Bouvier Grant Group

Great science is necessary, but not sufficient, to funding success. Here, I discuss preparatory strategies that distinguish my applicants who are consistently more successful at NIH. Actionable tips include familiarizing yourself with NIH’s funding priorities and finding your niche in the funding portfolio via the RePORTER website. Emphasis is place on navigating the myriad recent changes at NIH. An interactive checklist helps you track your progress through these important steps. 

The one-page Aims document is arguably the most important narrative section of an Ao NIH submission. Packed with templates and samples from recently successful applications, learners will be walked through the writing of an effective narrative overview, a well-constructed "we propose" paragraph, concise aims, and punch impact statements. We then discuss how to use the draft aims page to vet your project idea with the Program Officer and colleagues. The course supplements contain tips, numberous samples from recent successful applications, and a writing exercise that consiste of a funded Aims page into which I have inserted mistakes I typically see. An interactive checklist helps you track your progress. 

Applicants often struggle to write the Significance and Innovation sections and to understand the new scoring criteria. I walk learners through the writing of a strong Significance section, which includes the background/rationale, disease burden, the Rigor of Prior Research, and how your project will address the strengths and weaknesses of the prior research and reduce disease burden. I will demonstrate how the Innovation section must drive home the competitive advantage over previous and current approaches. Because reviewers tend to skim text at the review meeting, I emphasize formatting strategies that ensure reviewers won't miss key concepts. Course supplements offer loads of actionable tips, templates, and recently funded samples, and exercises to help you edit and write more competitively. An at-a-glance table and interactive checklist assist in developing a strong draft. 

The Approach section is perhaps the most intuitive yet daunting of the sections to tackle. And now, applicants worry about addressing the new scoring criteria introduced in FORMS-I. I will offer strategies for developing an effective outline and formatting techniques. One by one, we will review templates and samples for each of the sections typically included in the all-important Approach section. Given the changes in the scoring criteria, emphasis will be placed on concrete ways to write effectively about rigor, including many examples from recently funded applications. An interactive checklist will help you write a competitive draft.

Should you apply for a K, and if so, which one? To which institute? Are the training plan and mentoring team sound? Does your project fit the training plan? We begin with an overview of the Career Development Awards, the available funding mechanisms, how to choose support by career stage and eligibility, and how to structure your thinking about training topics, mentors, and your project. 

We examine step-by-step how to write each of the 3 parts of the Candidate Section. This course is packed with an array of templates and funded samples from across a wide range of K mechanisms. 

I will discuss how to draft the Letters from mentors, co-mentors, collaborators, contributors, and consultants — which unbeknownst to most K applicants are written in large part by the applicant. We review reference letters and how all these letters differ from one another. We also examine the contents of a winning institutional letter. 

I present mistakes I typically see on K submissions based on my assessment of recent Summary Statements from my K applicants.