The Selection Committee will accept and review applications from emerging principal investigators who focus on rehabilitation research. The applications that receive the highest scores are generally from junior faculty or researchers (including scientists, clinician-scientists, and engineers) who have a strong foundation for success through mentorship and resources at their home institution, and who are well prepared to serve a principal investigator role. Applicants must not yet have been a PI on an NIH R01 or equivalent grant, but are eligible for NIH funding (either a research or career development award). The Committee will base its decisions in large part on the scientific quality and potential of the applicant’s proposed research, the letters from the applicant’s sponsor (Program Supervisor or Department Head) and the quality of the home institution mentorship team (or arrangements and coordination of mentorship outside of their home institution). The letters will be scored based on information they supply about the candidate, the assurances they provide about the candidate’s potential for success in research, and the sponsors’ (both mentor and institution) support for the candidate’s research career. For this reason, a letter from a mentor from the applicant's home institution is important and should address the applicant's interactions with the mentor.
The following are specific selection criteria:
• Junior or mid-career faculty or senior post-doctoral trainees in any rehabilitation discipline at US institutions that are eligible to receive federal funding. In unusual circumstances, a senior individual who is embarking on a research career change will be considered. On occasion, we will consider exceptional and relevant international applicants with unique expertise that would allow them to apply for NIH funding consistent with NIH guidelines.
• Nomination by a Department Chair, Division Head, or Program Director who can assure that the candidate will be able to prepare for the Workshop, participate fully during the Workshop, and, if successful, complete the research or research training as specified in the research proposal.
• Letter of Support from your Research Faculty Mentor at your home institution. It should include information regarding your potential as an academic and as a researcher, adequacy of training and research experience to be competitive for an NIH or equivalent grant, and your mentor’s qualifications and plan of supporting you in writing and submitting your proposal.
• Development of a research concept sheet according to specified guidelines to include background, literature review, specific aims, hypotheses, and methodology outline. Accepted participants must agree to complete this preparatory work prior to the Workshop
• Special consideration will be given to proposals that add a focus on mechanisms or translation, demonstrate affiliations between successful NIH-funded research programs and traditional rehabilitation disciplines, show collaboration among basic and clinical researchers, attract new talented investigators into the field, encourage successful researchers to add a rehabilitation focus, apply new investigative technologies to rehabilitation, and/or show collaboration across disciplines.
• The Committee will seek a group of mentees who have excellent training, have made outstanding progress in their field, have demonstrated high motivation and the potential for success in rehabilitation research, and come from a varied group of institutions and disciplines.
Yes. Email Briana Gaddis, Briana.Gaddis@cuanschutz.edu with your questions, and she will either be able to answer them herself, or she will put you in touch with one of the Co_PIs for TIGRR, Dr. Edee Field-Fote or Dr. Jennifer Stevens-Lapsley.
“The TIGRR workshop was crucial for my career. It directly had an impact on my grant writing and allowed me to polish my most recent proposal. It was also very valuable to see the grant writing process from multiple perspectives and to interact with representatives from various funding agencies. Overall attending TIGRR was a great time investment!”
“This was an excellent experience to help me prepare for writing an R01. I received a variety of input on my application. My direct mentors and other TIGRR mentors continue to mentor me on all aspects of my application. I have been able to secure an AHA grant-in-Aid award and have been placed on a wait list for a DoD application.”
“I tell all young faculty that I meet that they need to go. Honestly, it was probably one of the most productive weeks of my career, when I think about the overarching value of the program. The week was intense, and consisted of a lot of writing, and meeting--but I got a ton out of it.”
“The workshop was enormously helpful to me. I came away from the workshop with a much clearer idea of how to move forward with the proposal that I was working on at the time. I also felt much more optimistic about planning a research and funding trajectory. The opportunity to speak to people across the rehabilitation research spectrum, from senior PIs and POs to new investigator peers was very helpful.”
“It is not an exaggeration to state that attending TIGRR was a turning point of my academic career. In the workshop, I learned how my peers develop their cohesive line of research. It also provided me an opportunity to examine my environment. The experience was not all pleasant and was embarrassing for me to be honest. But that gut check was exactly what I needed when I needed it. The follow-up after TIGRR was what really made a difference for me. I was able to stay connected with my mentor, and the K01 proposal we developed was funded in 2018 after 3 years of effort.”
“The mentors at TIGRR could not have been more helpful, and continue to be extremely helpful. This experience was very important for helping me to understand the culture of grant review and grant writing. It has helped inform my approach to grant writing so I feel more confident in the process, rather than feeling as though I'm at the mercy of some mystical luck machine.”
“It was a wonderful experience coming from a physician researcher. It was great to interact with non-physician researchers and get their input on the research ideas presented.”
“My experience at TIGRR was quite valuable as my discussions with senior faculty at the workshop led me to redevelop my aims into an R01 proposal that was recently funded.”
“TIGRR was an excellent use of funds and time that has given me a tremendous amount of grantsmanship knowledge and skills. Every administrator that I have told about TIGRR (chair, dean, external program reviewer) has been impressed with the content and experience I gained at TIGRR, particularly the one-on-one meetings with Program Officers/Managers and senior researchers. I recommend TIGRR to any junior faculty peers.”
“Following my participation in TIGRR, I was awarded a KL2 from the University of Miami CTSI. I am confident that I would not have been awarded this grant had I not had the opportunity to attend TIGRR.”
“I was successful with a grant application to the NSF’s National Robotics Initiative this year, with a collaborative application aiming at a new style of robotics for lower-limb rehabilitation…This was very much facilitated by the training at TIGRR (application was written in January and February), so I want to say ‘Thanks’.”
Briana Gaddis
tigrr-amc@cuanschutz.edu
303-724-3182