2025 Ralph L. Sacco Scholars Program

We are delighted to announce the second offering of The Ralph L. Sacco Scholars Program in Brain Health (“The Sacco Scholars”), a transformative career development opportunity jointly funded by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA). Dr. Sacco was the leader of the Division of Cerebrovascular Disease at Columbia University and subsequently chaired the Department of Neurology at the University of Miami; he served as President of both the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Neurology. This prestigious scholarship honors his legacy by empowering the next generation of researchers and practitioners, with a specific focus this cycle on the prevention of brain diseases and advancement of brain health across the lifespan for all. The focus areas may change from year to year, depending on the evolving needs and priorities within the rapidly growing field of brain health.

The Sacco Scholars Program offers a unique opportunity for early career trainees to undertake a mentored two-year research project targeting various aspects of brain health. The scholarship program is designed to encompass various training career stages each year, ensuring inclusivity and fostering diverse perspectives. In the current call for proposals, we welcome submissions from MD or PhD (or equivalent doctoral degree) applicants who are (or will be) in postdoctoral fellowship training with a focus on brain health beginning July 1, 2025.

We invite eligible candidates to submit their proposals for The Ralph L. Sacco Scholars in Brain Health. This scholarship represents a remarkable opportunity to contribute to cutting-edge research, promote brain health, and shape the future of this vital and rapidly developing field. We eagerly anticipate receiving your proposals and witnessing the profound impact of your work on advancing brain health.

• Although a joint effort of the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Neurology, applicants will utilize the AHA grant proposal system (ProposalCentral) to apply. 
  
  
• Proposals must be received no later than 3 p.m. Central Time on the deadline date. Early submission is encouraged.
  
  
• Before beginning a proposal, review the eligibility and requirements that apply to all AHA research awards at AHA Application Resources page.
  
  
• All proposals must be submitted electronically via ProposalCentral. The system will open eight weeks prior to the deadline to complete your proposal and upload documents. You can begin to create your documents now; please refer to the AHA Application Instructions (PDF). All submissions require a signature from a designated institutional representative.
  
  
• Applicants must be AHA Professional Members or members of the American Academy of Neurology at the time of application. This must be done online. Join or begin the membership process well before the deadline.

To enhance the training of postdoctoral trainees who are not yet independent. To ensure success, the applicant must have access to the institutional environment, support, and relevant scientific guidance of a primary research mentor appropriate for the level of trainee’s career development. Recognizing the unique challenges that clinicians, in particular, experience in balancing research and clinical activity, this award mechanism aims to be as flexible as possible to enable applicants to develop academic careers in research alongside fulfilling clinical service commitments.

• The trainee and mentor should work collaboratively to develop a thoughtfully planned, systematic proposal aimed at clearly answering an investigative question in brain health research (5-page limit). The applicant must have primary responsibility for the writing and the preparation of the proposal, understanding that the mentor will play a significant part in providing guidance to the applicant. Because the fellow receives only a stipend from the award, additional monetary support for the proposed work MUST come from the mentor's laboratory. Therefore, the proposal will likely be related to the mentor's currently funded work. The mentor should clarify the role the applicant played in developing the proposal, the relationship of the proposal to ongoing work in the mentor's laboratory, and how the proposal will contribute toward the training and career development of the applicant.
  
  
• A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied. Submission of a proposal to the AHA/AAN with identical or significantly similar content as a submission by another investigator is prohibited. Also, the submission of a proposal to the AHA/AAN with identical or significantly similar content from a mentor to a grant program or his/her fellow to another fellowship program is prohibited. In such cases, both proposals may be removed from funding consideration. If a separate grant proposal is submitted by the mentor of a fellowship applicant, both applications may be funded if there is no duplication of aims.

• At the time of award activation, the applicant must hold a post-baccalaureate PhD degree or equivalent, or a doctoral-level clinical degree such as MD, DO, DVM, PharmD, DDS, DrPH, or PhD in nursing, public health or other clinical health science.

• At the time of award activation, the applicant may have had no more than five years of research training or experience since obtaining a post-baccalaureate doctoral-level degree (excluding clinical training).
  
  
• The awardee will be expected to devote at least 80 percent of full-time work either to research or to activities pursuant to independent research (instead of administrative or clinical duties that are not an integral part of the research training program, or teaching responsibilities).
  
  
• This award is not intended for individuals of faculty rank.
  
  Exceptions:
  
  • MD or MD/PhD with clinical responsibilities who needs instructor or similar title to see patients, but who will devote at least 80% full-time to research training.
  • RN/PhD with a clinical appointment. The awardee will be expected to devote his/her time to research, or activities directly related to development into an independent researcher. All other eligibility criteria apply.
    
    
• Except for US citizens and permanent residents, awardees must maintain an accepted visa throughout the duration of the award. Please refer to AHA Application Resources for acceptable visa types.

Annual Stipend
$65,000 per year for two years
A portion of the stipend may be used to cover some of the cost of health insurance.

Project Support
$10,000 per year, in addition to the stipend
No limit on any line item (computer, equipment, lab supplies, travel, etc.)

Travel Support
In addition to the salary stipend and project support, each Sacco Scholar will receive reimbursement of reasonable travel expenses for attendance at AHA’s International Stroke Conference (February) and the AAN Annual Meeting (April). This reimbursement will be paid to the institution following attendance by the Sacco Scholar.

No indirect costs are paid on the scholarships.

Award Duration
Two years.
There is a maximum of two years of Sacco Scholarship support per individual.
These awards are non-renewable. 

Required Documents must be uploaded as PDFs into ProposalCentral.

