And next time maybe we can mention this. So there's something called the NIAMS Coalition. There are 90-plus organizations that work together to support research within the NIAMS mission areas, and they've developed a nice searching tool on their website that allows you to search for different organizations and find out what sorts of programs they have. Do they have grant programs? Do they have career development awards? So maybe we can send this information to Lynette and she could distribute it, but it's a really nice resource, especially for early career investigators. So yeah, and I would also recommend signing up for the newsletter, because there's so many websites, and you have a full-time job as well. So at least that way you can get something to your inbox that'll let you know when something has been posted for the program, and you can select by program. So if you don't care about any of the cancer, you don't have to select that to get information from. So those are some of the programs that you want to hear about. And then for the young investigator question, that's a great question. For orthopedic programs, at least for both of my programs, there is no minimum. All I ask is that you be an independent researcher. So anybody can apply, and what that allows us to do is also fund some high-risk, high-reward things, because a lot of times it's the younger investigators that are brave enough to move into and say, well, why can't we take this that's working in this other field and maybe apply it here? But even if it's not something high-risk, high-reward, it's open to any independent investigator. So one question, and thank you all for being here. This is a great session, and I really appreciate your time. As a younger investigator looking towards larger-scale funding, if we reach out, I think there's always that feeling of imposing, but finding the most efficient way. Is that sending an aims page, sending some other summary of what we're thinking about? But what would be the best way? Because I feel like finding that match of your proposal with the right mechanism and agency is so key. So I'll start here, Akia, if you don't mind. So what I would say is if you know the program director, or if you know a program director, and this is how I do it. If you send something to me and it is not within my portfolio, but it is NIME's mission, I'm going to forward you on to the right program director, number one. You should always try to send, don't send aims in an email, meaning within the body of the email. Send it as an attachment, a Word or a PDF. It's the best way, because then it's easier for us to share without it getting lost in a stream. But aims pages help. And then in the email body, just have a little description about what stage you are and what you're thinking of, what mechanism you think. Because then it helps us put our mind frame is to say, okay, what is this young guy talking about? Does he really want to do an R01? Does he want to do this? Is he an ESI, which I didn't mention because, again, I had to cut slides on. But if you're an ESI in our institute, I think we're what? We're funding at the 15th percentile? Versus somebody like Dr. Spindler or Dr. Wright would have to be more senior, would have to meet the 10th percentile. So that five-point bump is big. So all those questions have to come in. And then there's other mechanisms for junior or young investigators like the CATS award, CATS R01, which is a significant shift. And I didn't bring that up because I think everybody here is probably a little bit more geared in, they're not going to be changing fields per se. But that's something else we can discuss. And so all these things help build the conversation that we then have by phone or video. And I'll just add, when I joined NIAMS, I met one-on-one with all of our program officers. And across the board, the favorite thing they like to do is talking to investigators. So it's not imposing. It's what they enjoy doing. Actually, that's not the favorite thing. The favorite thing is when you score well, and then I get to call you and say you're being funded. That's the favorite thing. I'll just, it's because it's slightly different for the DOD. Don't send me your aims page. You can tell me the topic that, you know, like I'm looking at, I don't even want to say, give an example because then I'm saying too much. Your funding, this is what you're interested in submitting to the program. And would this be something, you know, of interest? And then I would say to you, either I would send you, like Chuck was saying, I will direct you to the right program manager if it's not me. But I wouldn't be able to say yay or nay, right? I would say, well, this looks like, are you thinking animal research or clinical, right? And then we would look, and then I would pull up one of our recent funding opportunities and we would walk through it together, right? I'm coaching. I'm like, oh, because here it says we're looking for these things. Do you think that what you're planning to propose is something that would fall into something here, right? Because I can't say, you know, because that would be almost me promising something that, you know, oh, this looks great. And then you submit it and don't get funded, right? So I have to be, we have to be careful there. Yeah. I think there's a question here first. Great points. Kurt. Oh, okay. So thank you all for being here. I think this is very, super informative. But people at different stages have