NIH All About Grants Podcast: Training Grants Part 2

David Kosub: Welcome back to NIH�s All About Grants Podcast conversation on training grants. If you joined us from our prior conversation, you know that Dr. Gibbs and Dr. Carranza were speaking all about what you should be thinking about doing if you�re putting together an application for a training grant and what peer reviewers are looking at. In this follow-on conversation, we go further into what trainees should be thinking about, how mentorship is considered, as well as what you should be doing post-award, and to report back on progress to here at NIH. Let�s join up with the conversation

>> From the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. This is All About Grants.

David Kosub: So, we�ve been focusing on kind of like what the principal investigator, I guess the researcher is kind of like, be thinking about, you know, as they�re putting together application or what have you. But, you know, the other side of this is all that, the trainees, the people that are-- the students that are going to be on these awards, you know. What should they be thinking about, you know, like what-- how should they be looking at being appointed on a training grant? You know, what else would they be-- skill, what other skills would they be getting as part of this?

Kenneth Gibbs: Yes. I think that�s great, right? So one, I mentioned that a training grant is not just a financial aid package, right? And I use it as a real program. That said, as a trainee, there are real benefits, such as a stipend, tuition remission, availability of benefits. And so that�s positive as it relates to being able to, for example, focus on the training, focus on your research development, instead of having to necessarily have a second job to sustain yourself. Really, I think you get a lot of things. One, you get, in a great program, you get your own skills, right? So it helps you to develop your skills as a researcher, whether it be technical skills, you know, operational skills. How you learn how to do this specific essay or professional skills, right? Learning how to present more effectively. You get an opportunity to network with peers and ideally with others in the field, because the training grants allows support to go to conferences. You get support from the mentors at the institution. So, instead of it just being you and the principal investigator for whom you�re working, you�re part of a broader community. You can have broader input, broader feedback, and all that can help, you know, catapult your career forward in whatever direction that you see as the best use of your skills and aligning with your values.

Maria Carranza: If I may add, I would just say that as trainees, predoctoral students, for example, are choosing graduate programs to attend. If an institution has a training grant, that could be a sign that that institution or department has a strong support for predoctoral students, for example. Yet, as Kenny mentioned, it�s not the only source of support. So universities usually have other sources of support as well. And it�s important when choosing a program that graduate students find out, you know, what are all those sources of support that predoctoral students may have at a given institution, and where that funding is coming from. And one other benefit that I would add to what Kenny mentioned is, you know, the benefit of protected time to be dedicated to your research, so that you can progress in your career and towards your goal of a PhD, if that is your case. And depending on what the career level is, what the goals are.

David Kosub: And you all have been kind of hitting on this about mentorship. I think Kenny was also talking about it explicitly. So like how does mentorship, you know, flow into this? How does it all work together? Like, what should the mentor and the mentee be thinking about? How do they, how should they engage with each other? How does this all flow together? I guess what I�m trying to get at.

Maria Carranza: So, I will begin. This is a question with probably a lot of answers, but I will begin by addressing that the mentor and mentee relationship and match is very individual. So the trainee, on the one hand, should be taking the time to think what kind of support will best help them succeed. And as they are considering a mentor, they should be sure to talk with prior trainees of that mentor and in that lab to find out, for example, what kinds of students thrive in this lab and what kinds of students may struggle. And what aspects of that lab really lead to student success, and what aspects of that lab may impede that success. So being very honest with themselves and having an idea of what might be needed is a great place to start in choosing a lab and a trainee program. Kenny.

