Oh no! I am over the page limit! Help!

Are you struggling to cut from 7 pages down to 6? Have you read your research plan 10 times, trying desperately to figure out how and where to cut? Don't panic. Take a deep breath, minimize your Word document on your screen, and trying goofing off for 5 minutes. (Yes, I am suggesting that you procrastinate in order to get your work done!)
First, what not to do. Do not start to think you are a Microsoft Word Master of the Universe. Any trick you can think of- shrinking margins to 0.495, shrinking text to 10.9, decreasing spacing so that lines are almost on top of each other- has already been tried and denied. Second, do not start deleting important pieces of your application just to save space. Third, and perhaps most important, do not start cutting from your research plan and trying to put the text in your Resources section or Appendix. (NIH recently announced that they are cracking down on this practice too.)

So, what's an aspiring scientist to do? Fortunately, there are methods of shortening your research strategy section that do follow NIH rules. Here are some options:

1. Tables and Charts are your friend. There are no text size requirements for tables and charts, as long as they are clear and legible. Have a long list of information? Try turning it into a table to save some space.




2. Check your text wrapping on tables, charts, and images. In many cases you can wrap text to one side or another of a graphic and create more space. Just remember to keep your image/table/chart together with the paragraph that references it. It will make it easier for reviewers to follow.




3. Using Track Changes and a thesaurus, attack your document from an editor's perspective. Rather than looking for content to remove, look for places where you may have a description that is very wordy, or may be able to convey the same message using shorter words or phrases.

If all else fails, talk to a seasoned proposal assistant or research administrator at your institution. An experienced person may be able to take a look and offer more advice on cutting. Don't have one? Email me at grantpwriter "AT" (replace with @) gmail.com and we can see if there is a way for me to help.

New FDA-approved cell therapy to treat wrinkles

Yes, something life altering has come from years of stem cell research. Nope, it is not the cure for cancer or diabetes. It is something even more ground-breaking: a cure for wrinkles! Last week, the FDA approved the use of cell therapy using blood stem cells to help smooth wrinkles and fine lines. This treatment, called laViv, uses fibroblasts from behind a person's ear, multiplies them in cell culture, and then injects them into his or her wrinkles. Development of this treatment was delayed by lack of funding. Could it be that the individuals interested in backing stem cell research and product development were more interested in funding projects related to cell therapy for cancers than for cosmetic problems?

University professors- your input needed!

Today, NIH released a Request for Information seeking advice on reducing administrative burden and costs associated with compliance requirements for federal grants to educational institutions. They are looking for ways to address issues and reduce time spent on meeting all of the grant requirements.

One area that should be examined is effort reporting. It is often confusing, difficult to track, and no clear system exists that is publicly accessible and allows for monitoring of effort. The creation of an effort repository would help to make sure that no scientist is budgeted for more than 12 months effort per year on their total projects, while saving valuable time spent tracking down effort reporting data. I shudder to think of the hours of my time wasted in tracking down effort information to include in JIT requests or progress reports!

Who knew that Kmart was doing so much to help the March of Dimes?

I was pleasantly surprised to see the headline "Kmart Marches Into 28th Successful Year of Helping America's Babies". I had no idea that Kmart and the March of Dimes had such a longstanding relationship. Over the course of 28 years, Kmart has raised $98.7 million for the organization, which goes toward prevention of birth defects, prematurity, and infant mortality.

Kudos to Kmart. Even with some of its own financial struggles, it has still managed to be a good corporate citizen and raise funds for a major foundation.

**************************************************************************
On a side note, I do not support the March of Dimes in many of their fundraising techniques. A couple years ago, a coworker of my husband suffered a stillbirth, and we wanted to do something to honor the baby. We made a donation to the March of Dimes in her name. Within 2-3 weeks, our mailbox was inundated with requests for donations from charities, including many we had never even heard of. There were an average of around 10 requests per day. Now, we have been giving to charities such as the Muscular Dystrophy Association for years, and never had this type of onslaught. It was pretty clear that the March of Dimes had sold their mailing list.

Since then, we have been receiving regular requests for donations from the March of Dimes almost monthly, though we have never donated another penny (and don't plan to). Some of these requests are marked with red "Second Request" stamps. This really angers me. It seems to be a trick designed to prey on the elderly, who may think it is a bill or a commitment they have made. This tactic is dishonest and fools people into making a donation.

