Clinical Independent Research Grant (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–$75,000

Independent Research Studies

• Clinical Research Grants for independent research studies are similar to the NIH R21 award; investigators early in their careers who are developing an independent research record are good candidates for this grant mechanism. (Having developed an innovative treatment approach, an experimental study, or a quasi-experimental study may be required to demonstrate the feasibility for a larger grant proposal.)
• Proposals must include a description of a research study that can be completed within two years. Because this grant mechanism is meant to fund research that will serve as preliminary data to support a proposal for a larger-scale, externally funded research study, the investigator will be expected to identify potential funding agencies, funding mechanisms, and timelines for submitting future grant proposals.
• While there is no requirement for a mentored experience, collaboration or consultation with a seasoned, funded investigator is encouraged.

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.
  • 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.
  • Experienced investigators should explain why the proposed work represents a new effort that is not fundable from existing research support or an extension of funding that is currently supporting or has supported related work.
  • 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.