1. Research proposal (up to 5 pages)
   
2. Literature cited
   
3. Training plan (up to 3 pages)
   
4. Statement from Department Chairperson (1 page) must include the Chairperson's commitment of 80 percent of the scholar’s full-time effort to research and/or to activities pursuant to independent research

 

For items 5, 6 and 7, please refer to the Sacco Scholars section of this web page: https://professional.heart.org/en/research-programs/application-resources/required-application-documents/reference-information.

5. Mentor's support letter (up to 2 pages)
6. Mentor’s reference report (2 pages) must be uploaded by the mentor
7. Additional reference report (2 pages) must be uploaded by the person providing the reference
   
8. Applicant biosketch (use NIH 5-page format)
   
9. Mentor's biosketch (use NIH 5-page format)

• An applicant may submit only one Sacco Scholars application per deadline.
  
  
• The Sacco Scholars program allows supplementation from other sources to meet the sponsoring institution’s stipend and benefit levels; however, the awardee may not hold a comparable award (such as an NIH K award or other career development award) as a source of supplementation.
  
  
• The awardee must resign the award if promoted to a full-time faculty position prior to completion of the first year of the program. The awardee may hold this award in its second year if promoted to a full-time faculty position after completion of the first year; the awardee must still devote 80% of effort to research activities during that second year of the award. 
  
  
• A postdoctoral fellow may not hold another comparable award concurrently. However, the awardee may apply for a subsequent award during the last year of the project and must resign the postdoctoral scholarship if another award is activated during the Sacco Scholarship period.
  
   

To judge the merit of the application, reviewers will comment on the following criteria. Please address these in your proposal. Each criterion will account for one-third of the overall score. The AHA uses a 1-9 score scale and AHA Peer Review Guidance.

Criterion 1 – Evaluation of the Summary for Non-Scientists – 5%
AHA Mission: To be a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives.
AAN Mission: To promote the highest quality patient-centered neurologic care and enhance member career satisfaction.

1. How well does the Non-Scientist Summary explain to a non-scientist audience the importance of research proposed and its relevance to advancement of the field of brain health?
2. Does the Non-Scientist Summary adequately explain the major problem being addressed by this study and how is it relevant to brain health?
3. Does it provide specific scientific questions and how the projects will address them?
4. Does it provide information on the overall impact of this work and the potential advances in the field of brain health?
5. Does it relay how the proposal supports the missions of the AHA and the AAN in their commitment to advance and promote brain health for all?

Criterion 2 - Evaluation of the Applicant – 30%

1. Does the applicant have the potential for a research career in brain health?
2. Are the applicant’s career plans specified in the application?
3. Is this supported by the applicant's academic record and the assessment provided by the three letters of reference?
4. Does the applicant have prior research experience and/or publications?
5. Is there a clear rationale supporting the need for the proposed training?
6. What is the mentor's assessment of the applicant?

Criterion 3 - Mentor/Training Plan and Environment – 35%
Because the fellow receives only a stipend from the award, additional monetary support for the proposed work MUST come from the mentor's laboratory. Therefore, the proposal will likely be related to the mentor's currently funded work. The mentor should clarify the role the applicant played in developing the proposal, the relationship of the proposal to ongoing work in the mentor's laboratory, and how the proposal will contribute toward the training and career development of the applicant.

Mentor and Training Plan

1. Is the mentor an independent investigator?
2. Does the mentor have the experience to direct the proposed training, as evidenced by a track record regarding productivity, funding and prior trainees?
3. Does the mentor have the appropriate expertise to support the trainee’s career in the rapidly evolving field of brain health?
4. Does the mentor have adequate current funding to support the applicant’s project?
5. Does the mentor demonstrate familiarity with the applicant’s career and developmental goals and provide a comprehensive plan that supports the applicant's career goals, which should be outlined in the Personal Statement section of the applicant’s biosketch?
6. Is there a plan for instruction in the responsible conduct of research, considering the specific characteristics of the training program, the level of trainee experience, and the particular circumstances of the trainees? The reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed training in relation to the following: A sufficiently broad selection of subject matter, such as conflict of interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research misconduct, research ethics. AHA/AAN does not require submission of the NIH RCR form.

Environment
Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of a successful learning experience? Is there evidence of institutional commitment?

Criterion 4 - Evaluation of the Proposal - 30%
The trainee and mentor should collaboratively provide a thoughtfully planned, systematic proposal aimed at clearly answering an investigative question in brain health research (5-page limit, not including citations to the literature).

Note: The proposal will be assessed on scientific merit, but equally as an integral part of the applicant's development into a career aligned with AHA and AAN’s missions.

A new fellow may not have had adequate time to generate preliminary data; therefore, applicants may present preliminary data generated by the mentor. The assessment of preliminary data, whether generated by the mentor or the applicant, should be put into perspective so that bold new ideas and risk taking by beginning investigators are encouraged rather than stymied.

1. Is the Proposed Work:

• Appropriate for the applicant, given his/her academic background, experience and career interests?
• Does the proposal contain the right balance of challenge, importance of the research question, and feasibility in relation to the applicant's experience and training?
• Does the proposed work have the potential to advance knowledge in the field of brain health?

2. Does the Proposed Project

• Include a specific hypothesis and describe the applicant’s role in the proposal;
• Provide a concise account of the subject matter, an overview of each part of the proposal, specific aims and the methodology;
• For all applications that include vertebrate animals or human subjects, applicants must explain how relevant biological variables, such as sex, are factored into the research design, analysis and reporting. Furthermore, strong justification from the scientific literature, preliminary data, or other relevant considerations, must be provided for applications proposing to study only one sex.

3. Significance

• Does this study address an important problem that is a barrier to attaining and maintaining brain health for all? Does the proposal address a specific gap in knowledge? 
• Does the science accelerate the discovery, interpretation and application of scientific knowledge to enhance and advance brain health?