For these reasons, I do not donate to the March of Dimes, though they do good work and provide important programs. I just can't support their tactics. If you rely on support for your research from a foundation, I suggest that you examine their fundraising strategies. If they are going in a direction that may backfire, you might find yourself looking for other sources of funding.

Interesting commentary on charity walks and athletic fundraisers

While it doesn't pertain directly to NIH research, this article may be of interest to readers who are engaged in research on cancer or other diseases with large foundations that support research. The article discusses the Avon Breast Cancer 3-Day Walk and several other athletic fundraising events and provides information on the actual amount raised after expenses. In some cases as much as 92 cents on the dollar goes directly toward support of programs and/or research, but in others less than 50 cents per dollar goes toward research/program support after expenses. Perhaps of most interest to researchers, the article discusses charity walk "fatigue"- in essence, now that there are myriad races, walks, and similar events, people who were once inclined to sponsor friends and relatives are now being more selective in their giving. The implications for researchers, of course, are that funding levels from these large foundations for research projects may decline unless they create new and innovative methods of fundraising.

Studying an aspect of health but neglecting your own?

For those of you who are still scrambling to meet July proposal deadlines, I wonder- are you sacrificing your own health to write the perfect proposal so that you can make the next great health-related breakthrough? While it is tempting to spend the last few nights before the deadline hopped up on caffeine and other stimulants, neglecting your health even for the sake of a major proposal is a terrible idea. (Not to mention that, in a sleepy, caffeinated haze, you are likely to make bad decisions regarding last-minute changes to your research plan and forget important details like writing a budget justification.) How much sleep should you be getting?
What Vitamins & Supplements Should You Be Taking? How much time should you spend on the treadmill? Or dancing and singing Michael Jackson Karaoke? Stop what you are doing, calm down, and think about your body's own needs. There is nothing worse than struggling to put a proposal in, and then promptly coming down with the flu or some other virus.

Should I include a Cover Page with my R01, R03 or R21?

If you are applying for an NIH Parent Announcement, the submission of the Cover Letter component of the application package is optional. (In some cases this letter is required, such as if you are applying for an R01 and have received permission to request $500,000 or more in direct costs per year. See below in this post for more information.)

So, why should you submit a cover letter? After all, you have already been working on writing your research plan, resources section, and all of the other required components. Why include something that is optional? In short- because NIH suggests it, that's why!

The Cover Letter section of the SF424 instructions states:

Applicants are encouraged to include a cover letter with the application. The cover letter is only for internal use and will not be shared with peer reviewers. The letter should contain any of the following information that applies to the application:
1. Application title.
2. Funding Opportunity (PA or RFA) title of the NIH initiative.
3. Request of an assignment (referral) to a particular awarding component(s) or Scientific Review Group (SRG). The PHS makes the final determination.
4. List of individuals (e.g., competitors) who should not review your application and why.
5. Disciplines involved, if multidisciplinary.
6. For late applications (see Late Application policy in Section 2.14) include specific information about the timing and nature of the cause of the delay.
7. When submitting a Changed/Corrected Application after the submission date, a cover letter is required explaining the reason for the Changed/Corrected Application. If you already submitted a cover letter with a previous submission and are now
submitting a Changed/Corrected Application, you must include all previous cover
letter text in the revised cover letter attachment. The system does not retain any previously submitted cover letters until after an application is verified; therefore, you must repeat all information previously submitted in the cover letter as well as any additional information.
8. Explanation of any subaward budget components that are not active for all periods of the proposed grant.
9. Statement that you have attached any required agency approval documentation for the type of application submitted. This may include approval for applications $500,000 or more, approval for Conference Grant or Cooperative Agreement (R13 or U13), etc.

If it can help to direct your application to the correct institute or center, and help to get it into the hands of the most appropriate review group, why not take the extra half hour to write it?

What is the NIH salary cap?

Beginning in 1990, each year Congress has set a limit on the amount of salary that can be paid to an individual on an NIH grant. The current fiscal year's notice (2011) states that no individual can be budgeted at a salary of more than $199,700 per year, prorated according to effort.

The salary cap is designed to prevent people from being "overpaid" on federal grants, at a level higher than most federal executives. This helps to ensure fairness and equality among individuals being paid by the government.

