then, it has to be at least that, and that’s what you state in your application. If you’re spending all of your time doing it, that’s great. That’s what they want. They want you to devote most of your time to this.

Career Development Awards (K awards) are one of the most successful NIH programs that have helped launched many productive investigator careers.

Over the past 5 years, K award funding has steadily increased NIH-wide, and in 2011, overall K award success rates were 35% across all institutes.

Learn More

# 2Attendee Question

Are there more favorable applications periods, June through October, etc.?

Expert Comments

No, not really. There are three review cycles (February 12th , June 12th and October 12th). One isn’t more favorable than another. It’s not more favorable in the summer than the winter.

The main thing is if October 12th is the next submission date, and it’s September 10th, you would not be thinking about October 12th. You would want to begin preparing for the next submission date which is February 12th, because you cannot possible write a K Award in a month, or even two months. These proposals should take several months to put together because there’s a huge amount of planning that goes into them. Again, I would not worry about which review cycle you submit it in. There’s not plus or minus to any one of them.

Understand what a Career Award (K) is, and is not?

Understand the differences between the many types of K’s and what’s appropriate for the candidate in their stage of research?

Know what goes into the K award, step by step?

Know how to optimize the message in a K award with NIH expectations?

K Award writing strategies and tips from K award recipients and from the NIH?

Do You…

Learn More

Do you recommend waiting for preliminary data before submitting a K grant proposal?

# 3Attendee Question

2.5 hour webinar for only $129 exclusive price for slideshare viewers – must enter coupon code

SLIDESHARESale Price Valid Only Until 09/08/2013

2.5 Hour On-Demand

Webinar Available in

CD-Rom, MP4 and

PDF Transcript

Learn More Buy Now

NIH Career Development(K) Awards: Taking Your Research Career to New Heights

Expert Comments

Yes, I do. I would say that the more you can show that you’ve done some of this work already the better. Preliminary data shows commitment on you part. It’s even better if you could show some published work on your proposed project.

If you say, “By the next cycle, I’ll have some more data, and I’ll have a paper published, hopefully,” it would be a good strategy to wait for that to come through. Not only will it show that you have a commitment but it will also demonstrate to the reviewer that you already have found information and your hypothesis is partly satisfied by some of the preliminary data. I think that it shows that the applicant is already on a trajectory path of answering these questions and could have more success.

So the more preliminary data you can put in, the better. Again, this is not a R Grant. For an R01, you will definitely need preliminary data and even for an R21. Not, probably, as much if you’re new, but it always helps. I would say err on the side of additional preliminary data.

Dr. Christopher Dant digs into the different NIHtraining and career development programs, discusses what programs are tailored to specific individuals during their career, and provides an overview of how to write a competitive K award.

Postdocs, junior faculty and students who are interested in a career in academic medicine and interested in an NIH Career Award …

2.5 Hour On-Demand

Webinar Available in

CD-Rom, MP4 and

PDF Transcript

If my grant is rejected, how long do I wait to apply again?

# 4Attendee Question

Expert Comments

For K renewals, resubmissions, revisions, the standard due dates are March 16th, July 16th

and November 16th. Just be sure if your K was rejected and given a review, you answer all the weakness clearly in the introduction and modify the grant to make it clear you’re addressing all their stated weaknesses. I would give it some time – at least 2 – 4 months so you can adequately address all the weaknesses.

2.5 hour webinar for only $129 exclusive price for slideshare viewers – must enter coupon code

SLIDESHARESale Price Valid Only Until 09/08/2013

2.5 Hour On-Demand

Webinar Available in

CD-Rom, MP4 and

PDF Transcript

Learn More Buy Now

NIH Career Development(K) Awards: Taking Your Research Career to New Heights

Christopher Dant is a faculty instructor at Dartmouth Medical School. His PhD work was concentrated in cellular and molecular biology. Early in his postgraduate career, he apprenticed with a Senior Editor at JAMA, and went on to work as a biomedical writer for life sciences investigators in academia, private industry, and government agencies. Before coming to Dartmouth, Dr. Dant was a Projects Director at the Stanford Medical School for grants and manuscripts and served as the Director of Medical Publications at Genentech in California. At Dartmouth, he works with investigators in developing grant proposals and programmatic initiatives, and educates faculty in grant and manuscript writing skills. He has worked through investigators at the NIH, NSF, NASA, DOE, and other federal agencies.