They're or Their: Avoiding Common Grammar Mistakes in Grant Applications

Many words and phrases are commonly confused with each other when writing in English. (The same problem might exist in other languages as well, but unfortunately I am not fluent enough to pick up these nuances in another language. My high school French teacher, who was impressed with my ability to converse with strangers on a school trip to Paris, would be very disappointed.) 

Unfortunately, many of these confused words and phrases are not picked up by the Microsoft Word spelling and grammar review that so many of us have come to rely on. This includes common typos that might change the meaning of a sentence but are still grammatically correct. 

To catch these types of mistakes, it is important to allow enough time to review your final proposal draft, paying close attention to each word, as well as to ask at least one colleague or professional editor to review the proposal prior to submission. This means that if you are working on an R01 proposal for the October 5th deadline, you should not plan to finish writing your Research Strategy on October 4th. It takes time to read and absorb every word of a document - most of us have a tendency to skim over text we have written and already read multiple times.

Examples of word and phrase substitutions and common typos to watch for include:

• advise - advice
• affect - effect
• cancer - canker
• data - date
• flight- fight
• flow - fowl
• food - flood
• its - it's
• light - lite
• phase - phrase
• prostate - prostrate
• then - than
• they're - their - there
• to - too
• veterinarian - vegetarian (yes, I have seen this one!)
• who - whom
• your - you're

This list is, of course, not exhaustive. There are many possible typos and mistakes that can occur during the course of writing your NIH grant proposal. Often, typing quickly leads to typos in acronyms. For example, HPLC becomes HLPC. To help catch this if you are working on the document in Word, I recommend searching for each acronym that has been used in your proposal. The acronyms should have red lines under them, which indicate spelling errors. If you ignore the spelling error, the red lines with disappear under all instances of the acronym. If you do this for all of your acronyms and there are still red lines remaining in the text, it will help to alert you of typos.

I hope these examples help to illustrate why it is vitally important to begin the writing process early and finish your materials early enough to allow time to incorporate review by colleagues or professional staff. The more eyes on the proposal, the better!

What is the PHS Assignment Request Form and why should I include it in my NIH grant application?

The PHS Assignment Request Form is an optional form that can be submitted with your proposal. It is not a separate attachment, but rather an embedded form in the application package. The form is used to list expertise needed to review your application, exclude reviewers, request an institute assignment, and, in particular for investigator-initiated applications such as parent R01s, to request assignment to a specific study section.

The PHS Assignment Request Form can be used to:

1. Provide up to five areas of expertise that will be required to understand and accurately review your application. 
• This can include specific disciplines or an understanding of certain methodologies; however there is no guarantee that all of the requested expertise will be represented in the reviewer panel. Write your proposal with this in mind.
2. List individuals who should be excluded from reviewing your application. 
• This section is limited to no more than 1,000 characters. Only a few reasons for exclusion will be considered. Valid reasons that could prevent you from receiving a fair review include if the potential reviewer is a direct competitor, if there is a long-standing scientific disagreement with the individual, or if a conflict of interest exists. 
• Unfortunately, you can't request exclusion of that guy who looked like Russell Brand who spilled his espresso martini all over your shirt when he was tipsy at last year's conference.
3. Request assignment to a particular study section and/or institute. 
• This request should only be made if you are submitting an investigator-initiated R01, R21, or R03 application. 
• Review the Center for Scientific Review's (CSR) study sections here.

More advice about completing the PHS Assignment Request form is available from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

What is an Other Significant Contributor (OSC) and how can it help my grant application?

 An Other Significant Contributor (OSC) is someone who will contribute to the scientific development or execution of an NIH-funded project without committing any measurable effort (person months or percent effort) to the project. OSCs are not considered senior/key personnel, but they can contribute meaningfully to the project, typically on a limited time basis.  

Including individuals as OSCs is common when including individuals in an advisory or other specific role, such as if you are using an innovative methodology and may need occasional advice from the individual who developed it in their laboratory. Using the OSC designation, if the person is willing to serve in this unpaid role, brings some advantages:

1. Save on expensive salaries.  If you plan to occasionally consult with a high-paid individual from your institution during the course of your study, using the OSC designation avoids the need to budget a percentage of an expensive salary and the associated indirect costs.  Even 2% of a salary at the NIH salary cap can eat into your budget. Keep in mind that most people do not want to work for free.  However, senior investigators who are already close to the maximum allowed effort on grants and expect only a minimal level of involvement with your project may actually prefer the OSC arrangement (see #3 below).
2. It allows you to include a biographical sketch (biosketch) from an expert in the field.  It may be difficult to get the world's expert in your discipline to join the research team.  However, they may agree to serve as an OSC and be available as someone you can occasionally bounce ideas off of during the course of the project.  OSCs are not considered key personnel, but their biosketches are included in the application package, which can strengthen the credibility of your research team.
3. It helps well-funded investigators to stay under the effort cap. A highly-recognized leader in their field is likely to have multiple grant awards. Effort is capped at 12 person months per year, which essentially means that a person can't work more than 100% of the time. If you need a distinguished expert to advise at a high level or be available for occasional questions, including them as an OSC might also make it easier for them to assist with your project without overcommitting their effort.

If the OSC role does not seem appropriate for your external collaborator, here is some information on Consultants that may be helpful: Role Confusion: How to tell the difference between Co-Investigators, Consultants, and others for an NIH proposal.

Addressing Rigor and Reproducibility in NIH Grant Applications

If you are writing your first NIH R01 proposal for the upcoming deadline, chances are that a well-meaning senior faculty member has given you a copy of one of their funded grants to use as a model for developing your application. This is a kind gesture that can be helpful for those who would like to see an example of a well-explained scientific plan, so I do recommend that you accept these types of offers. However, things change quickly in the grants world. If you follow a previously funded grant as a guide without reading the updated application instructions, you might miss key information or include outdated sections.

For example, there was a brief period of time back in the mid-2010s when Scientific Premise was a required component of the application. However, this terminology changed with a 2019 update that changed the requirement from Scientific Premise to Rigor and Reproducibility. Per policy, most research grants and career development awards submitted for January 25, 2016 and beyond as well as training grants and fellowships as of May 25, 2020 and beyond must address specific aspects of rigor and reproducibility in the text of their application.

Addressing rigor and reproducibility in your grant proposal requires addressing four key areas:

1. The rigor of the prior research. 
• Provide a careful assessment of the rigor of the prior research that helps to identify weakness or gaps in a line of research to provide support for the proposed project. Describe general strengths and weaknesses in the rigor of the prior research that lays the groundwork for the proposed project. Critique the rigor of previous experimental designs, incorporation of relevant biological variables, and authentication of key resources. Describe your plans to address any weaknesses or gaps.
2. Rigorous experimental design for robust and unbiased results. 
• NIH defines scientific rigor as "the strict application of the scientific method to ensure robust and unbiased experimental design, methodology, analysis, interpretation and reporting of results". Clearly state planned experimental details to enable reviewers to assess the proposed research. Enough detail should be provided that other researchers can reproduce and extend the findings.
3. Consideration of relevant biological variables.
• Describe the extent to which biological variables including sex, age, weight, and underlying health conditions will be factored into study design and analyses. In particular, provide strong justification for studies proposing to study only one sex, including animal studies.
4. Authentication of key biological and/or chemical resources.
• Key biological and/or chemical resources such as cell lines, specialty chemicals, antibodies and other biologics should be clearly described. Include the origin of each resource and any steps to ensure quality of the resources that will be used for the project.

As you work to complete your application, be sure to leave time for a final read-through and make sure you address each of these components.