Faculty Research Resources
All Department of Medicine faculty are eligible for the resources listed below.
However, we are particularly committed to supporting faculty during their first 5 to 7 years in rank: instructors/assistant professors, faculty transitioning from career-development awards to their first “R-level” grant, and faculty with their first “R-level” grant seeking their first competitive renewal.
The Academic Health Center's Biostatistical Design and Consulting Center (BDAC) assists faculty with study design, preparation of grant applications, database design and development, data management, statistical analysis, results summarization, and manuscript writing.
The DOM supports faculty use of these services.
Guiding principles for DOM prioritization of BDAC support are as follows:
- Pre-submission support for grant proposal development has priority over "unfunded analysis" for manuscript preparation.
- Priority is given to grant applications in the following order:
- National, peer-reviewed applications (e.g., NIH, CDC)
- Foundation, peer-reviewed applications
- Locally funded, peer-reviewed applications
- Investigator-initiated industry applications
- Faculty without current resources for statistical support will have priority over those with current funding.
Guidelines that need to be followed:
- Limit of 45 hours of BDAC support within a time span of 2 years from beginning to end.
- The DOM would be supportive of a post-manuscript submission/pre-acceptance extension - as long as this is within the 45-hour boundary. The manuscript cannot be "in preparation", but actually submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, by the 2-year mark.
Information on how to request BDAC services:
Request Statistical Support -- Biostatistical Support | CTSI
- My Service Requests
- New Request
- Select Study
- Biostatistical & Data Management Support
- Complete the online form with:
- Funding Category: Non-Federal
- How research will be funded: Departmental Contract
- Department: Medicine
Faculty Research Toolkit
Forms & Templates
- Institutional Review Board (IRB)
- Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)
- Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC)
- Department of Environmental Health and Safety (DEHS)
- Report of External and Professional Activities (REPA)
Compliance Training & Opportunities for Faculty & Staff
- Animal Training and Certification (required once)
- Blood-borne Pathogens and Other Infectious Agents (required annually)
- Chemical Safety (required annually)
- Controlled Substances (required once)
- Hazardous Material Shipping (required every 3 years)
- Hazardous Waste (required annually)
- Human Subjects Use of (required every 3 years)
- Privacy and Data Security Training (HIPPA) (required once)
- Radiation Training (required annually)
- Radiation Safety Orientation (required once)
- Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Part 1 (required once)
- Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Part 2 (required once)
- Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Continuing Education (required annually)
- Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Continuing Ed Awareness/Discussion (required every 3 yrs)
- Select Agents (required annually)
- Minnesota State Register
- Minnesota Department of Education
- Education Minnesota
- Minnesota Office of Higher Education
- Center for Disease Control (CDC)
- Institute of Educational Sciences (IES)
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- US Dept. of Education (USDE)
- US Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS)
- American Educational Research Association (AERA)
- American Psychological Foundation (APA)
- Council on Foundations (COF)
- Lumina Foundation
- Minnesota Council on Foundations (MCF)
- Spencer Foundation
- U of M Foundation
- W.T. Grant Foundation
Note: Not all foundations are approachable. Many are categorized as "restricted" by the U of M Foundation.
Other Grant Resources
U of M Intramural Funding
Internal Peer Review of Grant Proposal Drafts
A variety of internal peer review mechanisms are available to DoM faculty who are preparing a grant proposal:
Early-stage review of specific aims (ideally occurs 6-9 months before the submission deadline)
Senior faculty investigators are called upon to critique the project’s specific aims and a 1-page overview of the project’s significance and approach. Written reviews are provided. A face-to-face feedback session can also be arranged, so that the investigator can benefit from group discussion and Q&A with reviewers.
Mock study section review (or written reviews only) of full proposal draft (ideally occurs 6-9 weeks before the submission deadline)
A mock study section of senior faculty investigators is convened to critique a complete draft of the proposal. Reviewers score the draft and provide both written and oral reviews. The investigator is present during the mock review, with the opportunity to discuss the critiques and ask questions. Alternatively, reviewers can be called upon to provide written critiques only.
The recommended review timelines can be tailored to accommodate different funding mechanisms with shorter timelines.
For inquiries and to schedule a review, please contact: Anne Marie Weber-Main during the earliest stages of the proposal’s development.
Scientific Writing Consultation
Anne Marie Weber-Main, PhD, provides critical review and substantive editing of faculty’s written research products (grant proposals, peer-reviewed articles) at different stages of development.
Potential areas of critique and writing support
- Compellingly articulating the project’s significance
- Communicating complex scientific ideas with optimal clarity
- Writing to meet the review criteria and funder’s priorities
- Balancing brevity with appropriate detail
- Writing in reviewer-friendly prose
- Developing tables and figures to communicate specific ideas
- Ensuring logic and cohesiveness of prose
She also offers personalized coaching in areas such as productive academic writing. To request assistance, contact via email Anne Marie or call (612) 625-7433.
Writing-Intensive Grant Workshop Series
Anne Marie facilitates a 12-session grant workshop series for faculty who are actively preparing a research grant application (R- or K-series).
The workshop is an interactive working/writing group, not a series of lectures. All participants are expected to prepare and critique written material at each session. Senior funded investigators meet periodically with workshop participants to review drafts of specific aims, discuss approaches to proposal development, and share their experiences as grant reviewers. The workshop culminates in a formal study section review of completed drafts.
For more information or to sign up for the next series, contact Anne Marie Weber-Main.
Research Policy & Guidance
Gap Funding Award: Department of Medicine
Each year when budget permits, the Department makes funds available to help cover gaps in research funding resulting from the need to submit a grant revision. This mechanism is intended to provide subsistence-level support on a temporary basis to maintain lab operations at a minimal basis for up to 1 year. Funds cannot be used for faculty salary support. Funds are limited and will be dispersed on a merit basis, as assessed by a study section mechanism.
|a) Stage of Career||Assistant > Associate > Professor
|c) Future Promise||
|d) Imminent Funding Likely||
e) Department Priorities
Each application will consist of the funding agency critique including score and %ile (must be the critique in its entirety); a point by point response including the experiments to be done to respond to the critique and their itemized cost (3 page limit); and a letter of support from the division director delineating the division’s contribution (1 page limit). Return completed applications to the Vice Chair for Research by one of the following application deadlines: March 1, July 1, November 1.
Terms of Support
A favorable decision will be accompanied by a decision as to how much support will be provided. Funding will commence when needed, generally one day after the end of the previous sponsored funding cycle or after complete expenditures of funds carried forward by a no-cost extension, whichever is later. Funding is intended to be temporary and will last no longer than twelve months. The investigator must agree to return any unexpended funds to the Department’s Gap Funding account, prorated to when funding from the intended sponsor is obtained.
Pre- and Post-Award Management
- The Key Points for SPA/Agency Letters
- Understanding F&A Costs Brochure
- Electronic Grants Management System (EGMS)
- Grant Types (PDF)
- Grantsmanship 101 (PDF)
- Sponsored Projects Administration (SPA)
- NIH Office of Extramural Research
- Budget Detailed and Modular (PDF)
- Budget Justification (PDF)
- Cost Sharing (PDF)
- Indirect Costs (F&A) (PDF)
- NIH Budget (XLS)
- PeopleSoft Friendly Budget (XLS)
- Calculate Split F&A Rates (XLS)