ASH Foundation announces Clinical Mentored Research Grants (US and Canada)

Research should directly advance knowledge of treatment efficacy and assessment practices in audiology and speech-language pathology or investigate the implementation of evidence into practice. For Clinical Research Grants, priority is given to proposals that:

• Investigate bold, forward-thinking solutions that could improve the everyday functioning of people with, or at risk for, communication and related impairments.
• Promote new directions for the discipline and likely would progress to future large-scale studies with the potential to compete for additional external funding.

Funding Information

• Grant amount: $50,000

Mentored Research Studies

• Clinical Research Grants for mentored research studies are similar to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) F32 award; investigators need to identify mentors with histories of conducting efficacy research and securing successful funding who agree to be actively involved in mentoring throughout the study. New investigators, especially post-docs, are good candidates for this grant mechanism.
• Proposals must include a description of a research study that can be completed within two years. A mentoring plan is also required to demonstrate the mentor’s involvement from the review of the plan through implementation, dissemination, and preparation of an external grant proposal to support continued research on the proposed problem.
• Proposals that document matching funds or other support via university or extramural funding will be given priority. The budget justification should explain how ASHFoundation funds will be used in the context of other available support. (For example, if the investigator is working in an active treatment efficacy lab in a post-doctoral fellowship role, most of the funds could support the investigator’s salary. If the investigator is a new investigator in a faculty position, most of the funds might be expected to fund the research activities directly.)

Eligibility Criteria

• Investigators must meet the following criteria to be eligible for the Clinical Research Grant:
  • The investigator must have received a PhD or equivalent research doctorate within the discipline of communication sciences and disorders or a related field.
  • Note: Proposals will be accepted from individuals in the final stages of completing their dissertation. However, no awards will be given to individuals who have not received a PhD by September 1, 2025.
  • The investigator must demonstrate the potential for, and commitment to, conducting independent research with a clear plan for applying for extramural research support.
  • The research must have significance and direct application to the development and evaluation of audiology or speech-language pathology intervention or assessment practices.
  • Candidates for a mentored study must identify a mentor willing to provide a firm commitment for at least one year. Proposals that document matching funds via a university or the mentor’s extramural funding will be given priority.
  • Proposals submitted to the 2025 Clinical Research Grant competition cannot be submitted to other 2025 ASHFoundation grant competitions. However, the investigator remains eligible to submit to other ASHFoundation grant competitions in the same year, if proposing to investigate a different topic.

Evaluation Criteria

• A review panel will evaluate all Clinical Research Grant mechanism proposals on the following three factors:
  • Factor 1: Importance of the Research
    • Significance: The potential for the study to advance the discipline of communication sciences and disorders and to impact clinical needs relevant to audiology or speech-language pathology. Consideration of the rationale for undertaking the study, the rigor of the scientific background for the work (e.g., prior literature and/or preliminary data) and whether the scientific background justifies the proposed study.
    • Innovation: The refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, methods, or interventions. The investigator explains how the research is groundbreaking and has potential to impact the discipline. The extent to which innovation influences the importance of undertaking the proposed research. Note that while technical or conceptual innovation can influence the importance of the proposed research, a project that is not applying novel concepts or approaches may be of critical importance for the field.
  • Factor 2: Rigor and Feasibility
    • Approach: The likelihood that compelling, reproducible findings will result (rigor) and whether the proposed studies can be done well and within the timeframes proposed (feasibility). The merits of the design for accomplishing the specific aims of the study and, if applicable, the potential challenges of moving the study toward completion. The appropriateness and feasibility of a detailed account of the method, including measurement and data-analysis plans, will be considered.
  • Factor 3: Expertise and Resources
    • Investigator: The perceived ability to carry out the study in the specified time period, reflected by appropriate training, experience, and past accomplishments. The investigator outlines clear and detailed management and budget plans.
    • Environment: The extent to which the investigator has access to needed scientific facilities, resources, personnel, and subjects.

For more information, visit ASHFoundation.