In earlier posts, we looked at the distributions of gender and race of designated principal investigators (PIs) of R01 and RPG applications submitted before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we extend on our prior analyses by presenting R01-equivalent application data on PI characteristics of Early Stage Investigators (ESIs).
Here we look at NIH R01 and RPG application patterns for calendar dates May 8 through September 7 and September 8 through Jan 7 over the past 5 years.
20 Comments
We really care about the details. It is important to a fair review that all applicants competing together for funding have adhered to the same rules. It is also important that your application is submitted in a way that allows us to efficiently process your application and make it available for funding consideration. Consequently, your application will be checked at Grants.gov, by our eRA systems and finally by our staff before it is referred for review.
0 Comments
Twice since the onset of the public health emergency we have taken a look at the number of research applications submitted together with some demographic information on the affiliated scientists. We are continuing to follow this analysis again here, focusing on NIH R01-equivalent and RPG application patterns during April 9 and August 8 over the past five years.
13 Comments
NIH recently issued a clarification indicating that while grant applications should not include contingency or recovery plans for problems resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, investigators may address effects due to the pandemic on productivity or other scoreable issues in the personal statement of the biosketch.
0 Comments
Dawn Corbett, NIH’s Inclusion Policy Officer, shares why human subjects’ protection and monitoring plans are important in this next NIH’s All About Grants podcast. We will discuss what should be included in these plans as part of your application, what should be left out, what are risks and what are benefits to study participants, how reviewers assess it all, and so much more.
0 Comments
Before you hit submit, check out the Submission Policies page for answers to questions you may have.
0 Comments
A few weeks ago, we touted the value of the NIH’s Research, Condition, and Disease Classification (RCDC) system to give us consistent annual reporting on official research budget categories and the ability to see trends in spending over time. RCDC’s robust scientific validation process, which allows for such consistency, provides public transparency into over 280 different NIH budget categories.
RCDC categories do not encompass all types of biomedical research. So, how can we get this type of data for other research areas that are not encompassed in RCDC categories, especially those which are newly emerging fields? Are we able to use the same thesaurus-based classification system to explore other research trends?
0 Comments
Ever wonder what you should and shouldn’t put in a grant application cover letter? Dr. Cathleen Cooper, director of the Division of Receipt and Referral in NIH’s Center for Scientific Review, explains just that in the latest addition to our “All About Grants” podcast series – “Cover Letters and Their Appropriate Use” (MP3, Transcript).
4 Comments
In March 2017, we wrote about federal funders’ policies on interim research products, including preprints. We encouraged applicants and awardees include citations to preprints in their grant applications and progress reports. Some of your feedback pointed to the potential impact of this new policy on the peer review process.
10 Comments
4 Comments