The Grants Enhancement Program (GEP) was founded by CTSI-CN in 2010 to improve grant applications submitted by junior investigators to maximize the probability of funding. Providing this support at both CNH and GW is designed to expand the base of successful, externally funded clinical and translational researchers at our partner institutions. Explore the program details below and email CTSINavigator@childrensnational.org to learn more.
Grants Enhancement Program
The GEP process involves the following elements:
- Senior Level Proposal Review
-
The GEP review consists of a panel of six successful senior investigators whose collective expertise spans the translational research spectrum. These GEP advisors provide detailed review, feedback, and mentoring of proposals from developing early-stage concepts to draft specific aims through full proposals, in concert with the investigator’s primary mentor. Requests for consultation by the GEP should be made at least 12 weeks prior to the grant submission date. The GEP reviews both initial applications and revised (amended, or “A1”) applications that are in response to an NIH critique.
- Open Studio Reviews
-
Open Studios meetings address the earliest stages of project formulation. The meetings invite critiques of an applicant's conceptual design by a team of GEP faculty, together with other senior faculty specifically experienced in the project area. With this input, applicants then develop a specific aims page that becomes the basis for 1-on-1 assistance by the GEP members and peer critique.
- K/R Group Meetings
-
The GEP hosts periodic meetings of two groups of peer investigators: those pursuing Mentored Career Development Awards, and those pursing Independent Research Awards (R Grants). At each meeting, the group reviews, discusses, and critiques the specific aims of a group member and provides peer review, guided by one or more senior faculty member of the GEP.
- GEP Library
-
This library contains a collection of successfully funded grant applications for both mentored and independent R level awards, as well as various guidance documents for grant preparation.
- Nuts and Bolts
-
How to have your grant application reviewed by the GEP:
- Request Assistance
Applicants at CNH:
Email GEP and Dr. Stephan Ladisch requesting an initial discussion or review of a draft proposal.Applicants at GWUMC: Email GEP and Dr. Sanjay Maggirwar requesting an initial discussion or review of a draft proposal.
Questions? Contact Valery Yankov, GEP Administrator.
- Register the Proposal
The actual review requires proposal registration in the redcap system. To register, once initial grant draft documents have been prepared and submitted to the GEP, Valery Yankov will generate and forward the redcap survey link to the investigator. This link permits the applicant to enter her/his proposal into the system for review. Simultaneous submission of a minimum of the draft specific aims page is required at this point.
- Complete REDCap Submission
The applicant completes the REDCap submission, including uploading grant documents for review (creating an ongoing record of reviews in progress).
- Review Assignment
Upon notification of the REDCap entry, Valery Yankov extracts documents and sends them to the GEP chair at Children's National, Dr. Stephan Ladisch or at GW to Dr. Sanjay Maggirwar. One reviewer of the GEP faculty becomes the primary reviewer for the proposal specific aims review and will be responsible for follow-through; other reviewers may also provide input.
- Review Process
The primary reviewer is identified by email with a cc or reply to Valery Yankov, who will keep the ongoing record of work in progress. All reviewer feedback/edits are sent directly to the applicant, with a copy to Dr. Stephan Ladisch to facilitate tracking or to Valery Yankov (to record as needed).
- Submission
By the due date of the application submission Valery Yankov contacts the applicant to verify successful submission and assure redcap update. A month after the submission date he follows up with the applicant to obtain the (NIH) review date as well as a month after the review to obtain the review outcome (and review summary).
- Request Assistance