Q. What do I do if my grant application is rejected?

For most NIH funding opportunities, applicants whose original application is rejected have the option to prepare and submit a resubmission. Here are 10 steps for preparing a grant resubmission, as recommended by NIH program officers in recent podcasts and seminars.

1. Take a few days after receiving your summary statement to calm your emotions. Don’t take criticism personally.
2. Make a plan. Read the summary statement carefully and start making a plan for resubmission. Think about what you could do fairly quickly to address reviewers’ concerns—for example, rewriting unclear sections, reviewing additional literature, conducting additional statistical analyses, or performing some straightforward lab work—and what might take longer.
3. Reach out to your program officer. Investigators planning a resubmission should always contact their program officer. Don’t cold call your program officer; instead, email them to set up a time to meet virtually or by telephone. If you can, email them specific questions or concerns or an outline of your plans for revisions so that they can prepare for your conversation.
4. Keep up with your field. Revised grants usually must be submitted within 37 months of the original application. Especially if a lot of time has passed since your original submission, your resubmission should demonstrate that you have read recent literature and kept up with new technology in your field.
5. Respond thoroughly and professionally. Resubmitted applications are reviewed by the same study section as the original application; they may not have the same primary reviewers, but those reviewers may still be members of the study section. Reviewers of resubmitted applications have access to the summary statement for the original submission and do consider whether the previous reviewers’ concerns have been adequately addressed.
   
   In the introduction page to your resubmission, summarize the reviewers’ criticisms and then address them all politely and constructively. (See “Tips for writing Introduction sections for NIH resubmission grant applications,” The Write Stuff, Summer 2017.) If you can’t address a concern or disagree with it, the introduction should provide the reasons why—don’t simply ignore such criticisms. (See “How to disagree with an NIH research grant proposal review,” The Write Stuff, Winter 2019.) The introduction should also clearly indicate what has changed in the resubmitted proposal. The NIH no longer requires you to mark changes in the Research Strategy document.
6. Seek advice from mentors and colleagues who have been through the resubmission process and those who have served on study sections. People outside your field can often help you review your application for clarity. The INTEREST program at MD Anderson holds mock study sections in which MD Anderson faculty review and provide feedback on grant proposals. Editors in the Research Medical Library can also help improve the readability and organization of your proposal.  
7. Work with your strengths. Revise the weaknesses identified by reviewers while being careful not to change elements the reviewers liked. Highlight your ongoing work by including new findings or new preliminary data.
8. Reread the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA). Revising a grant proposal can take some time. Many NIH FOAs expire after 3 years, so make sure that the FOA still applies at the time of your resubmission and hasn’t changed. (See “NIH tip: Check your funding opportunity announcement 30 days before submitting your grant application,” The Write Stuff, Spring 2019.) Most FOAs allow resubmissions, but a few do not, so also check to make sure the FOA to which you are applying does so.
9. Avoid common errors. Several common errors can reduce your chances of receiving a fundable score, among them not contacting your program officer and failing to respond thoroughly to the reviewers’ comments. NIH program officials also stress the importance of clear communication, including visual communication. The text should be clearly written, be well organized, and use—but not overuse—bold text to highlight important points and review criteria. Paragraphs should be fairly short and tightly focused. Figures and legends should be clear and readable, and the page layout should make good use of white space.  
10. Don’t give up. In most cases, it’s a good idea to revise and resubmit an unfunded proposal—even if it wasn’t discussed. NIH data show that resubmitted applications have higher success rates than initial submissions do. Unless the reviewers had major problems with several of the review criteria, in which case you may need to reconceptualize the entire study, try again.

Read more of The Write Stuff