Applying for an NIH grant can be a daunting process. NIH grants are highly competitive and require a careful strategy in order to build a winning proposal.
Applicants who have strong and innovative research ideas can run into critical errors that can hurt their chances of achieving funding. From the ground level all the way up to submitting a grant, understanding the common pitfalls and best practices to avoid them can make all the difference for someone’s journey to extramural funding. Here is a Top 10 list of grant writing mistakes, successful strategies to correct them, and available resources for the topics:
1. Lack of Clear Research Significance
Mistake: Failing to articulate the importance and potential impact of the proposed research.
Correction: Ensure that the significance section clearly explains how your study fills a gap in existing knowledge and how it advances the field. Use compelling language to make the case for why your research matters; while making sure it is clear and easy to understand for the reviewers.
Helpful Resources:
2. Weak Specific Aims
Mistake: Crafting vague, overly ambitious, or unfocused specific aims.
Correction: The specific aims should be clear, concise, and achievable within the project’s timeframe. Each aim should flow and align with the overall vision of the study.
Helpful Resources:
3. Unrealistic Research Plan
Mistake: Proposing an overly ambitious project that lacks feasibility within the budget and timeframe.
Correction: Outline a realistic and structured research plan with clear methodologies, timelines, and contingency plans. Objectives should be reasonably achieved with the available resources.
Helpful Resource: Grant Proposal Development Workshop – Developing Your Project (HERE)
4. Lack of Preliminary Data
Mistake: Failing to provide sufficient preliminary data to support the feasibility of the study.
Correction: Include relevant preliminary findings that establish credibility and demonstrate that your proposed approach is viable. If preliminary data is lacking, justify the need for exploratory research.
Helpful Resources:
5. Inadequate Budget Justification
Mistake: Crafting a lofty and unrealistic budget or failing to justify the proposed funds.
Correction: Develop a detailed and justifiable budget that aligns with the scope of the project itself. Clearly outline and justify the expenses and how they tie to the project’s objectives while ensuring consistency throughout the proposed budget.
Helpful Resources:
6. Weak Investigator Credentials
Mistake: Lacking sufficient expertise or failing to highlight relevant experience.
Correction: Build a well-rounded and knowledgeable team whose expertise can effectively operationalize the project’s vision. Also, be clear to highlight and articulate your qualifications, experience, and prior successes through your biosketch and throughout the grant proposal. Enlist co-investigators or collaborators to fill gaps in areas where more robust expertise is necessary. A team of PIs, staff, and expert collaborators with robust experience in the key areas of the project is essential to operationalizing a research project.
Helpful Resource: Grant Proposal Development Workshop - Building Teams and Mentor Teams/Project Management (HERE)
7. Failure to Align with NIH Priorities
Mistake: Submitting a proposal that does not align with NIH funding priorities or the mission of the specific institute.
Correction: Review the objectives and health priorities of the specific NIH institute to which you are applying. Ensure that the proposal aligns with the agency’s interests and that your research is apropos to the institute’s mission.
Helpful Resources:
8. Poor Writing and Organization
Mistake: Submitting a proposal with unclear writing, excessive and unclear jargon, or poor organization.
Correction: Write concisely and use proper headings, formats, and bullet points to provide clarity for reviewers. In addition, have colleagues and mentors offer a fresh set of eyes to review your proposal and ensure it is written properly and clearly.
Helpful Resource: Scientific Writing Workshop (HERE)
9. Ignoring Reviewer Feedback
Mistake: Resubmitting a proposal without adequately addressing previous reviewer comments.
Correction: If resubmitting, thoroughly respond to all critiques. Address weaknesses and explicitly highlight how revisions have improved the proposal.
Helpful Resource:
10. Missing Deadlines or Submission Errors
Mistake: Submitting after the deadline or making errors in the application process.
Correction: Start early and familiarize yourself with NIH submission guidelines. Use the NIH ASSIST system or an institutional grants office to check for compliance and technical issues before submission.
Helpful Resource: Grant Proposal Development Workshop – Submitting Your Grant Proposal (HERE)
Additional helpful CCTS resources to utilize when writing a grant:
With meticulous planning, a strong research plan, an expert team, and clear alignment with the specific NIH institutes’ priorities you can position yourself to submit a competitive and impactful grant proposal. Avoiding these common pitfalls will significantly enhance the quality of your NIH grant proposal and improve your chances of securing funding. For more insight into the NIH grant tools and tips, learn more HERE.