By Esma Yerlikaya
The Ruth L. Kirschstein Predoctoral Individual National Research Service Award – otherwise known as the F31 fellowship – is a highly prestigious research grant designed to cover a graduate student’s stipend and tuition. Beyond providing critical funding, being awarded an F31 fellowship serves as a significant acknowledgment of a researcher’s ability to think critically, communicate effectively, and plan scientifically. It is particularly useful for those aiming to remain in academia, as it demonstrates the skills a principal investigator (a scientist leading their own lab) should possess.
To be eligible to apply for the F31 fellowship you must be a U.S. citizen or permanent resident enrolled in a doctoral research program. Applications are open three times a year: April 8th, August 8th, and December 8th. You have to work with your departmental grant specialist and the Office of Research Affairs (ORA) to apply. Thus, you may have different internal deadlines, which are usually a week before the official deadline. Once submitted, applications are assigned to a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and eventually to a study section, a panel of experts who review and discuss the project. For example, my project – which focuses on the pathophysiology of diabetic retinopathy – was assigned to the National Eye Institute (NEI) and evaluated by the Neurodevelopment, Oxidative Stress, and Synaptic Plasticity Study Section. Applicants can submit a form indicating a preference regarding a division or a study section; however, it is not required.
This is a challenging but rewarding process, regardless of the outcome. Here, I will share my personal story of applying three times and give tips and tricks for a successful application. Spoiler alert: I was awarded the fellowship on my third attempt. Continuing to pursue this goal after repeated setbacks was challenging – but even when I sometimes felt ready to give up, I knew that the process of persevering through these applications allowed me to develop and hone many skills that a successful scientist needs. Whether or not you have applied for an F31 before or plan to in the future, I hope you find something in my story that will resonate with you and give you hope, whether that be amidst failed experiments, fellowship applications, job hunting, or any of the other daily challenges we face in pursuit of our degrees. If you have people who support you in going through the hardships, you are already winning. Have a cup of tea and get ready to hear my story!
The First Application: A Learning Experience
The first year of my graduate school journey was incredibly fruitful. By my second year, I had gathered enough data to publish my first primary-author manuscript during the fall semester. Building on this success, my mentor encouraged me to apply for the F31. I was initially hesitant, knowing how competitive the F31 is. However, I convinced myself that I had nothing to lose. And I can tell you, it was overwhelming.
I quickly realized that submitting a strong grant proposal involved more than a good idea and data. The long list of required documents begins with the Specific Aims page, a one-page document that outlines the significance of your project, your main hypothesis, and your research aims. This is immediately followed by a six-page research strategy that details the experiments and methods you will use to test your hypothesis. Also required is a biographical sketch, or biosketch: a document used to highlight the passion you have for your project, along with previous leadership roles and academic recognitions. Though similar to a CV or resume, it differs in that it also doubles as a personal statement to portray yourself as a strong candidate by featuring leadership roles, community outreach, and showcasing a promising training environment. Another important document is the Research Training Plan, formerly known as Selection of Sponsor and Institution. This has been combined with the Respective Contributions document; within the Research Training Plan you describe why you chose your institution (here, Penn State), your mentor, and the project that you are applying with. You will convince reviewers of the fellowship applications that you have a good mentor-mentee match. Since this fellowship supports your current education, a good relationship between yourself and your mentor (the person who educates you during your doctoral process) indicates that this fellowship will be successful. In addition to these documents, you also need strong letters of reference. As changes are now being implemented in the application process, grades will no longer be required or allowed to be mentioned in the biosketch. All the updated information can be found here. I strongly recommend reaching out to your departmental grant specialist as they have been updated about the changes. Finally, I made a list of documents for your reference.
When I got the results of my first application, I was devastated to see the words “Not Scored.” Unfortunately, this meant that the study section decided that my application did not merit group evaluation and discussion by my study section. For an application to be successful, it first goes through an evaluation by individual members of the study section – if they give the application a good score, it moves to the next stage, where the entire study section evaluates it and will receive an impact score, which shows how big of an impact your project can make. If your application was scored poorly by the members prior to the meeting, your submission will not be discussed, and you will not receive an impact score. Here, a high enough impact score could grant funding. In the next stage, the council selects those worthy of funding from among the scored applications based on the availability of the NIH budget. When I went to my mentor’s office confused, sad, and angry, he said, “You most certainly deserve an F31 in my eyes, and you’ll try again.” His words pulled me from my sadness. This advice goes to my fellow first-year friends: pick your lab and mentor wisely. A research project might fail, but a good mentor will take you a long way.
