Thread by @soragnilab

Attending this interesting seminar on NIH high-risk, high-reward research program. Will try to pass along as much info as possible
1/n

Really nice talk from Dr. Basavappa. First up the Pioneer Award. While open to all career stages, awards typically go to more experienced folks - so be mindful of that if you decide to apply

Review is very different than NIH, with 2 phases.
Phase I: There is no close match of expertise of reviewers to the proposal.
Pioneer-specific review criteria: Proposal / investigator and suitability for program
Only scores and brief comments provided, no discussion

Second Phase: In-person interview
A panel of 12-15 experts selects 25 applicants guided by the first review
Overall success rates: 4-5%

- 51% of research effort must be dedicated to the award for 3 years but can go down to 33% and 25% in the last two years
- Free to change research direction as the science evolves
- Explicit acknowledgement that non all projects will succeed as proposed

Gender distribution in Pioneer award:
Applications: 20:80 female:male
Awards: only 23-24% are awarded to female scientists

They also evaluated outcomes of the program and determined that Pioneer research is more impactful than similarly qualified R01, and as impactful and innovative as HHMI (?)

Now on to the New innovator award program or DP2.
- Investigators must have track record of exceptional creativity and have outstanding promise (don't we all....)
- Average to 300K per year direct for 5 years
- NO cost extension so spend all that money!

- Similar in spirit to pioneer award, data allowed but really not required.
*** very important comment: it is not good idea to provide TOO much data because it shows too much feasibility / project may be criticized as more appropriate for an R01 instead

- Review criteria similar to innovator but phase II does not include an interview
- 20% only are scored - so to be scored is an accomplishment!
- 8-10% are awarded

Then the Transformative research award program was discussed - I actually never heard of this before 🤔
- Aimed at: Individuals or teams with a project to overturn or create a fundamental paradigm
- Focus is more on the idea than individuals

- There is an annual 6-7 Mio budget fore these
- No $ limit, with successful proposals ranging from 250K to 2.5 Mio ... apparently nobody yet applied for the full available budget.. but it's possible, so get those bold ideas out there!

- Proposal must address challenge, impact, innovation and suitability
- Again not as much focus on data, most people present some -- too much may be counterproductive

Very interesting review process here, that uses an "editorial board model"
- Screen all apps to identify most exciting
- Those are sent forward to technical review
- Editorial board uses technical review to discuss and score

They receive about 200 applications per year, but very variable year-to-year
Only 3-4% are funded 😱

Now I'll finish up with my notes on the Early independence award or DP5.
- introduced to support "talented young students who have intellect scientific creativity, drive and maturity to flourish independently without the need for traditional postdoctoral training"

Some DP5 went to support individuals who already secured TT positions or similar
- To avoid this: DP5 applicant now cannot be "functionally independent" at time of application: no independent lab space, no possibility to apply for R01 type grants as PI

- Applicants must be from -12mo to +15mo from graduation
- Only 2 applications are allowed for each institution
- 3-5 letters of recommendation are required
- 20-25% success rate, with 11-15 awards made each year
- 250K /year budget

On the first year of the award, there is a site visit! The NIH actively supports DP5 awardees, and checks on each and every one of them which I found quite interesting

That was it! Great final slide 🙂

Last bit of info: Dr. Basavappa mentioned to reach out to him in case of questions, using ScheduleOnce