Kenneth Gibbs: That�s great. You know, I think mentorship is critically important. It�s also important to define what you mean, right? Because it�s a multi-directional relationship, right? And so the mentor, you anticipate having some additional skills, knowledge, that can help the one who is earlier in their career, but the earlier in career individual also has perspectives, energy, idea, innovation that can benefit the mentor. So it�s a multi-directional relationship. I think in terms of you know, one, having appropriate expectations. And so, your laboratory mentor, your research group mentor is an individual. They can�t be all things to all people. And so you want to have a suite of mentors because as a trainee, you want to think about what do I need, and can I get these needs met with this relationship, or do I need some additional relationships? It�s important to advocate for what you need. And this is on both sides, not saying that there�s a-- there�s clearly a positionality difference. But, you know, if you�re a trainee and you say, �I need some additional feedback here,� think about how you can ask for what you need, because people will not know what you need unless you verbalize it. And this is one of the, you know, there�s a science of mentorship, NIH has funded some of that recently with the National Research Mentoring Network. But one of the big pieces there is aligning expectations, making sure everybody knows what to expect. So, as a mentor you say, �Here�s what you can expect from me, here�s what I hold myself accountable to, here�s what I hold you accountable to.� And then vice versa, right? And that�s how you can helpfully have these productive relationships. One other piece I�ll add, you know, since these are-- we�re talking about institutional training grants, we�re often looking for institutions to identify individuals, scientists who have these skills, and to make sure, whether you�re a early career faculty or you�ve been in the game for 20 years, you know, it�s a set of skills we can always continue to develop our skills. And so there�s a number of different mentor trainings or professional development opportunities to enhance mentoring skills. And training programs are often a great vehicle to catalyze that kind of positive change at the institution. We say, �Hey, let�s get all our mentors together and make sure we can think constructively to align expectations and maximize everyone�s success.�

David Kosub: What you all have been talking about, that�s all good stuff. This is a lot of information, and NIH has to take all this information in, and the researchers have to tell us everything, you know. Like how they�re being successful, how are their outcomes, and report back to us on these sorts of things. Like how is NIH kind of evaluating progress, you know, based on all this information that you all are talking.

Kenneth Gibbs: So I think, you know, it�s outcomes, right? And so in research grants, we usually look for research productivity. Here we look for training outcomes. And so those, this will get very into the weeds, but I�ll try to come back up. You know, there are a number of different tables that NIH has that collect standardized data on the outcomes for example. Again, those can be evidence that the trainee was able to, you know, advance in research consistent with their training stage. And so again, that could be an undergrad presenting posters, that could be a PhD student or a postdoc publishing research articles. Undergrads can contribute research articles as well. So those are outcomes. The career outcomes, are the people that you�re appointing finishing in the training stage, right? If everybody at point doesn�t actually get the degree, that�s a challenge. And when they get the degree, what do they do subsequently? Again, we recognize there are a breadth of career pathways that you can use, that utilize your training and advance the NIH mission. And so looking to make sure that individuals who are part of the program are well positioned to move forward in the careers that utilize their training and align with their values. And one other very bureaucratic piece, Maria talked about slots, which means, �Hey, we gave you five positions. And so you see, can you fill five positions?� You might be a great program, but you might need to only have three positions. And then that gives us money to fund some other program, right? And so, you know, the outcomes for the trainees, and you know, are you faithfully administering and stewarding the resources that you�ve been given by the NIH?

Maria Carranza: I would also add that NIH is also interested in building the pipeline of mentors. So NIH is interested in seeing that the composition of the preceptors mentors is made up of both experienced researchers, as well as more early career researchers who are both committed to the training of the next generation of researchers. And thereby providing opportunities for earlier career mentors to build up their experience and expertise in mentoring so that they can later also become the program directors of other future programs.

David Kosub: Well, Kenny and Maria, you�ve definitely given us a lot of good things to think about. But before we close, I would like to give the opportunity for our guests to say some final thoughts. Is there anything that you�d all like to share that you might not have already said, or rehash something that you�ve already said that is important to take away for the audience?

Maria Carranza: NIH is committed to the training of the next generation of researchers in all fields. So we encourage principal investigators considering an application to please reach out to us. And we encourage students and researchers earlier in their career to take advantage of training opportunities that may be offered by institutions through training grants.

Kenneth Gibbs: This is a great opportunity, this is a great structure, right? I know that many people go into research, not just for the research aims, which tickles our brains, but also the opportunity to influence future researchers. And so this is a great chance, if you are an investigator at an institution, to get your colleagues together, develop a coherent program, and then use those resources to really amplify the training of future researchers. Which will ultimately be what impacts the biomedical research enterprise, right? Research is done by researchers, and we all had to get trained somewhere. And so this is a very important mechanism by which we can support that.

David Kosub: Well, Maria and Kenny, thank you again. This has been so pleasant to hear more about, you know, NIH training grants and what researchers and trainees should be thinking about. We definitely encourage folks if they would like to learn more to definitely check out the resources that are available on NIH�s grant site, as well as on the NIGMS, National Institute of General Medical Sciences and National Institute of Aging�s website. They have some great resources relating to training grants. This has been David Kosub with NIH�S All About Grants. Thank you.