The Second Attempt: Building Resilience
With four months and the support of my mentor, I dedicated myself to preparing for the August application. This time, the process felt a little easier, since I’d done it once before. The feedback I received from reviewers in my study section on my first F31 application guided me during my next attempt. I had more time to meet with my mentors to fine-tune my ideas. For a re-submission, you must submit a cover letter alongside all of the previously mentioned documents. This letter should highlight the major changes in a responsive manner to the reviewer’s comments. In addition, I chose to add a table of previous reviewers’ scores to my letter to emphasize the strengths of my previous application. I finally felt like I had it figured out!
But when the results came, my heart broke. My application was scored, but not high enough to get funded. I was devastated. I had put so much time and effort into this, and the rejection felt very personal. Although I joked with my friends that I didn’t care about the outcome, deep down, it hurt. I began to question everything: my abilities, my place in academia, and whether I belonged here. I felt like I was failing at something I cared about so much. It was a tough pill to swallow.
The Third Attempt: Perseverance Pays Off
When my mentor suggested a third application in my third year, I was ready to give up. I felt like I was wasting my time and everyone else’s. However, with his unwavering support, I agreed to try again. This time, the process felt different. Because I couldn’t apply with the same project for the third time, I had to either rewrite and restructure the previous applications or come up with a different idea. Based on conversations with my mentor, I wrote about one of my side projects. Although I had more work to do on this application than the previous resubmission, I learned to manage my expectations and focus on simply doing my best.
By now, I had a more refined project, more data, a stronger application, and a better understanding of what reviewers were looking for. My training plan was carefully improved with input from multiple faculty members. I also asked for four reference letters rather than three from faculty who saw my progress both inside and outside the classroom, including during volunteering activities and through on-campus leadership roles. An eternity later, when the study section results came back, I saw a good score for the first time! I cried happy tears but knew that scoring well didn’t guarantee funding. A month later, the NIH council met to decide which applications to fund. Finally, in late November, I received the official news: I had been awarded the F31 fellowship!
Lessons Learned and Advice
This journey taught me resilience, patience, and the value of mentorship. Here are my tips for future applicants:
- Plan Early: There is no rush to apply early. The reviewers prefer students who apply after the comprehensive exam. Give yourself enough time to gather data, build a strong training plan, and write a compelling application. My ideal timeline (Fig. 1) would heavily depend on the comprehensive exam and the feedback that you got from your committee.
- Utilize Penn State Resources: Research Development has a website that explains individual sections in detail, and it also manages an internal proposal library to support College of Medicine researchers seeking guidance. To request access, send an email with a brief explanation to: ResearchConcierge@pennstatehealth.psu.edu.
- Seek Feedback: Get help and guidance from your thesis committee. They most probably served on multiple fellowship study sections. They are the insiders. Share your drafts with peers and mentors and use their feedback to improve.
- Highlight Yourself: Your research is only half the story. Your achievements, leadership, and training environment are equally as important.
- Mentorship: If your primary mentor is relatively new, consider adding a co-mentor with a strong track record to strengthen your application. The addition of co-mentors outside of the institution can also offer greater training potential.
- Be Resilient: Rejections are part of the process. Use each one as an opportunity to improve your application.
This process prepared me for the realities of academia, where resilience and continuous improvement are essential. If you’re considering applying for an F31, remember, success often comes when you least expect it!
Best of luck!
TL; DR
- The F31 fellowship is a prestigious and competitive training grant awarded to pre-doctoral students
- The application includes a specific aims page, research strategy, biosketch, and research training plan documents
- I recommend planning early, utilizing Penn State resources, seeking feedback, highlighting yourself, picking a strong mentor, and being resilient!
Reference:
Lions Talk Science 