R15: The Academic Research
Enhancement Award
michelle C. Dunn, mathematical statistician and Program Director, surveillance Research Program, Division of Cancer
Control and Population sciences, National Cancer Institute
M
ost statisticians know the National Institutes
grants may be evaluated in the same study section as
of Health (NIH) is a major source of fund-
traditional R01 research grants, they do not compete
ing for statistical methodology research
directly with R01 grants.
relevant to the health sciences through investigator-
Like other research grants at NIH, the time from
initiated research grants. Less well known is that NIH
submission to award is about nine months. There are
has a variety of mechanisms, which vary according to
three standard submission due dates per year for an
purpose and target audience. Broad classes of mecha-
AREA/R15 grant: February 25, June 25, and October
nisms are research grants (R), training awards (K), and
25. Once submitted, applications are received by the
cooperative agreements (U). Cooperative agreements
Center for Scientific Review and referred to a study
are for collaborative projects with NIH. Training
section for review and an institute for potential fund-
awards generally support postdocs and early-stage
ing. The study section provides the first level of review
professors. Research grants are the main class of awards
to judge the proposal’s scientific merit and responsive-
for investigator-initiated ideas. Popular research grants
ness to the goals of the mechanism. On this basis, the
among statisticians are traditional research project
grant receives a priority score.
grants (R01), small research grants (R03), and explor-
Unlike R01 grants, in which the priority score
atory/developmental research grants (R21).
determines a percentile rank based on scores from all
The Academic Research Enhancement Award
R01 grants evaluated at the current and previous two
(AREA)/R15 grant mechanism supports research
meetings of the study section (e.g., BMRD), AREA/
at domestic institutions (such as U.S. colleges) that
R15 grants are not percentiled. Institutes provide the
receive less than $6 million in NIH funding per year,
second level of review, and funding decisions are par-
based on funding in the last seven years. Eligibility is
tially based on an institute-established payline. Unlike
determined at the time of application and can differ by
the percentile payline for R01s, which makes the pro-
academic component within an institution; to learn if
portion of funded to received R01 grants approxi-
a particular academic component is eligible, see http://
mately equal across study sections, the payline for
grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/area.htm. Support is for
AREA/R15 grants is based on the priority score.
up to three years, with up to $300,000 per year in
For more information about eligibility, criteria, and
direct costs.
application procedures for the AREA/R15 grant mech-
The proposed research is investigator-initiated and
anism, see
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/area.htm
can be in any type of biomedical or behavioral science.
or email National Cancer Institute program director,
Proposed work should be well grounded and well
Michelle C. Dunn, at
dunnm3@mail.nih.gov. n
motivated by scientific problems, and collaboration
with medical or behavioral researchers is encouraged.
There are three stated goals of the AREA/R15 pro-
gram: support meritorious research, strengthen the
Accreditation Committee Formed
research environment of the institution, and expose
students to research. All research grants share the first
The ASA’s voluntary accreditation program is under way and
goal. The second and third goals are additional criteria
the Accreditation Implementation Committee has been formed.
for this mechanism.
Members of the team include the following:
AREA/R15 grant applications are evaluated by an
Mary Batcher Bob Mason
NIH study section, such as the Biostatistical Methods
Judy-Anne Chapman David Morganstein
and Research Design (BMRD) study section, which
Christy Chuang-Stein Jeri Mulrow
consists of prominent statisticians representing a wide
Iain Johnstone (chair) Teri Utlaut
range of scientific and application areas. Evaluation
Nancy Kirkendall Geert Verbeke
is based on all three goals. Therefore, in addition to
describing the proposed research, applications should
Working from guidelines approved by the ASA Board in August
directly address the second and third goals. For exam-
of 2009, this committee will provide recommendations for launching
ple, the application can address the suitability of the
and operating the accreditation program. These recommendations
institution for the award and the investigator’s experi-
are expected to be ready for board consideration by April of 2010.
ence interacting with and engaging students (includ-
For details about the voluntary accreditation program, visit http://
ing undergraduates) in research. While AREA/R15
www.amstat.org/news/VoluntaryAccreditationofStatisticians.cfm. n
December 2009 AmstAt News 13
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100