If you are budgeting someone on your NIH grant proposal with a salary of more than $199,700 per year, you will need to determine where the difference in salary will come from. In many cases, university departments will make arrangements to cover the difference in investigator salary and support from NIH. If you can't find written policies on this at your institution, talk to your Sponsored Research Office. If the grant is awarded, nobody wants to be scrambling after the fact to find the money to cover a salary difference!

WARNING: some individuals seem to think they can get around the salary cap by budgeting someone for more effort than they intend to actually spend on the project, essentially "overbilling" NIH to make up the difference. In most university environments, checks are in place to make sure that this does not happen. Why? This type of model would be defrauding the federal government. Not a good idea! If you need to save money on your grant, and at least one of your investigators is paid at an amount over the salary cap, you have a couple of options. 1) Budget the person at a small amount, and lessen their responsibilities on the project. 2) Hire the expensive person as a consultant, and work with him or her do determine a reasonable amount of payment for the duties needed. (NOTE: if the person who is paid over the salary cap is employed by the same institution as the PI, you may be prevented from budgeting him/her as a consultant by institutional rules.)

Grant Proposal Resubmissions - How do you plan to mark changes in your revision?

If you are working on your revised application of an R01 for the July 5th deadline or R03 or R21 for the July 16th deadline, how do you plan to mark the text showing revisions from your previous version? Are you currently italicizing revisions, putting them in bold, or making them a different color? If so, you need to go back and re-read the SF 424 instructions regarding resubmission (A1) applications. The instructions clearly state:

The substantial scientific changes must be marked in the text of the application by bracketing, indenting, or change of typography. Do not underline or shade the changes. Deleted sections should be described but not marked as deletions. If the changes are so extensive that essentially all of the text would be marked, explain this in the Introduction. The Preliminary Studies/Progress Report section should incorporate work completed since the prior version of the application was submitted.

One of the most effective, space-saving methods of marking your changes is to use Arial 11 for your font setting for all unchanged text, and Palatino Linotype 11 (in italic or bold) to mark all of your changes. The fonts are similar enough that they won't give the reviewers a headache, but different enough to meet the NIH requirements and clearly mark your revisions. Don't forget to also include an introduction page that provides an overview of your changes to the application and responses to major reviewer comments.

How do I comply with the NIH Public Access Policy?

Over 3 years past its inception, the Public Access Policy still confuses and mystifies even the most seasoned researchers. The policy was designed to enhance access for the general public to research findings that are developed through taxpayer funding (i.e. NIH grants). Every publication that results from research that was funded in whole or in part by NIH should have a manuscript deposited in PubMed Central. This website has some great information including FAQs and links regarding the policy.

Can I list a self-published book on my biosketch?

Question:
Dear Grant,
Can I list a book that I self-published as one of the publications on my biosketch? I don't have that many articles.

Answer:
Technically, since you can't list anything that is not peer-reviewed, this book should not be included. And really, why would you want to? If the book is truly self-published, it has not been reviewed by any other scientists in your field, so in essence it could be a book full of theories without credible evidence, or a book full of just about anything that you wanted to write. It does not help to show your credibility or productivity as a scientist, so I would leave it off.

NIH Biosketch Personal Statement - First or Third Person?

One of the major changes to NIH biographical sketches is the addition of Section A, the personal statement. NIH does not specify whether to write the personal statement on the biosketch in 1st or 3rd person. It seems that either way is acceptable. The example provided by NIH includes a personal statement that is written in 1st person as follows:

A. Personal Statement
The goal of the proposed research is to investigate the interaction between drug abuse and normal aging processes. Specifically, we plan to measure changes in cognitive ability and mental and physical health across a five-year period in a group of older drug users and matched controls. I have the expertise, leadership and motivation necessary to successfully carry out the proposed work. I have a broad background in psychology, with specific training and expertise in key research areas for this application. As a postdoctoral fellow at Berkeley, I carried out ethnographic and survey research and secondary data analysis on psychological aspects of drug addiction. At the Division of Intramural Research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), I expanded my research to include neuropsychological changes associated with addiction. As PI or co-Investigator on several university- and NIH-funded grants, I laid the groundwork for the proposed research by developing effective measures of disability, depression, and other psychosocial factors relevant to the aging substance abuser, and by establishing strong ties with community providers that will make it possible to recruit and track participants over time. In addition, I successfully administered the projects (e.g. staffing, research protections, budget), collaborated with other researchers, and produced several peer-reviewed publications from each project. As a result of these previous experiences, I am aware of the importance of frequent communication among project members and of constructing a realistic research plan, timeline, and budget. The current application builds logically on my prior work, and I have chosen co-investigators (Drs. Gryczynski and Newlin) who provide additional expertise in cognition, gerontology and geriatrics. During 2005-2006 my career was disrupted due to family obligations. However, upon returning to the field I immediately resumed my research projects and collaborations and successfully competed for NIH support. In summary, I have a demonstrated record of accomplished and productive research projects in an area of high relevance for our aging population, and my expertise and experience have prepared me to lead the proposed project.

