We are presently in the most competitive environment for health research funding in recent memory. Many projects with significant scientific merit will go unfunded because of reductions in budgets and increased competition for funding sources. Recently, for example, more than 3000 applicants vied for $1 billion in CMS Health Care Innovation Awards. Ultimately, 107 applicants were funded to conduct 250 projects averaging $4 million each, a funding rate of less than 3.5%.

So, how do we maximize our chances for receipt of funding? Careful development of research proposals and avoidance of common pitfalls are imperative. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has posted on its Web site a list of the most common issues with unfunded proposals¹:

• Uncertainty whether research will produce significant information.
• Scientific basis not fully developed.
• No apparent translatability of research into practice or policy.
• Lack of a theoretical framework.
• Overly ambitious research plan; volume of proposed work unrealistic.
• Lack of original ideas.
• Proposed methods not appropriate to answer research questions.
• Research issues are more complex than investigator describes.
• Too little detail in the research plan (leads to reviewers questioning investigators’ ability to carry out the research).
• Lack of focus in study hypotheses, aims, and/or research plan.
• Lack of generalizability of findings or methods.
• Investigator lacks expertise in methodology.
• Study team lacks expertise in all needed areas.
• Proposed time and effort of study team members insufficient.
• Lack of study controls.
• Lack of adequate preliminary data.
• Insufficient consideration of statistical needs.
• Inadequate attention to protection of human subjects and/or population representation.
• Lack of complete literature review.

The ACCP PBRN is equipped to assist investigators in addressing several of these key issues by providing support for budget and grant preparation, study feasibility testing within a national practice-based network, assistance with the submission of necessary IRB and regulatory documents, and data analysis and statistical support. I encourage any investigator developing a research proposal to consider the resources of the ACCP PBRN, the first national clinical pharmacy–based research network. For more information on how to collaborate with the ACCP PBRN, contact us at [email protected].

1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Common Problems Identified During Peer Review. Rockville, MD: AHRQ, January 2005. Available at www.ahrq.gov/funding/grants/grant-app-basics/peerprob.html. Accessed May 8, 2013.