We recently analyzed the educational and career outcomes of scholars who participated in the NIGMS Postbaccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP). The goal of this program, which we started in 2000, is to prepare recent baccalaureate graduates from groups that are underrepresented in the biomedical sciences for entry into—and completion of—rigorous Ph.D. training programs. PREP is part of a larger effort at NIGMS to support the development of a highly skilled, creative and diverse biomedical research workforce.
PREP grants are awarded to research-intensive institutions. Each grant supports five to 10 scholars who spend 75 percent of their time as apprentice scientists pursuing a mentored discovery research project and the remainder engaged in academic and professional development activities. These include a program of study to enhance their academic record and workshops to improve their writing and presentation skills.
Our assessment of PREP outcomes is based on various educational and career metrics for PREP scholars supported from 2001 to 2014 through 41 institutional programs. For more details about the analysis, read the report.
As we enter the second year of the NIH Common Fund Glycoscience program to develop accessible tools for carbohydrate research, we encourage those who are new to carbohydrate chemistry and biology to bring their fresh perspectives to bear on difficult challenges in this field by applying through one of the following funding opportunity announcements (FOAs). While we continue to welcome applications from carbohydrate scientists, we hope to see new ideas from synthetic chemists and technology developers from other fields. Our goal is to enable researchers in all biomedical fields to study the roles of carbohydrates in health and disease, so approaches from outside the established glycoscience community are of particular interest.
Last week, I wrote to NIGMS-funded T32 program directors to encourage them to inform students about trainee career outcomes. Because this topic is also relevant to the broader community, I’d like to share the message here.
Dear NIGMS T32 Training Grant Program Director:
At the June 2015 meeting of NIGMS training, workforce development, and diversity program directors , Peter Preusch, Dick Okita and I discussed the importance of making post-training career outcomes available to current and prospective students. The goal of collecting and sharing data on Ph.D. career outcomes is consistent with recommendations of the Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the Director, NIH. This topic has also been addressed by the Association of American Medical Colleges , the Council of Graduate Schools and a recent Molecular Biology of the Cell article.
NIH’s Center for Scientific Review (CSR) is not the only locus for the review of grant applications–every institute and center has its own review office, as well. Here at NIGMS, the Office of Scientific Review (OSR) handles applications for a wide variety of grant mechanisms and is always seeking outstanding scientists to serve as reviewers. If you’re interested in reviewing for us, here’s some information that might help.
I previously told you about the development of an NIGMS clearinghouse site where members of the research community will be able to find grantee-produced training materials designed to teach rigorous experimental design and enhance data reproducibility. Since then, NIH has established two new related sites. The first is a Rigor and Reproducibility web portal that provides general information about NIH efforts and offers resources that include guidelines for how research results should be reported and links to publications written by NIH authors on rigor, reproducibility and transparency.
The second site is focused on grants and funding and includes a summary of NIH’s proposal to clarify its instructions to applicants to emphasize expectations that rigorous experimental design and reproducibility of results should be considered during the application and review process. You may have read about the changes in a recent Rock Talk blog post that announced the publication of two new NIH Guide notices: Enhancing Reproducibility through Rigor and Transparency and Consideration of Sex as a Biological Variable in NIH-funded Research. We anticipate that the new instructions will be released in the fall of 2015 and will take effect for all research grant applications submitted on or after January 25, 2016.
As always, if you have questions or concerns, contact your program director. We’re also interested in hearing how your lab validates key biological and chemical reagents, so tell us about your procedures!
One of the research and training resources we help fund is iBiology , a collection of high-quality, free online videos of scientists talking about their research, career paths and related topics. The project, which also receives support from the National Science Foundation and other organizations, produces material that is relevant to those at a range of educational and career levels, especially undergraduate students, graduate students and postdocs.
When Ron Vale started the iBiology project in 2006, his goal was to give people around the world broader access to research seminars. Since then, the scope has expanded. The collection now includes 350 videos that fall into three main categories:
We recently analyzed outcomes of the NIGMS Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (referred to here as the Diversity Supplement Program or DSP), which provides investigators holding active NIGMS research grants with supplemental funds to support scholars from groups underrepresented in biomedical science. Using a public search approach, we could track a large proportion of participants—but not all—through doctoral training and into various careers. We assessed the educational and career outcomes for undergraduate, graduate student and postdoctoral participants supported by supplements between 1989 and 2006, and we encourage you to explore the report.
UPDATE: Due to technical difficulties, the MIRA webinar was not recorded. We have posted the slides on the MIRA Web page, where we’ll also post a summary of the webinar questions and answers.
NIGMS Director Jon Lorsch and I will field questions about the recently announced Maximizing Investigators’ Research Award (MIRA) for New and Early Stage Investigators (R35) during a webinar on Tuesday, June 30, from 1-2 p.m. EDT. Participants will be able to submit questions using the chat feature. We’ll post the archived webinar and slides on the MIRA Web page.
The most common questions we’re getting about the new MIRA funding opportunity announcement (FOA) have concerned eligibility, so we created a new flowchart to help determine this. Another common question has related to research areas appropriate for support by a MIRA. These and other topics are covered in our answers to frequently asked questions about the second MIRA FOA.
If you have colleagues who may be eligible to apply but may not know about the FOA or may have questions about it, please share this post with them.
As with the first MIRA FOA, this competition is an experiment and is intentionally limited to a small group of eligible applicants. If the pilot is successful, we plan to issue future FOAs covering additional groups of investigators.
For more information about the MIRA program, e-mail me or call me at 301-594-0828.
In an earlier blog post, I presented data on the first competing renewal rates of R01 projects that NIGMS awarded to new and established investigators. The analysis showed that no renewal application was submitted for a substantial percentage of projects—30% of new projects from new investigators and 45% of new projects from established investigators. This raises questions, such as those suggested by Feedback Loop readers, including:
- Do projects for which no renewal is submitted generally have less productivity or scientific impact?
- Are new projects awarded to established investigators more likely to represent the second or third award to that investigator?
I’ve tried to explore these questions in a further analysis.