After Peer Review

Questions and Answers Table of Contents

Whom do I talk to after review?

After initial peer review, your application moves from the organization that reviewed it to a program division in an institute. At that point, your program officer becomes your contact. See Your Application Moves to NIAID. Call the program officer, not the scientific review officer, for more information about the review.

Before you've been assigned a program officer, you can find one to contact in the eRA Commons or in Contact Staff for Help. Later, while your application is being considered, stay in close contact with the assigned program officer who's listed on your summary statement and just-in-time mailer.

Who writes summary statements?

The scientific review officer writes the Resume and Summary of Discussion as well as the administrative notes. In contrast, peer reviewers contribute written critiques. For more information about these components, see What is included in my summary statement?

For more information, see Who Peer Reviews Your Application? in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

Does a summary statement point out all the problems with my application?

No. A summary statement is not meant to be an exhaustive critique. Instead, it hits the highlights of the review discussion, providing general feedback. For more information, see Who writes summary statements? and read Summary Statements Have Their Limitations and Know What a Summary Statement Means in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

How long does it take to get a summary statement?

You will receive your summary statement roughly six to eight weeks after peer review, earlier for new investigators. Go to When You Can Expect to Hear Back in the NIH Grant Cycle and NIAID R01 Application to Award Timeline.

What is included in my summary statement?

Your summary statement contains the following sections:

• Resume and Summary of Discussion. Highlights the main points discussed during the review meeting and points out major strengths and weaknesses.
• Reviewer critiques. Provides more information about the strengths and weaknesses detected by peer reviewers.
• Codes and budget information.

For more information, see Know What a Summary Statement Means and Summary Statements Have Their Limitations in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

How do I interpret my summary statement?

Read Know What a Summary Statement Means and Summary Statements Have Their Limitations in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

What does it mean if my application doesn't get a score?

There are a variety of reasons why your application may be streamlined and not scored, including a limited amount of available funds, the number of applications received, and the scientific quality of your application.

To learn more, see Part 11b. Not Funded, Reapply in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

Does NIH include unscored applications in the percentile calculation?

NIH includes unscored applications in the percentile calculation. Since the number of unscored applications varies by study section, including them affects the percentile distribution and makes percentiling fair across study sections.

How can I assess the feedback in my summary statement?

Read starting at Ask: Is It Worth Fixing? in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.

What if I see a restricting code on my summary statement?

Peer reviewers add codes to your summary statement that may bar or restrict your award due to research animal, human subject, or biohazard issues. For example, the code indicating a bar due to a human subjects protection issue is a 44. Codes typically appear with a brief explanation. You will not be funded until you address the issues; contact your program officer for advice.

For lists of codes and their meanings, see the Human Subjects Involvement Codes, Human Subjects Inclusion Codes, Research Animals Involvement Codes, and Understand Codes on Your Summary Statement.

For more information on codes and bars, see Assigning a Priority Score, Bars to Grant Awards SOP, Human Subjects SOPs, and What Happens If Reviewers Have Concerns?

Do study section codes need to be resolved before Council recommendation?

Generally, Council will not recommend your application for funding until you resolve the study section's codes. If your summary statement has a code for a bar to award, NIAID can't give you an award until you resolve the issues.

Do all competing grant applications need Council's recommendation before funding?

By law, all applications must be approved by an outside body, usually our main advisory Council, before we can fund them. See the Advisory Council SOP, Council main page, and How NIAID Determines Which Applications to Fund.

Does Council recommend some applications beyond the payline?

Yes. Council recommends some programmatically important applications beyond the payline. For more information, see How NIAID Determines Which Applications to Fund, Selective Pay SOP, and NIAID R56-Bridge Award SOP. 

Do I have to wait for a Council meeting before I can get an award?

Some applications qualify for expedited second-level review and receive an award a few weeks after the initial peer review. The others wait for the Council meeting.

Expedited review applies to investigator-initiated applications with percentile ranks within the payline and no staff concerns or bars to award on the summary statement. See Second-Level Review is Faster for Some Applications and Bars to Grant Awards SOP for grants or Restricted Awards for Contracts Involving Human Subjects or Restricted Awards for Contracts Involving Live Vertebrate Animals SOPs for contracts.

What if my question wasn't answered here, or I'd like to suggest a question?

Email deaweb@niaid.nih.gov with the title of this page or its URL and your question or comment. We answer questions by email and post them here. Thanks for helping us clarify and expand our knowledge base.