O-K Review

Sidebar

The goal of the San Diego CFAR O-K Review Team is to keep junior investigators in HIV research. To do this, the O-K Review Team offers a mock study section that provides investigators with a critical review of their K applications before submission, with junior investigators participating in the process.

We hope the mock study sections, reviews, and networking connections will have an impact lasting well beyond the grant due date. And better yet: this service is free, and delicious refreshments are provided for the in-person meetings!

Timeline for the Upcoming Review Cycles

NIH deadline: January 8, 2018
Date Action

Monday, November 27, 2017

Applicants submit a short abstract or the specific aims of their proposed application (submit to cfar@ucsd.edu).

 

Monday, December 4, 2017

Draft applications submitted for review. Applicants should submit whatever is ready and whatever they would like reviewed.**

Friday, December 15, 2017

In-person O-K Review panel, 1:00 – 3:00pm, location TBD.

Monday, January 8, 2018

Applications due at NIH.

 

NIH deadline: May 7, 2018
Date Action

Monday, March 26

Applicants submit a short abstract or the specific aims of their proposed application (submit to cfar@ucsd.edu).

 

Monday, April 2

Draft applications submitted for review. Applicants should submit whatever is ready and whatever they would like reviewed.**

Friday, April 13

In-person O-K Review panel, 1:00 – 3:00pm, location TBD.

Monday, May 7

Applications due at NIH.

 

NIH deadline: September 7, 2018
Date Action

Friday, July 27

Applicants submit a short abstract or the specific aims of their proposed application (submit to cfar@ucsd.edu).

 

Friday, August 3

Draft applications submitted for review. Applicants should submit whatever is ready and whatever they would like reviewed.**

Wednesday, August 15

In-person O-K Review panel, 1:00 – 3:00pm, location TBD.

Friday, September 7

Applications due at NIH.

Applicants

**For a full review, applicants should submit the following:

K Applications:
Candidate Background 
Career Goals and Objectives
Aims
Research Plan 
A list of mentors 
Applicant Biosketch 
Mentor Biosketch

R Applications:
Aims
Research Strategy
Candidate Biosketch

If partial documents are submitted, there will be a limited review.

As part of the review and learning process, you will be asked to serve as a reviewer for one of the other submitted applications.

We are very excited about this new initiative! If you have any comments or questions, please email us at cfar@ucsd.edu. OK?

Potential Reviewers

If you are interested in participating as a reviewer on the mock study section, please let us know by email to cfar@ucsd.edu. We try to keep the workload manageable and not overload anyone.

Testimonials

 

Sara Gianella Weibel, MD | Assistant Professor of Medicine

 

1R21AI134295-01 | "Effect of Sex Hormones on HIV Persistence"

"It is becoming increasingly hard for junior investigators to receive any NIH fundings to support their independent research. This is even harder for international researchers (like me), since we don’t qualify for most career developmental grants. After uncountable failures, I submitted my R21 to the OK study section for review. The reviewers raised concerns that it was too ambitious and suggested to split the project in two separate applications.

I followed their suggestion and both R21s were funded at the first submission with excellent scores. I think the input from the OK study section has been crucial for my success. I would definitively recommend to all junior researcher to take advantage of this amazing opportunity. As an OK reviewer myself, I also encourage all CFAR investigators to serve as reviewers since it really makes a difference."

 

Jerel Adam Fields, MD | Postdoctoral Scholar

 

"Mitochondrial biogenesis dysfunction in the CNS of HIV-infected individuals on antiretroviral therapy"

"The OK-Review process was instrumental in the crafting my K01 application. I struggled for 2+ years to write a fundable K-application and establish a clear pathway to independence as a principal investigator. After multiple attempts of getting scored just outside the funding range, twice the reviewers of the OK-Review committee helped me get my score cut in half. The OK-Review team provided the sort of constructive and unbiased criticism that is needed to get through the NIH review process.

On the other hand, reviewing applications through the OK-Review process has also served as a valuable tool for my development as a scientist. I strongly suggest that trainees take advantage of this tremendous resource for career development."

At a Glance