>>Narrator: If you are an emerging biomedical or
behavioral researcher, consider applying for our Early Career
Reviewer Program.
The Center for Scientific Review at the National Institutes of
Health developed this program to help you jump-start your career
by giving you some experience reviewing grant applications.
Early Career Reviewers or ECRs get an insider's view of the NIH
grant application review process.
They develop skills needed to be expert reviewers.
They network with distinguished scientists and they enrich the
pool of future NIH reviewers.
The feedback from our ECRs has been impressive.
But don't take my word for it.
Listen to what they have to say.
>>Eleanor Seaton: I would say it was an awesome experience...
In terms of thinking about grant proposals,
preparing grant proposals and how they are reviewed,
and also meeting some of the key people -some of the key movers
and shakers in the field.
>>Craig Nunemaker: Anybody's who is junior faculty has got to
sign-up for this thing.
Because it's an eye-opening experience.
I thought it was incredibly beneficial and a great way to
sort of ease your way into the peer review process at the NIH.
>>Narrator: How hard was it to review the applications?
>>Judith Altarejos: I think it's natural to feel nervous about
reviewing grant applications because it is such an important
job.
But I do feel that I had sufficient training from my
previous experiences, as well as my current position,
to actually review the grant applications.
And I was assigned grant applications that were within my
area of expertise that I felt very comfortable reviewing.
After you get the first one done,
you feel kind of like "yes I am definitely qualified to do
this."
>>Narrator: What was the review meeting like?
>>Ehsan Jabbarzadeh: The spirit of the meeting was very
positive.
And that was a surprise.
Because, you might think that people would argue about
proposals.
But it was very positive.
There were discussions among the panelists,
but the whole concern of the panel is to identify good
science and also provide constructive feedback.
>>Daniel Enquobahrie: Participating in this program
really helped me appreciate the difficult task reviewers have
making sure that good are decisions are made that really
promote the science.
They have open minds and try to get as much information as
possible about each of the applications they review and
make sure they understand what investigators have in mind when
they apply for funding.
>>Eleanor Seaton: The thing that impressed me the most was the
consistency I heard in terms of the reviews.
Despite the fact that the reviewers had diverse
backgrounds, expertise, and even disciplines there seems to be a
great amount of consistency in how grants were being reviewed
and discussed.
I just think it confirms the objective nature of the
scientific process that we're all striving to achieve.
>>Narrator: What did you learn about peer review?
>>Ehsan Jabbarzadeh: In this climate of funding writing a
strong proposal with a strong written impact,
significance, and innovation is extremely important for
assistant professors -- for young investigators like myself.
And I believe this Program really helped me understand how
to strike a balance between details,
significance and other parts of the proposal and how to present
my ideas.
>>Craig Nunemaker: You really need to be able to communicate
why what you're doing is important and why it should,
therefore, be of utmost priority to the folks in that room.
You know these are people that are coming from very different
backgrounds, and you really need be able to convince,
certainly, the people who have reviewed your grant directly
-but then really everybody else in the room --that this is
something that's worth putting money into.
And so to me, more than anything it was simply: sell what you're
doing and explain why it's important.
>>Narrator: How do you think being an ECR will help you?
>>Eleanor Seaton: The best thing about being in an Early Career
Reviewer was hearing the conversation around how grants
are reviewed in terms of criteria for the investigator or
in the investigator team, significance,
innovation.
All of that was really good for me because I never achieved an
NIH funded grant before.
So I think the best part is that it will help me with future
grants because now I have a good idea of what people are looking
for.
>>Judith Altarejos: I think having the opportunity to
actually experience the review process will help my career
because it will help me become a more effective grant writer.
I understand, now, what our target audience,
which is the grant reviewers, what they're looking for and
what the scoring criteria are and how grantsmanship can really
be important for them to get your message.
And so I think this program will really help me succeed at
getting a grant.
>>Craig Nunemaker: I had an opportunity to meet a whole 'lot
of different folks from different backgrounds,
from different areas, different Institutions.
Being able to listen to grants being presented from the
perspective of the reviewers in all these different fields was
really valuable in terms of getting an idea of how to
properly form your ideas so that they can be communicated to
folks who don't necessarily know your branch of research
particularly well.
>>Narrator: Who should apply and how do you apply?
We are looking for researchers who have a faculty position,
or equivalent, who have an active,
independent research program, who are published in
peer-reviewed research journals and have not reviewed for NIH.
You don't necessarily need to have NIH or equivalent funding.
Visit our Web site at www.csr.nih.gov and apply
online.
We want to hear from you and help jump-start your research
career.
>>Eleanor Seaton: I think it's invaluable for junior scholars
like myself.
I think it's invaluable for minority,
ethnic junior scholars...
again people who are trying to make their way into the
pipeline...
So I hope more individuals like myself can take advantage of it.
>>Judith Altarejos: In this day and age you really have to take
your career in your own hands.