New Efforts to Maximize Fairness in NIH Peer Review

May 29, 2014

We want you to know NIH is working on multiple fronts to get to the bottom of unexplained racial disparities in R01 grant funding and to maximize fairness in NIH peer review. Since the problems and the solutions are bigger than NIH, we have reached out to the scientific community and other concerned citizens for help. Now armed with a team of experts and a set of new initiatives, we’d like to tell you about our efforts to address this important issues –- particularly an exciting opportunity for you to submit your input. ….

A Change in Our Resubmission Policy

April 17, 2014

We have had much discussion on this blog about NIH’s resubmission policy (most often referred to as the NIH A2 policy). I have also heard from many of you in a variety of forums, expressing serious concerns about the impact of NIH’s resubmission policy on applicants during these times of tight funding. We’ve listened to your concerns, and we are making changes. ….

101 Comments

New Data on Peer Review Across NIH

April 11, 2014

RePORT is your go-to source for NIH data, and I’m excited to let you know about a new addition to the NIH Data Book on RePORT: data on peer review across NIH. The new “NIH Peer Review” section provides information related to initial peer review across NIH. It includes data on peer review organized by the Center of Scientific Review as well as by NIH institutes and centers. ….

More on Percentiling

June 21, 2013

Understanding NIH’s system of percentiling can be a challenge. My posts on how percentiles relate to paylines and success rates continues to get a lot of hits. A recent presentation by NIH’s Center for Scientific Review provided an example that I thought might be helpful to people trying to understand more about how a percentile is calculated for some grant applications. ….

The A2 Resubmission Policy Continues: A Closer Look at Recent Data

November 28, 2012

We have heard from many of you about the policy to sunset A2 applications. As you may remember, this policy was developed as part of NIH efforts to enhance peer review. There were concerns that applications were piling up in a “queue” and subject to a holding pattern that delayed funding until the resubmission (A1 and A2) stages, and as a consequence highly meritorious science proposed in original (A0) applications was made to wait additional months for funding.

When Disaster Strikes

November 2, 2012

My thoughts are with everyone affected by Hurricane Sandy, and I am deeply sympathetic to the struggles of those who continue to feel the aftermath of this destructive storm. The immediate and long term economic and emotional costs of natural disasters such as Sandy can be overwhelming.

Moving Forward with Special Council Review

August 20, 2012

It’s been three months since I discussed how, during May Advisory Council meetings, NIH would pilot a new Special Council Review process for particularly well-funded applicants. Since that time, we ran the pilot and carefully considered all the great feedback we received from Advisory Council members and staff. We are now ready to implement the final policy on Special Council Review.