Application Process - KL2 Mentored Career Development Program
Positions
Eight to ten positions are available annually and have a start date of July 1.
Timeline
- Submit letter of intent by 5 p.m. Central Time on Friday, August 15, 2008.
- Submit application packet by 5 p.m. Central Time on Wednesday, October 1, 2008.
Applications will be reviewed November and December by the Clinical and Translational Science Activities (CTSA) Postdoctoral Programs Committee and information for recommended candidates will be forwarded to NIH in January 2009. NIH will review and confirm appointment recommendations in February-March 2009.
How to Apply
Step 1: Identify a mentor One of the most important steps in applying to the program is to identify a primary mentor at Mayo Clinic. You and your primary mentor will then determine an appropriate co-mentor in another discipline that will bring valuable expertise to your research proposal and career. The proposed mentor will help you identify the appropriate department or division within Mayo Clinic that would provide an administrative and academic appointment, and assist you with developing a description of your proposed research experience.
For candidates within Mayo Clinic, identifying a primary mentor and comentor can be accomplished by using knowledge of existing Mayo research programs. Candidates applying from outside Mayo Clinic can explore Mayo’s research faculty directory and research departments and centers to identify and directly contact potential mentors. Or you may contact the CTSA Education Resources office for assistance in identifying potential mentors.
Also see:
Step 2: Submit letter of intent to apply by August 15, 2008 Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent. The letter is due by 5 p.m. Central Time on Friday, August 15, 2008. The information in the letter of intent allows us to better plan the review process and assist potential applicants as necessary.
The letter of intent should be addressed to Dr. Glenn Smith, Director, Postdoctoral Programs, and must include:
- A brief paragraph describing what you hope to achieve through participation in the program
- A brief paragraph describing the research that you would like to perform as a part of the program
- The name and specialty of your primary mentor
- Your curriculum vitae and bibliography
Please send or email your letter of intent and CV with bibliography to:
Step 3: Submit application and required documentation by October 1, 2008 To apply, you will need to submit the following materials:
- An application form. Please carefully review the detailed instructions on the form prior to completing the application. Complete the form online, print and send hardcopy.
- Curriculum vitae in NIH Biosketch format (form and sample available online)
- A personal career development plan (2 pages maximum)
- A description of the proposed research experience (7 pages maximum).
- A letter of recommendation from the proposed primary mentor.
- A letter of recommendation from the proposed comentor.
- A letter of recommendation from the chair of the candidate’s Mayo Clinic division/department.
- A letter of recommendation from a faculty member who has worked with you in the past.
- One letter of support from the Mayo research administrator and division/department chair stating financial analysis has been completed and that they are both aware of the financial impact, if any, to the division/department.
Step 4: The required materials listed above should be submitted in one envelope and must be received no later than October 1, 2008.
Send the material to:
Application Review Process and Criteria Each application will be reviewed initially by the CTSA Postdoctoral Programs Leadership Team for completeness and eligibility. Eligible applications will undergo a two-stage review process by the CTSA Postdoctoral Programs Committee. In the first stage, the applications will be reviewed using the following review criteria: - Appropriate stage in his/her career for this award Is the applicant at the point where this award will be beneficial? Is the applicant too inexperienced, unprepared to benefit from the coursework and research experience? Is the applicant too far along in his/her career development, seeking just protected research time rather than a real training experience? What will they gain from the program?
- Trajectory leading to research independence and scientific excellence in clinical research In their experience to date, is there evidence that the applicant has the drive and energy to succeed? If the proposed career plan is carried out, will the candidate have a reasonable chance of becoming an independent investigator applying state-of-art techniques to clinical research? Does the plan provide the applicant with new cutting-edge techniques that will provide a good basis for the applicant's future career? How successful will the applicant be without this training? With this training?
- Evidence of a multidisciplinary, team-based approach to their research and career Could they lead a multidisciplinary team? Does the career plan incorporate elements of a multidisciplinary approach? Will the applicant gain experience in building the relationships necessary to assemble and lead a research team? Is there evidence of a multidisciplinary approach in the applicant's past experience?
- Proposed environment (mentor, facilities, etc.) appropriate for a clinical research training experience Is there evidence that the mentors are committed to the development of the applicant and willing to spend the time and energy needed? Can the mentors provide the environment necessary to carry out a research practicum experience? Does the mentor have a successful track record of funding and mentoring?
- Unique qualities What unique qualities does this applicant bring to the program? Please consider external candidacy, nationality, gender, race, and age, as well as any other important characteristics of the applicant. How will the appointment of this candidate contribute to the overall goals of the program?
- Quality of proposed research experience: Include consideration of the following elements:
- Project strengths, weaknesses: What are the specific scientific strengths and weaknesses of the project? For example, is the question interesting? Can the experimental design answer the question? Are the techniques appropriate? Are there innovative features? Is the applicant familiar with relevant literature?
- Feasibility: Can the project be completed with the amount of time and resources available to the scholars?
- Appropriateness as a clinical research training experience: Will the project provide a good research training experience? Will it significantly add to the current scientific repertoire of the candidate? Could the project provide significant preliminary data and momentum for future extramural funding? Is this line of research potentially fundable?
- Overall assessment: What is your overall level of enthusiasm for this candidate, and what are the primary reasons for this assessment? In the second stage of the review process, applicants meeting all the above criteria will be invited to give a brief presentation of their proposed research protocol.