Of course, the same paragraph could also have been written in the 3rd person to convey the same message.

A. Personal Statement
The goal of the proposed research is to investigate the interaction between drug abuse and normal aging processes. Specifically, the research team plans to measure changes in cognitive ability and mental and physical health across a five-year period in a group of older drug users and matched controls. Dr. PI has the expertise, leadership and motivation necessary to successfully carry out the proposed work. She has a broad background in psychology, with specific training and expertise in key research areas for this application. As a postdoctoral fellow at Berkeley, Dr. PI carried out ethnographic and survey research and secondary data analysis on psychological aspects of drug addiction. At the Division of Intramural Research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), she expanded her research to include neuropsychological changes associated with addiction. As PI or co-Investigator on several university- and NIH-funded grants, she laid the groundwork for the proposed research by developing effective measures of disability, depression, and other psychosocial factors relevant to the aging substance abuser, and by establishing strong ties with community providers that will make it possible to recruit and track participants over time. In addition, Dr. PI successfully administered the projects (e.g. staffing, research protections, budget), collaborated with other researchers, and produced several peer-reviewed publications from each project. As a result of these previous experiences, Dr. PI is aware of the importance of frequent communication among project members and of constructing a realistic research plan, timeline, and
budget. The current application builds logically on her prior work, and she has chosen co-investigators (Drs. Gryczynski and Newlin) who provide additional expertise in cognition, gerontology and geriatrics. During 2005-2006, Dr. PI's career was disrupted due to family obligations. However, upon returning to the field, she immediately resumed her research projects and collaborations and successfully competed for NIH support. In summary, Dr. PI has a demonstrated record of accomplished and productive research projects in an area of high relevance for our aging population, and her expertise and experience have prepared her to lead the proposed project.

As with resume and CV preparation, your choice of whether to submit personal statements in 1st or 3rd person is, well....personal. I do recommend, however, that all biosketches submitted with your proposal be consistent in their choice of 1st vs. 3rd person. It will create a more cohesive feel as reviewers examine the biosketches submitted with your proposal.

Read more NIH biographical sketch personal statement advice, including things to avoid, here.

After Finals loss, there's hope LeBron James will gain humility - Michael Rosenberg - SI.com

After Finals loss, there's hope LeBron James will gain humility - Michael Rosenberg - SI.com

This has nothing to do with grant proposals, but I just think it is an interesting analysis of Lebron James.

What is the difference between an R01, and R03 and an R21?

This is a common question as you begin to prepare research grant applications. How do you select the correct mechanism when applying for a parent announcement? Contrary to popular belief, this should not just depend on how much money you need. Rather, the type of grant mechanism to apply for is dictated by your research plan. What do you hope to accomplish? Is this an exploratory project to try a new method that can then be turned into a large-scale study? If so, consider applying for the R21. Is this a smaller-scale study that can be completed in 2 years? If so, consider applying for the R03.

For more information and definitions of the various R series grants from NIH, click here.

Writing an R01 - Where to start

Question:

Dear Grant,
I am ready to write my first R01, but I am not sure how to get started. One of my colleagues said to start with the Methods, but another said that he always starts with the Budget. Who is right?

Answer:

My response to this question is- if it is working for them, and they are successfully obtaining funding, then they are both right. For you, however, my suggestion is to do neither. As a new investigator, your primary concern should be developing a viable hypothesis and clear, measurable Specific Aims. Your proposal will not be strong if it is not built on strong aims. When you have your aims drafted, show them to these
experienced researchers and solicit comments and feedback. Be prepared for some harsh criticism- you are better off hearing it now than in the peer review comments. Once your aims are narrowed down and finalized, you can begin to draft your methods and then budget. I suggest saving the abstract for last- it will be much easier to write when the rest of the proposal is already complete! Good luck!

