A Practical Guide to Writing a Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Grant

By Andrew D. Hollenbach

A Practical Guide to Writing a Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Grant provides F-Series grant applicants and mentors with insider knowledge on the process by which these grants are reviewed, the biases that contribute to the reviews, the extent of information required in an NRSA training grant, a deeper understanding of the exact purpose of each section of the application, and key suggestions and recommendations on how to best construct each and every section of the application.

A Practical Guide to Writing a Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Grant is a solid resource for trainees and their mentors to use as a guide when constructing F30, F31, and F32 grant applications. 

• Covers F30, F31, and F32 grant applications
• Detailed overview of the review process
• Key suggestions on how to best construct each section of the application
• Includes a checklist of required items

• Language: English
• Publisher: Academic Press
• Release date: Sep 20, 2013
• ISBN: 9780124202368

Andrew D. Hollenbach

Associate Professor, Department of Genetics, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA, USA

Book preview

Legacy.

Preface

Andrew D. Hollenbach

There have been two significant experiences in my life that led to me writing the book you have in front of you. First, as a junior faculty member just starting out in my career I had my postdoctoral researcher write a Ruth L. Kirschstein F32 training grant. Ignorant of the extent of information that was required and the overall focus of this type of application, we wrote the grant focusing entirely on the science. I was surprised, and even somewhat put out, at all of the additional sections that needed to be written (including the sponsor information, training plan, applicant information, etc.). Thinking that the F-series grants were similar to the R-series of research grants, we focused mostly on the science and simply wrote something to fill in the space for all of the other sections. In our naiveté, we thought we had a strong application and felt that there was no way that we wouldn’t get funded. However, we were shocked when the grant came back triaged (the term used in the past for grants that were not discussed). Years later, after sitting on my first F-series study section, which turned out to be a truly eye-opening experience for me, I realized how naïve I had been about the Ruth L. Kirschstein training grants and just how bad the grant was that we had submitted.

Second, in my career there have been several people who truly made a difference in my training as a faculty member and through their help, guidance, and mentoring made it possible for me to advance in my academic career. In particular, there was a colleague and friend at another institute. While I was writing what would become my first successful R01 research grant, she offered to read through what I had written. She had served on multiple study sections and knew exactly what the reviewers were looking for. Further, she was a well-funded investigator and knew what was required to write a successful grant. When she offered to read my first R01 research grant application from the perspective of a reviewer, I enthusiastically took up her offer. However, even at that stage of my career, after having others cursorily read my grants with no real mentoring involved, I was skeptical that I would receive the training and mentoring that I needed, even from a trusted friend and colleague. I was happily proven wrong when she took the time to thoroughly read my grant, constructively criticize what I had written, and then spend hours working closely with me, teaching me how to construct a solid grant. This mentoring and training, for which I am eternally grateful, resulted in my being awarded my first R01 award, which secured my research, my tenure, and my position in academia.

Since my time serving on the F-series study sections, I have encountered many students and postdoctoral fellows who want to apply for a Ruth L. Kirschstein training grant. Many of these trainees and their mentors are naïve of what is required to construct the best training grant they can possibly put together, as I was myself, and as such have grants returned to them, having not been discussed. The more I saw this happening, the more I realized that I had a unique position from my repeat presence on study section to assist trainees and help them understand the extent of information needed for the application, the purpose of every component of the application, and provide insight into exactly what the reviewers are looking for and the biases and prejudices that exist in the reviewing process. Therefore, the above two experiences in my career inspired me to utilize my insider’s perspective on how training grants are reviewed, to pay it forward and assist trainees at my institute to prepare the best grant they could possibly put together.

The more students, postdoctoral fellows, and sponsors heard of my willingness to help them in a constructive manner, the more I realized I needed to develop a method to logically present the nuts and bolts of submitting a Ruth L. Kirschstein training grant. From this realization I developed a seminar to present the information, which saved me having to repeat my spiel multiple times to several different individuals in each granting cycle. As part of my seminar I provide handouts of my seminar slides, which tend to be very detailed and are capable of existing as a stand-alone document. At some point I realized that my seminar slides formed the skeleton for what could be a manual or book to be used by anyone, not just at my institute, to understand what is required in a Ruth L. Kirschstein training grant and the human bias and opinions that go into reviewing these grants.

In this book I provide a small biography of Ruth L. Kirschstein and her legacy, I discuss the review process and many of the biases that affect this process, along with providing a detailed description of the purpose of each component of the grant, what reviewers are looking for in each section of the grant, and suggestions for how to concisely and clearly sell yourself and your training potential. It is not meant to serve as the key to writing a winning grant. Given the natural biases and influences of human nature in the review process, I truly believe that no magic bullet exists to write the perfect grant. However, what I hopefully provide is an understanding of the process and the philosophy behind each component that will allow you to construct the best grant application that you can, with respect to your own history and unique situation.

July 2013

Chapter 1

Ruth L. Kirschstein—The Woman and Her Legacy

Although thousands of people apply for the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) training grants every year, few people actually know who Ruth was, what she accomplished in her career, and why these grants serve as her ongoing legacy to scientific training. This chapter provides a brief biography of Ruth L. Kirschstein including information about how her upbringing shaped her ambition and drive, her detail-oriented work as a pathologist leading to the creation of quality control standards for the polio vaccine, her dedication to mentoring and minority issues, her time at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as the first woman to serve as a director of an NIH institute and as acting director of the NIH, and the lasting changes she implemented during her time at the NIH. A brief section is included describing the five different types of NRSA training grants (F30, F31, F31 Diversity, F32, and F33).

Keywords

Ruth L. Kirschstein; National Institutes of Health; national research service award; polio vaccine safety testing; deputy associate commissioner for science; National Institute of General Medical Sciences; minority access to research careers; honors undergraduate research program; National Center for Biotechnology Information

1.1 Ruth L. Kirschstein—A Brief Biography

The Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) training grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are one of the most prestigious training awards given to predoctoral students and postdoctoral researchers in the United States. However, very few people actually know who Ruth L. Kirschstein was, what she accomplished in her career, and why these grants serve as her ongoing legacy to scientific training. Ruth Lillian Kirschstein, born in 1926, was the daughter of immigrants fleeing Jewish persecution in Russia whose original name, now forgotten, was changed to Kirschstein by a tired Ellis Island immigration official. She was raised in Brooklyn, the daughter of two teachers who instilled a love of learning in Ruth through a constant exposure to education and culture. As a result of the continual discrimination against Jews at the time, her parents encouraged Ruth to pursue her own interests in life, regardless of societal attitudes. Therefore, Ruth never realized or accepted that there was nothing that she could not accomplish once she set her mind to it. This familial environment also instilled high personal standards of excellence in Ruth. Although classically trained and accomplished in playing the French horn, she realized that her talent was limited and would not allow her to achieve the level of professional excellence that she desired. Therefore, she decided to follow her second love and pursue a career in