NINDS Loan Repayment Guidelines

NINDS Supports two Loan Repayment Programs, the Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program and the Pediatric Loan Repayment Program. Complete information and instructions regarding loan repayment programs can be found on the NIH Loan Repayment Program website.

Priorities
NINDS receives a large number of loan repayment applications and, unfortunately, cannot fund them all. Consequently, a number of prioritizations are used. The most important factor is the reviewer ratings. Highest ratings go to applicants with a clear and on-going dedication to research. This may be evidenced by receipt of independent funding, such as career (K) awards, a long-term publication record, or a publication record appropriate for a dedicated researcher at the experience level of the applicant. In addition, higher ratings are given to applicants who demonstrate an ability or potential to have a successful career as an independent, primary investigator.

In addition, a goal of the NINDS loan repayment program (LRP) is to facilitate the ability of clinician-scientists who have substantial debt to significantly devote themselves to research, at the expense of a more lucrative clinical practice. Among similarly rated applications for the clinical research LRP, first priority is given to neurologists and neurosurgeons. Clinical psychologists and neuropsychologists are also considered, but with a lower priority than the above mentioned groups. For the pediatric research LRP, highest priority is given to pediatric neurologists. Ph.D. scientists who do not have a clinical practice, although eligible, have the lowest programmatic priority for these NINDS Loan Repayment Programs.

Feedback
Reviewer comments for loan repayment applications are not provided to applicants (see http://www.lrp.nih.gov/). Because of the large volume of LRP applications, we are unable to provide very much in the way of personalized feedback about an application. If an application is not funded, it is acceptable to submit a new application in a subsequent year. Because official summary statements are not generated, and thus are not made available either to applicants or reviewers, applicants are not expected to indicate how their application differs from any earlier ones they may have submitted.