NIH is making is easier to be a parent and a scientist

NIH has created a new section of their website that is essentially a clearinghouse to showcase their family-friendly policies. I already told you about the recent change in biosketches to allow for a description of unusual personal circumstances. Now they are making it very clear that grant funds on all types of grants can be used to reimburse child care expenses for investigator participation at project-related conferences and meetings. The caveat is that these expenses must be factored into the budget, though I would imagine that if you had a baby in year 2 of a 5 year R01, there would be some leverage to use available funds for necessary child care. These changes are great, and show that NIH is making progress in supporting scientists who choose to be parents. Maybe someday it will be much easier to be both!

Baseball Proposal Fail

In case you are down about your grant not being funded - see what it is like to face another kind of proposal rejection.

Can I list my NIH Loan Repayment on my biosketch?

Are you confused as to whether to list your NIH LRP on your biosketch? To me, this really is a judgement call. The program is desribed by NIH as follows:

NIH wants to encourage outstanding health professionals to pursue careers in biomedical, behavioral, social, and clinical research. If you commit at least two years to conducting qualified research funded by a domestic nonprofit organization or U.S. federal, state, or local government entity, NIH may repay up to $35,000 of your qualified student loan debt per year, including most undergraduate, graduate, and medical school loans. Loan repayment benefits are in addition to the institutional salary you receive for your research.

Basically, the LRP is paying your loans if you are conducting research. While this technically does not qualify as a research grant, being awarded an LRP does suggest that NIH thinks you have something to offer.

Now, here are the biographical sketch instructions:

D. Research Support. List both selected ongoing and completed (during the last
three years) research projects (Federal or non-Federal support). Begin with the projects that are most relevant to the research proposed in this application.
Briefly indicate the overall goals of the projects and responsibilities of the
Senior/Key Person identified on the Biographical Sketch. Do not include number
of person months or direct costs.

While this does not expressly state that you can or can't include the LRP on your biosketch, I suggest that you go ahead an include it. If you are early enough in your career to have an LRP, it is likely that you do not have 4 pages worth of publications and research projects to list on your biosketch. So go ahead and list it if it makes you happy. To me, it doesn't appear as if you will be breaking any rules, since it is technically NIH supporting your research career.

Training on Human Subjects Protections

Though most universities offer CITI or another type of human subjects training and certification, if you are located at a hospital or other institution, you may not have easy access to human subjects protection training. NIH offers a great training that is free and easy to access, located here. You do have to register, but it is free. What better place to obtain training than straight from NIH?

What is a hypothesis?

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of HYPOTHESIS
1a : an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument b : an interpretation of a practical situation or condition taken as the ground for action
2: a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences
3: the antecedent clause of a conditional statement

There is a definition of hypothesis for children here.

I am providing this as a public service. Recently I received a proposal to review from "scientists" whose hypothesis was actually a list of aims and methods. Perhaps it is wrong to assume that everyone with a science degree knows what this word means?

Longitudinal Studies in Action

A recent publication from a team led by Dr. Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill suggests that as many as 19% of young adults have high blood pressure. This is an alarming statistic, and one that underscores the importance of obesity prevention programs, and the need for better nutrition in United States children.

This statistic was derived from an analysis of data collected by the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (known as "Add Health"). The study has collected 4 waves of data on a large sample of children who have been followed into adulthood. Various social and medical information has been collected on this group. The study data is used by researchers around the country, and hundreds of publications are developed each year.

The Add Health study has received most of its funding from NICHD, though it has also received ancillary funding and additional funding for supplemental work from various other agencies.

The Sissy Boy Experiment

The next time you complain about having to write a tedious human subjects section or fill out a lengthy and confusing IRB application, read this article. It will make you appreciate the protections offered to research participants today.

AHRQ ending Public Health Preparedness Program on June 30th

I was disappointed to receive the following email today:

AHRQ Public Health Emergency Preparedness Program Announcement

As of June 30, 2011, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is discontinuing its Public Health Emergency Preparedness Research Program (PHEP). Since AHRQ began its work in public health emergency preparedness in 2000, the federal government has increased its efforts to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies. As preparedness programs have expanded and diversified at the federal level, coordination among them has become more complex and a realignment of federal resources is needed. Activities pursued under AHRQ’s program will continue to be supported by other federal agencies.

