The NIH Katz has become one of the more talked-about funding mechanisms among Early Stage Investigators. Here we lay out what it is, who it’s for, and how savvy applicants position themselves strategically.
What Is the Katz Award?
The Katz Award is a relatively recent R01-level mechanism available exclusively to Early Stage Investigators (ESIs). To qualify as an ESI, you must be within ten years of your terminal degree or the completion of your last clinical training, and you must not have previously served as Principal Investigator on an R01 or equivalent grant. Co-investigator or consultant roles don’t count against you — only PI status on an R01 or equivalent does. Small-format mechanisms like the R03 or R21 are irrelevant to ESI eligibility.
The difference between the Katz R01 and a standard R01 is that the Katz is intended for investigators who are changing research direction. In that sense, it functions similarly to the small-format R21, but with the higher budget limit and longer project period typical of an R01. Preliminary data may not be included on the application.
Why choose the Katz over the DP2, DP5, MIRA, or small-format R mechanisms?
Choose the Katz if you are an ESI, you are changing research direction, and you have little or no preliminary data yet — and the duration and funding amounts work for your project goals. ESIs have other options besides the Katz. Here are a few, and when to consider them.
- Parent R01 with ESI funding advantage. An ESI may apply to the parent R01 and receive their IC’s ESI funding advantage on that mechanism. You need substantial preliminary data and publications with your team on the topic of the R01 in order to be competitive.
- NIGMS R35 MIRA for ESIs is another possibility. It offers a longer award period than what NIGMS typically offers for their traditional R01s. But this mechanism is only an option if your work fits within the mission of NIGMS.
- NIH Director’s New Innovation Award (DP2). This recently reissued mechanism is for “exceptionally creative early career scientists proposing innovative, high-impact projects”. Award size and duration is similar to a traditional R01. It is highly competitive, like all the High-Risk, High-Reward NOFOs (featured in an upcoming blog post).
- NIH Director’s Early Independence Award (DP5) is another recently reissued mechanism out of the High-Risk, High-Reward portfolio. It is for “exceptional junior scientists bypassing postdoctoral training to launch independent research careers”. The 5-year awards are limited to $350K per year, which is a bit smaller than the $500K one can ask for on traditional R01s.
- Small-format mechanisms like the 2-year R03 or R21 require less preliminary data to be competitive — but unlike the Katz, they do require some. Award sizes tend to be smaller: typically $275K total directs for R21 and $100K total directs for R03. An R21 might be for you if you are changing research direction and can present some preliminary data, and the duration and award size work for your project.
Do they really mean no preliminary data at all?
One of the Katz’s most defining features is that it truly prohibits any and all preliminary data. It is a central feature of the mechanism, and it exists for a reason: if you are genuinely changing research direction, you should not yet have a body of preliminary data in that new area.
Note that many applicants quietly withhold data they actually do have. In this case, while your application is under review, continue building your data using foundation funds, startup funds, or other smaller funding sources. If your Katz is funded, carry the work forward. If not, you’ve spent the intervening year strengthening your preliminary data and might now be competitive at a small-format R21.
What do reviewers consider a new research direction?
Here is where many Katz applications run into trouble. The single most consistent theme in Katz Summary Statements is reviewer skepticism about whether the proposed research truly constitutes a change in direction. Reviewers take this question seriously, and applicants who cannot make the case convincingly will hear about it from reviewers.
To help applicants understand what constitutes a new research direction, the National Institute on Aging has published a sample “Change of Research Direction” document. This is a one-page attachment you are required to write on a Katz that justifies, concretely, why your proposed work represents a genuine departure from your prior research. It is worth studying carefully before you draft your own.
In Summary…
The Katz Award is an option for ESIs who are pivoting their research. It is highly competitive, requires a credible change of research direction, and you cannot report any preliminary data. If you are considering a Katz submission, your single most important task is making a convincing case that your proposed work is genuinely new territory for you.
