Top Ten Tasks Not to Forget for Your NIH Submission

When applying for a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Principal Investigators (PIs) focus on the research strategy, rightly since it is the meat of the application and the focus of peer-review. However, there are several administrative steps requiring thoughtful and timely review and completion that many applicants forget until crunch-time. It is very important to finish these steps or there may be a delay in your institution’s ability to submit an error-free application packet. These are general administrative steps for NIH grant applications, but it’s important to review the specific instructions provided in the chosen NOFO and consult with your institution’s research administration office for any additional requirements or guidelines. While every grant application is unique, there are a few common things that NIH grant applicants may forget to do. Procrastination can be detrimental to the grant application process. Waiting until the last minute to submit the application increases the risk of technical issues, system overload, or other unforeseen problems. Plan your timeline to submit well in advance of the deadline to avoid any last-minute complications.

Here are some key areas that applicants often overlook until the 11^th hour:

1. Required Approvals and Signatures: Obtain necessary approvals and signatures from both the PI and the authorized institutional representative who will be submitting the application through the NIH’s electronic submission system, typically through Grants.gov. This may involve internal review processes within your institution, such as approval for your research project. Ensure that your institution’s administrative officials (central office or department grants managers, institutional signatory) are aware of your application and their required roles. The majority of the following required tasks may need their facilitation or active involvement.
2. Project Budget: Create a modular or detailed budget as needed that justifies the requested funds for personnel, equipment, supplies, and other necessary expenses. Follow the specific budget guidelines outlined in the NOFO. My oft-provided advice is to ask for what you need for the proposed work and can justify. Anticipate cuts to your awarded budget by NIH – don’t short-shrift yourself unless it’s unavoidable. Also make sure all amounts are accurate including the Indirect Costs & Fringe Benefits rates as negotiated by your institution with DHHS in a federal rate agreement.
3. Budget Justification: Many applications require the submission of a narrative Budget Justification providing explanatory details about the funds requested. PIs frequently overlook the importance of this, especially that it must parallel the budget itself and be in-line with the activities of your proposed research. Reviewers are scientists too and they know the general cost for mice or pipettes as well as what would seem excessive for the proposed project.
4. Commons IDs: All personnel in the budget are required to have Commons IDs. The application packet will be rejected without this!
5. Compliance Checks: Confirm your institution’s pre-submission compliance review requirements. Some require preliminary and/or completed reviews for conflict of interest (COI),as well as for research subjects through its IACUC, IRB, or technology development office (for intellectual property, inventions, etc.)
6. Prepare the Application Package: Complete the required application forms, including the SF 424 (R&R) application package. This package includes various components such as the Project Abstract, Specific Aims, Research Strategy, Budget, Biosketches of key personnel, and other supporting documents. These must be completed in order to submit an error-free application which can take time and careful review. Make sure you’ve completed these to obviate the need for multiple edits of rejected packets.
7. Public Access Policy: Make sure that PMCID numbers are included with citations according to the NIH policy. This is another administrative task that can slow your submission as the deadline hour approaches.
8. File Format/Required Nomenclature: The many attachments in an application packet may require specific formats, nomenclature, etc. Yet another obstacle for an error-free submission if not followed according to the NOFO and NIH grants policy.
9. Internal Consistency: Include time for you, your team, and/or grants manager to review the research strategy and other attachments are in synch. A sloppy application can tank the grant in peer-review.
10. Public Information/Review Assignments: Be aware that the grant title, narrative, and abstract will be publicly available and consider inclusion of any proprietary information. Also note that those are also the main ways that the Center for Scientific Review (CSR) assigns your application to NIH I/Cs, study sections, etc. This also highlights the importance of using the Assignment Review Form to request your own preferred choices for those assignments. Don’t leave this impactful decision to natural language processing at the CSR.