AHRQ is currently working with its federal partners to ensure that emergency preparedness materials developed by the agency remain publicly available to emergency planners and responders in the field. The agency is also working to develop a new email subscription list to ensure that subscribers of this AHRQ Update list continue to receive important information on emergency preparedness. Details on how to subscribe to the new list will be sent via this AHRQ Update later this month.

AHRQ is proud of the contributions it has made to the emergency preparedness field and is confident that our federal partners will continue to provide valuable leadership and support. We appreciate the dedication of those in the emergency preparedness community who continue working to keep our nation safe and ready to respond in times of crisis.

I am sad to see this program go. We certainly have come a long way in terms of disaster preparedness, but we still have a lot to learn. As the recent tornadoes that hit my state and several others have shown us, it is vitally important that our first responders and healthcare facilities are prepared for emergencies. There are many trainings and equipment evaluations that may be developed in the future to help disaster response personnel to be more efficient and prepared. Let's hope that another federal agency really does step in and continue to fund these worthwhile projects.

June 5th Deadline - You can do it!

For those of you who didn't follow any of my advice and will be up all night this weekend trying to cut your research plan down to 12 pages or figure out what belongs in the Facilities and Resources section, I just wanted to say GOOD LUCK!

If you are still writing content and trying to develop your budget in time for a Monday submission, I wish you even more GOOD LUCK! (And you are SCREWED.)

Enjoy your weekend!

My advice on length (size matters!)

Since I just got off the phone and finished giving this advice I thought I should share it with the rest of the blog universe: When writing your grant proposal, it is much easier to cut material than to go back and add more material. Chopping is simpler than creating! So as you work on your grant proposal, dissertation, letter to the editor, or psychotic manifesto, just put all of your ideas and information on paper. Don't worry about section or page limits until after you have finished a first draft and are able to take a break from the document for a short period of time, then review it with a clear head for cuts that can be made.

If you are concerned about having to go back and change your reference citations if any are removed, my response is- you shouldn't be! With EndNote, RefWorks, and so many similar products on the market right now, there is no excuse for you to be numbering citations by hand! Create a great database of papers that you may need to cite, and these programs make it very easy to go back and make text edits later.

Don't understand the acronym soup in your application guide?

NIH has a wonderful glossary that will help you to decipher all of the acronyms and abbreviations included in your application instructions or being tossed around at the latest grad student cocktail hour. Every new hire, intern, student, or new investigator I have worked with has been given a copy of this glossary at our first meeting. I highly recommend bookmarking the page and referring to it often with any questions.

Find something that isn't in the glossary? Email me or leave a note in the comments and I will work on getting you an answer.

A little outdated but useful- How to get an R01

I came across this article from Science Mag. It is a little outdated (don't use it for specific R01 writing advice, since the requirements have changed since 2007) but most of its basic advice still applies. Also, I love the picture of the boxes of NIH paper applications- great example of the need for electronic submissions!

Clearing up confusion over structuring of Research Strategy related to Specific Aims in NIH grant proposals

One of the most common questions I received from Principal Investigators when NIH released the new Research Strategy section guidelines was regarding Specific Aims. Though NIH has gone to great lengths to clarify the allowed structure of Research Strategy with regard to the aims, the question still seems to pop up.

Here is the official answer, right from the NIH Enhancing Peer Review site:

How I should organize the Research Strategy section to address the Significance, Innovation, and Approach for each Specific Aim, assuming I have more than one?

Applicants should use their discretion in organizing the information to best convey the desired information to the reviewers. For example, if an application had two specific aims, an applicant might choose to organize the Research Strategy in one of the following two ways:

Significance: Specific Aim 1, Specific Aim 2 Innovation: Specific Aim 1, Specific Aim 2 Approach: Specific Aim 1, Specific Aim 2

OR:

Specific Aim 1: Significance, Innovation, Approach Specific Aim 2: Significance Innovation, Approach

Last chance to meet NIH in Florida!

Are you looking for a chance to meet face-to-face with NIH personnel and ask questions about grant proposals? Want to do it in beautiful, sunny Florida? Don't miss your chance to attend the NIH Regional Seminar on Program Funding and Grants Administration in Weston, Florida. Last-minute registration is still available for the June 22-24 meeting.

Weston is not far from Fort Lauderdale and many wonderful attractions. If you go, and are fortunate enough to be able to extend your visit with a vacation, be sure to check out the Jungle Queen riverboat for some unique entertainment. I also highly recommend the shops and restaurants on Las Olas Boulevard.