I got my score for the R01 that I wrote on my lab's main
project. The scores were
awesome. They thought the grant was significant
and innovative. They thought my expertise was perfectly aligned with the proposed work. The scientific
environment got mostly perfect scores as well. They thought the aims were great. The reviewer concerns were minor at best. On one hand this feels awesome, but on
the other hand, it means nothing, because I still didn’t meet the payline, even
with the ESI bonus. This hurts
even more knowing that my score is one of the best anyone in my department has
received in the past three years. This pretty much means that only
close-to-perfect scores will be funded this round.
The situation just seems impossible.
My dept chair was quite a bit more upbeat about this than
me. She said there was very little
chance that the study section was going to give me this grant on the first try anyway when
I still have a few more months of funding left, but that I should get it on the
next try. I didn’t think study
sections were supposed to consider current funding, but then again, in this
funding climate, how could they not? She also told me to look at this as an opportunity to stop and think a little deeper about my research, and really bring out the therapeutic future potential in the resubmission. I guess that's good advice.
My program officer said something similar about select
pay. She loved my grant and said I
was a great candidate for select pay given my great score and that most of the
critiques could be responded to simply by adding text. However, with the remaining months on my
R00 grant, she said I would likely not be competitive for select pay in the
eyes of the council, because this usually goes to labs that are about to shut
down due to lack of funding. So obviously things could be worse, but it still stings.
So I’m gearing up for a resubmission. ESIs can resubmit past the standard
deadline for review in the very next cycle. Since my first submission, we’ve published a paper that
addresses many of the questions in Aim 2, so I now have to write a new sub-aim
or craft an entirely new aim. I
feel like I have to come up with something so practical and feasible that there
can be no new critiques, but then this means that it will probably be boring. Everything I want to write about has a
catch. In vivo experiments, using
a new type of primary cell, or using a new technique would all open up a whole
new world of possible concerns from the reviewers.
So this means my complete blog post on writing an R01 is still
postponed until further notice. If
you need me, I’ll be brainstorming in my office all weekend.
No comments:
Post a Comment