One of the most important steps in preparing any NIH application is evaluating whether a specific mechanism is appropriate for the organization, the investigator(s) and the moment. Before expending the considerable effort that a T32 application requires, it’s important to carefully consider if you will actually be competitive for funding. An NIH T32 application, with its onerous training tables, can easily take hundreds of hours to prepare. Before committing that kind of time, step back and confirm that a T32 is the right fit.
What is a T32?
T32s are NIH institutional training grants. Unlike most NIH mechanisms, you are not applying as an individual investigator. The institution applies for training slots that will be filled at a future date by trainees to be named later. A common example is the MD-PhD program at academic medical centers, which is frequently funded through NIH T32 training slots.
Why would a university put themselves through the trouble of writing a T32 application? The advantage of holding a T32 is that you can recruit the best trainees by offering them funded slots. When recruiting, your university can inform prospective trainees that a fully funded position is available if they join, which allows an institution to compete for the strongest candidates in a given field.
T32s are the most common of the T-series mechanisms at NIH, but they are not the only option — so be sure to check out active T mechanisms in which your target institute may participate at time of application. In addition, there are other types of training mechanisms, such as an R25, which is considerably easier to write and does not require you to create those damn training tables. The trade-off is that an R25 cannot support a full-time, year-round program the way a T32 can. Some institutions start with an R25, such as a summer training program, and use that track record to build toward a future T32.
Large universities often have dedicated support for the T32 application process. Some pre-award offices have dedicated staff whose entire job is to support institutional training grants. If you are considering a T32, the first step is a conversation with your pre-award support office to understand the help available to you, both in the preparation and in the writing and execution of the application.
Who typically initiates a T32 application?
An idea for a T32 application tends to come from one of two people: (1) The prospective PI who is thinking about applying. Note that often, a mid-career PI may have the time, interest, and bandwidth to lead this initiative, but they lack experience. So they partner with a senior PI who has led T32s in the past. Together, this combination can make a strong multi-PI team. (2) Someone in a pre-award or research development office may take the lead on initiating the T32, often because they were asked to by a vice president for research.
Regardless of who initiates a discussion of a T32 application, the questions below are what determine whether it makes sense to move forward.
You are ready for a T32 if you have:
- An unmet need for trainees or training in a particular scientific area. This is the first and most important question, and it is more often overlooked than you’d think. When asked to justify an unmet need for a specific group of trainees on their campus, many prospective applicants have no clear answer.
- A possible PI with the right scientific background, funding, and training track record. Someone has to serve as the champion for the application and take responsibility for coordinating the many people who will contribute sections of it.
- A cohort of potential mentors with active NIH funding. A training program rests on the strength of the mentors. You should have a pool of researchers who have funding and publications in the relevant scientific area, and a successful track record of mentoring.
- A diverse potential pool of trainees who would realistically be interested in the training slots being proposed.
- Strong facilities, along with the support of the relevant college or department. Institutional backing matters even when the initial push to consider a T32 comes from above, such as a directive from a VPR rather than from the PI.
Assessing research strengths
Look across the departments or divisions at your institution and identify areas of research strength (e.g., funding, publications, and other research outputs). Out of perhaps a dozen or more departments, there are usually two or three that stand out in publications and NIH expenditures. How might those two or three scientific areas coalesce around a single, central theme that is innovative and compelling, both to NIH and to the trainees you hope to attract?
Within those areas, identify the faculty who are funded and active, which may mean an experienced investigator with hundreds of publications but can also be a rising star who might serve as a mentor. Search PubMed for these faculty’s publications to confirm their research strength.
Assessing funding strengths
Once a set of potential mentors has been identified, search NIH RePORTER for their funding history. Remember that at this stage the list of potential mentors is still hypothetical. These are faculty you may not have approached yet, and you do not know whether they are interested. The goal is simply to determine whether a critical mass of well-funded faculty exists, whether that means continuous R01 support or a first R01, along with some demonstrated mentoring experience.
Assessing training potential
With research and funding strength established, the next question is whether the institution can actually train people in this area. That includes whether the faculty have a history of pre-doctoral or post-doctoral training. It also includes whether the school has a track record of strong training outcomes, such as fellowships earned and publications produced by trainees.
Just as important is whether a faculty mentor development program or system is already in place at your university. A T32 application requires a plan for training the mentors themselves, and ideally that program won’t be built de novo. Reviewers prefer to see an existing infrastructure for developing mentors upon which the training grant can build.
Questions program officers may ask
Conversations with NIH program staff tend to focus on the same core questions: Why is a training grant important at your university, in this scientific area, at this time, for these trainees? How does the proposed program complement rather than duplicate other training programs, such as a CCTI, already on campus? Beyond the infrastructure, is there actually a program, meaning a clear articulation of how the areas of research strength synergize around some common scientific theme, who the trainees will be, why they might want this training, and what makes the program innovative?
Where this fits in the larger process
Confirming readiness is a key step of a T32 application, ahead of lining up resources, building the training program structure, and vetting the idea before writing begins. Each of these steps deserves its own careful treatment, but none of them matter if the underlying readiness has not been confirmed first.
