How To Get Your NIH R01 Resubmission Funded In 2023
The anticipation for your summary statement and critique is understandably nerve-wracking. You’ve spent a lot of time on your R01, so it’s only right that those feelings are there.
For those times when the disappointment sets in because your grant didn’t score well enough, it’s time to take a step back and evaluate what went wrong so you can right the ship and resubmit your R01.
We know that you can expect one of two general results: Discussed and Not Discussed. We’re going to talk about each of these separately because the category you land in affects how you can use your summary statement and other factors to prepare your resubmission.
Your R01 Was NOT Discussed
If there was no reviewer discussion, this is a sign that there were major flaws in your proposal.
It’s also possible that there may have been a problem with the strategic alignment or framing of your grant. This just means your grant might have ended up in the wrong study section and the reviewers' expertise did not match your research proposal.
If you find yourself in this scenario, the first thing you must remind yourself of is this: It’s not the end of the world. You live to write another day. Remember: with a decade-long overall success rate of ~20% for R01-equivalent grants, not getting funded means you’re in good company.
So if this is your first or second attempt at getting your R01 funded, take a deep breath and see this as an opportunity to help strengthen your R01 for resubmission.
BUT: if you’ve taken many kicks at the can on this particular project and haven’t managed to get the grant discussed, it’s time to make some big changes.
Reviewing Your Summary Statement
As you start making plans to improve your grant for resubmission, take a close look at your summary statement: in particular, the main strengths and weaknesses for each of the scoring criteria.
This will help you understand where reviewers were confused, what they focused on, and what worked or didn’t work. You especially want to note areas where they said there was a lack of clarity because that indicates a grantsmanship issue.
After reviewing the critiques, you have a decision to make. Resubmit your application (A1) or submit as a new application (A0).
If you want to start over (A0), your grant will still benefit from the critiques in the summary statement. But if you’re thinking of resubmitting (A1), it’s time to go back over the feedback again and look for some key areas of improvement.
One that I like to emphasize at this point is ensuring your grant goes to the right study section in front of the right group of reviewers. You may need to reframe your application so that the Center for Scientific Review can assign it to a more appropriate study section, allowing you to avoid reliving old problems.
From there, the next steps are all about improving your grantsmanship, receiving guidance from the reviewers’ feedback, and—most importantly—taking your time to rewrite a really clear, persuasive R01.
(If you’d like some help doing that, including guidance on how to handle a resubmission, check out our Grant Funding Formula online course, which walks you through the R01 grant writing process, step by step.)
Your R01 WAS Discussed
Even though your grant wasn’t funded this time around, you still deserve a pat on the back because getting your R01 discussed is a sign that reviewers liked your grant…they just didn’t love it.
So now the question you have to answer is, “how do you get them to fall in love with your research proposal?”
To get that answer, we have to go back to the Summary Statement.
Reviewing Your Summary Statement
The difference between this and the summary statement when your grant was not discussed is that now you have an actual summary of the discussion.
So at this stage, you will do what we do for our clients in our strategic grant review process. You’re going to take a line-by-line approach to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses, with a heavy focus on the weaknesses of each individual scoring criteria.
This is your opportunity to scrutinize the feedback so you can decide whether you agree or disagree with your reviewers.
If you agree with their feedback? Great! You know exactly what you need to do.
If you disagree? Great! This also gives you a really useful direction.
More important than what you disagree with is understanding WHY you disagree with the feedback. This lets you gain a deeper understanding of why you made the choices you made.
That justification should then be embedded in the introduction to the resubmission and in the grant itself–all in an effort to give a stronger argument for why you’re doing things the way you’re doing them.
You also want to confirm that your grant made it to the right study section and in front of the right reviewers—but if your grant was scored/discussed that usually means it’s in the right place. Then clean up your framing for the grant to ensure it’s making a compelling connection with the reviewers.
Your Summary Statement Can Get You Funded
The resubmission blues are part of the R01 game, but not the end of the game, especially when you use the summary statement to your full advantage.
Whether your grant is discussed or not, there’s still hope for your resubmission. There’s still hope to get your research idea funded. There’s still hope that your hard work in preparing your R01 will not be in vain.
Don’t let denial get the best of you. Embrace your summary statement, go over it in painstaking detail, and let it be your roadmap to resubmitting your R01 and getting funded this year.
Strategic Grant Writing Review
If you’re ready to start your resubmission process, but want some expert eyes on your application and advice on how to increase your likelihood of making this your last resubmission (because funding is in your future), submit an application to join a future cycle for our Strategic Grant Review process. Please note that we only work with PIs who are resubmitting R01s that were discussed.