to be ready for grant. So when you're really talking about the NIH in general, unless it's a K award, you're talking about someone in mid-career and senior to have a reasonable chance of getting it. Most people in orthopedics started through the REF awards or they start through the society awards. And so the REF and the society awards are the ones that provide them a track record of getting a grant, managing a grant, publishing papers, some preliminary data. So that, for the people who've never had a grant, that's the first step. And then there's a timeline that was created, and Chuck knows it well because he's on the Clinician Scientist Development Program with me, about where you are in your career and where should you be setting the next idea of grants. Where should it be? So that's number one. Number two is, if you want to write a grant, there are grant writing workshops that the ORS has, and there's an entire clinical portfolio written by the ORS and the ORF in order to do that. So this is, the NIH is sort of the prize jewel of getting a grant, so you don't go there first unless you have track record or a great idea or experience in mentoring. You're probably going to start at society, ORF, Arthritis Foundation, maybe the DOD. Excellent. I still wouldn't discourage. I agree with you 100 percent, and we've actually talked about doing an analysis to see how many people had these, like, seed grants from the ORF and other agencies and then went on to get other funding. But I completely agree with you that that tends to be the trend line, especially since we do ask for preliminary data because we are in the large, you know, the higher funding area. But I think that there is something to be said about our willingness to take risks. I think that's great, but I mean, in general, the ORF has a large track record, and, you know, 50 percent of their career development awards have gone on to NIH funding. And so we have a long history, the ORF has a long history of doing that, and that's the starter for almost most people in orthopedics, including the most senior people that you know that have been funded by NIH. And then the society, the Sports Medicine Society, has created a fair number of grants that have that, that was seeding it in order to do it, in order to do it. MARS was initially funded, that Rick has, with $600,000 because there are no mechanisms in orthopedics to get enough preliminary data to be competitive for an R01 without having significant seed funding, which AOSSM has done a number of times. Go ahead, or where's the next question? I had maybe almost more a comment than a question, but earlier you guys mentioned like the value of reviewing, and I just wanted to say that I thought that being a reviewer is just like a great opportunity to learn about, you know, what everybody's looking for when they're reviewing applications, and I, my first time reviewing, I was an early stage investigator, so that program was great. Chuck helped me through the process of applying to be an early stage reviewer. And then also, you may not know, but the AOSSM has the BART Man Award, so if it's your first time reviewing, you can apply to the AOSSM and you get a $5,000 stipend for doing your first NIH review, so that's a little incentive as well, which is a pretty cool program. Great, and I think there was one more question in the back. I'm John Elphar. I'm the guy he referred to. I called you out. Sorry, John. Two of you in this room know me very well, Akua and Chuck. I did want to say one thing, which I thought helped me, because there's a lot of people younger than me in this room, more than I'd like to admit. You're going to fail at this, and that's not such a bad thing. Both of you know I wrote many more grants than the ones I got funded, and, you know, now I'm sitting on the other side of being much more successful at this, and if anybody in this room wants to put together a specific aims page and want someone to read it for them, I will. There's probably a lot of people in this room that will do that. Anybody who's failed at writing grants, and I fail, I don't know, eight to ten times for every time I'm successful. People only measure the successful times, but anybody who wants somebody to read their aims page, I will. I'm the chair at the University of Arizona, and I've been through all kinds of hell getting things funded, and those of us on the other side of that, getting things funded, know that that's a valuable friend to have, and I'm sure that there's a couple of other people in the room that would do that for you, too. I think that that's very important in getting funded and getting to success, is getting through failure and recognizing that even the people who have been successful fail much more often than they are successful, and I just wanted to say that because nobody did. Anyway, carry on. That's such a valuable comment, and it's a lovely offer from you. Can I ask for a show of hands, those of you in the room that are under seven years in practice, can you raise your hand? Okay, and then can you keep the hand up if you already had funding from DoD, AstroVarious Foundation, or NIH? Great. And then those of you that have failed at funding, because again, I wouldn't even use the word failure. So you've tried. That's fantastic. Very good. So keep trying. That's the only way to do it. So Drew, come on up and talk to us about early career advice.

resources

NIAMS Coalition

funding opportunities

preliminary data

grant-writing