Analysis of NIH K99/R00 awards and the career progression of awardees

Nicole C. Woitowich, Sarah R. Hengel, Christopher Solis, Tauras P. Vilgalys, Joel Babdor, Daniel J. Tyrrell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Many postdoctoral fellows and scholars who hope to secure tenure-track faculty positions in the United States apply to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for a Pathway to Independence Award. This award has two phases (K99 and R00) and provides funding for up to 5 years. Using NIH data for the period 2006-2022, we report that ~230 K99 awards were made every year, representing up to ~$250 million annual investment. About 40% of K99 awardees were women and ~89% of K99 awardees went on to receive an R00 award annually. Institutions with the most NIH funding produced the most recipients of K99 awards and recruited the most recipients of R00 awards. The time between a researcher starting an R00 award and receiving a major NIH award (such as an R01) ranged between 4.6 and 7.4 years, and was significantly longer for women, for those who remained at their home institution, and for those hired by an institution that was not one of the 25 institutions with the most NIH funding. Shockingly, there has yet to be a K99 awardee at a historically Black college or university. We go on to show how K99 awardees flow to faculty positions, and to identify various factors that influence the future success of individual researchers and, therefore, also influence the composition of biomedical faculty at universities in the United States.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournaleLife
Volume12
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 19 2024

Funding

Here, we demonstrate the complex nature of faculty hiring within the NIH grant system that exists today in the biomedical sciences and related fields. The K99/R00 award mechanism undoubtedly increases awardees’ chance of securing a faculty position. As one of the most coveted NIH grants for postdocs, we have examined the flow of K99 awardees to R00 institutions and how these flows impact future NIH award funding. Many factors besides those considered and quantified here contribute to where K99 awardees choose to begin their faculty careers, and the K99 award itself does not guarantee securing a faculty position. Despite this, we have identified factors that pose significant disadvantages to future funding success for K99/R00 awardees which likely influence funding success more broadly. Future work must examine the role of ethnic and racial bias in these domains. As the K99 MOSAIC program becomes more established, a comparison of this program and the K99 grant mechanism explored here may reveal whether the MOSAIC strategy is effective at promoting equity for underrepresented minorities in the biomedical faculty ranks. By quantifying and understanding these factors, grant reviewers, faculty hiring committees, department chairs, and funding bodies may be able to more equitably award and administer grants and evaluate faculty candidates. Improvements to the faculty hiring process can be achieved centrally through the NIH creating a more equitable grant funding system or within the many diverse faculty searches (Bhalla, 2019; Schmidt et al., 2021). There is only one NIH and many searches, so systemic change will likely lead to more impactful change; however, both options could be implemented simultaneously for the optimal benefit of the scientific community. We thank Chris Pickett for his valuable input when preparing this publication. CS is supported by NIH R00-HL151825. TV is supported by NIH F32-GM140568. DJT is supported by NIH R00-AG068309. SRH is supported by NIH R00-ES033738.

Keywords

  • computational biology
  • funding
  • grants
  • human
  • meta-science
  • networks
  • systems biology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Neuroscience
  • General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
  • General Immunology and Microbiology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Analysis of NIH K99/R00 awards and the career progression of awardees'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this