The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) announce the release of the CSR 2022-2027 Strategic Plan. CSR is entrusted with most of the peer review that enables NIH to support a broad range of biomedical research. Our primary goal, to ensure that peer review identifies the strongest, most promising science, depends upon an evaluation process that is fair, independent, expert, timely and free from inappropriate influences.
Inclusion plans. You have questions. We have answers. Join us for this NIH All About Grants podcast miniseries to learn about preparing inclusion plans as part of your application (Part 1) and what happens during peer review and post-award (Part 2).
NIH recently announced an update to the Special Council Review (SCR) policy to align with updated Other Support disclosure requirements. Effective with the FY 2022 May/June Council round, Advisory Council members will continue to provide additional consideration of new and renewal applications from well-supported investigators who currently receive $2 million or more in total costs, per year of active NIH funding.
The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) draft strategic plan is now open for public comment. This 5-year plan (for 2022–2027) will serve as our roadmap as CSR advances its mission of seeing that NIH grant applications receive fair, independent, expert, and timely scientific reviews—free from inappropriate influences—so NIH can fund the most promising research.
Quiz Yourself on Security and Confidentiality in NIH Peer Review: Rules, Responsibilities and Possible Consequences
Maintaining security and confidentiality in the NIH peer review process is essential. We would like to remind the extramural community of the federal statutes, regulations, and NIH policies regarding peer review security and confidentiality; their responsibilities for abiding by those rules; and possible actions that the NIH (in coordination with other offices) may take and consequences that may ensue from a violation of those rules. Check your knowledge with the following quiz.
Have you applied for, sponsored, or reviewed NIH fellowship applications? We would like to hear your thoughts on what works, what doesn’t, and how the process could be improved.
An anniversary is a time for reflection on our history, the goals we’ve accomplished, the challenges we’ve surmounted, and the lessons we’ve learned along the way. Our video, “Catalyst of Hope and Health,” reflects on CSR’s work over the past 75 years to ensure that grant applications sent to NIH receive fair, independent, expert, and timely scientific reviews that are free from inappropriate influences, so NIH can fund the most promising research. Since its establishment, CSR has also sought to continually improve.
Two NIH program officers join us in this NIH All About Grants podcast to discuss what should be considered when deciding whether or not to resubmit an application.
A cautionary tale about a breach of review integrity in the guise of a normal professional interaction.
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.