From editor@principalinvestigatorsadvisors.org Tue Nov 24 14:52:31 2009 Return-Path: Received: from principalinvestigatorsadvisors.org (cgw-53-74.66.216-eh.jbvglobalsolutions.net [216.66.74.53]) by smtp.XXXXXXX.XXX (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAOMqUJV001935 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:52:31 -0800 Message-Id: <200911242252.nAOMqUJV001935@smtp.XXXXXXX.XXX> From: "PI eAlert" Subject: Your Issue: November 24, 2009 To: XXX@XXXXXXXX.XXXXXXX.XXX Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:52:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SCORE: 2164 Content-Type: text/html; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-FBL: 612071 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=1.12.8161:2.4.5,1.2.40,4.0.166 definitions=2009-11-24_12:2009-11-16,2009-11-24,2009-11-24 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=100 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-0908210000 definitions=main-0911240241

Please add "editor@principalinvestigators.org" to your whitelist or address book, so that you have no trouble receiving future issues!

PI e-Alert weekly e-zine is delivered worldwide. Feel free to share this issue with friends and colleagues. Subscribe Today!

PI e-Alert features expert advice on managerial and administrative challenges which confront Principal Investigators in every field of science research. If such matters are not of interest to you or your associates, please accept our apologies and “unsubscribe” at the bottom of the page.

No. 4, November 23-27, 2009

Grant Clinic:

Was "too ambitious" to blame for non-funding?

Reader Question: I recently received the reviewers' summary sheets for my first R01 research grant submission. The score was encouraging, but not fundable. The reviewers’ criticisms, however, were all mild and addressable, and did not represent specific flaws in the work itself. Two reviewers commented that the program is an ambitious one, and that perhaps I need to cut back on at least two of the proposed studies. I could easily do that, so why didn’t I get the funding? What am I missing?

Expert Comments: Interpreting the thoughts of the reviewers is a road to madness, but I might be able to read between the lines here. First, you got hit with the dreaded “A” word – ambitious. This is code for “your inexperience is showing.” Reviewers want to see originality and novel ideas or methods to some extent, but they do not want to see a proposal for a project that is so unusual or aggressive that it may not be doable. You are sure you can do it and maybe you can. But, um, “stuff happens”, and all of a sudden recruitment becomes sparse, a reagent was contaminated, something else goes wrong, and

View the remainder of the expert comments

Comments by William Gerin, Ph.D., P.I. e-Alert’s Chief Grants Consultant, Professor of Biobehavioral Health, Pennsylvania State University, and Author, Writing the NIH Grant Proposal: A Step-by-Step Guide, SAGE Books (2006)

Agree? Disagree? Submit your comments

►►Preview of Next Week's Question◄◄

No. 5, November 30-December 4, 2009

Reader Question: As PIs, we understand of course that research fraud is intolerable. However, at times misleading data could be reported to a journal or sponsor merely because of a serious, though fully accidental, mistake in recordkeeping, faulty statistical calculations etc. Does such a mixup constitute "fraud"? What is the difference in the eyes of granting agencies and legal doctrine? When and how does "accident" cross over to PI "crime"?

Missed Last Weeks's Question?

Reader Question: We have a new scientist coming to my lab from China, but a corporate sponsor of our research only wants U.S. citizens working on the project. We aren’t doing any kind of top secret or classified work, so this request came as a real surprise to us. Does the sponsor have a right to do this? Are there any other things we need to be aware of in having a non-U.S. citizen working in our lab?

View the expert comments

This issue was brought to you as a service by Principal Investigators Association. If you have general questions or comments contact us at editor@principalinvestigators.org.

* Please note that in some cases the unsubscribe links in these messages can become broken by the way that an email program displays the message. If you are having trouble unsubscribing you may also forward this message to unsubscribe@principalinvestigators.org with the word 'remove' in the email message subject line.

Principal Investigators Association
3565 10th St N, Suite B
Naples, FL 34103 USA
(800) 303-0129

Research Resources
4301 Gulfshore Blvd., #1404 - Naples, FL 34103 US