Researchers explore funding alternatives

Duke researchers are taking extra measures to strengthen their applications for NIH grants given a shrinking pool of dollars at their disposal.

In order to improve their chances of receiving funding, many Duke researchers are taking advantage of numerous, new University-led initiatives to improve the quality of applications. Researchers are having to be smarter about how they seek research, whether that means diversifying their interests or applying to both private and public sources. Still, some faculty members—especially those who have had to put their own research on hold—are concerned that the reduced funding will deter some from entering the field of scientific research at all.

“Research is a bit like insurance,” said Lee Jones, scientific director of the Duke Center for Cancer Survivorship and associate professor of radiation oncology. “You have to spread your risk. To this end, I have been increasing my collaborations since you need to have several irons in the fire that are associated with your overall program goal but if one fails, you have some back-up plans.”

Last November, Congress ended deliberations without delivering a budget proposal, resulting in spending cuts of $1.2 trillion across government programs—including the NIH—in 2013. The NIH funds scientific research across the country and devotes hundreds of millions of dollars to research at Duke.

Increased competition for funds is also causing some researchers to spend more time writing grants, which limits the time available to pursue other projects, said Beth Sullivan, co-director of the Duke University Program in Genetics and Genomics and assistant professor in molecular genetics and microbiology. Although Sullivan noted that she worked long hours as a graduate and later as a postdoctoral student, a principal investigator’s hard work does not necessarily correlate with success.

“Cuts have already affected my research by making us shelve several lines of research,” Sullivan said.

Securing funds

The University is taking notable measures to help researchers in the grant writing process.

“[Grant writing] is a blend of scientific writing with salesmanship,” said Mark Dewhirst, associate dean for faculty mentoring at the Duke Translational Medicine Institute, who spearheaded the program. “A lot of it is about making the reader understand how important your work is.”

Specifically, the senior faculty work with applicants to bolster their Specific Aims page—a summary of the grant that is often used by NIH officials in making decisions about which grants to support. The program also includes one-on-one mentoring and an internal review process.

During the internal review, faculty members provide an NIH-style review and commentary about two months prior to NIH submission, Dewhirst said. Applicants then meet with reviewers to discuss their revised applications and the comments they received earlier.

“I knew nothing about applying for NIH grants before this program, and I am learning a lot,” Yiping He, assistant professor of pathology research, wrote in an email Saturday. “I believe it makes people who are already in research feel supported and perhaps more confident.”

Some researchers depend entirely on grant funding, which may pose issues for completing certain projects.

E. Jane Costello, associate director of research at Duke’s Center for Child and Family Policy and professor of psychiatry and behavior sciences, wrote in an email Feb. 1 that her research projects are too expensive for independent foundations to fund.

“As a new lab, we have very exciting projects that are moving forward really well, but the cut is shadowing everything,” He said.

Funding cuts would make continuing his experiments almost impossible, He added.

‘Losing a generation’ of scientists

Although the Path to Independence program will help Duke investigators become more competitive on a national level, Jones said he is unsure if it will incentivize more people to pursue research as a career.

“Most scientists are extremely passionate about what they do and if you’re not passionate about research, or anything for that matter, you shouldn’t get into the field of research,” he said.

Many factors, such as the low success rate for securing funding and the years of training it takes to become a researcher, are driving many away from the field.

“We’re losing a generation or two of scientists and the intellectual capacity to drive the economy forward with innovation being lost,” Dewhirst said.

Dewhirst added that scientists are usually more than 40 years old by the time they apply for their first grant.

“You go to school for all these years, do a four to five year Ph.D. and then do a post-doc for another three [years] only to find there are no jobs—so you do another three year post-doc only to find there are no jobs,” Jones said. “If you are fortunate to get a job, the starting pay is not great, and you are given three years to get fully funded, but grant funding is at an all time low.... Is it a career that you would want to get into?”

Sullivan noted that, as a graduate mentor and co-director of a graduate program, she will not encourage students to pursue academic research unless they are truly passionate about it. Instead, Sullivan urges students to pursue diverse science careers, such as medical writing or biotechnical opportunities.

“It troubles me to think that as much as 85 percent of proposed science in this country is not getting funded,” Whitson said. “How can we remain a leader in medical innovation and discovery if this continues to be the case?”