April 12, 2004
Q. What do you mean by the "success rate" of grant applications funded by NIGMS and how does this relate to the percentile ranks assigned in peer review?
A. The success rate is the total number of grant applications that are funded in a given fiscal year divided by the number of grant applications that were peer reviewed. For FY 2004 research project grants, NIGMS anticipates a success rate of approximately 30 percent. A large proportion of NIGMS’ research project grants are R01s, so the success rate for R01s is usually similar to the overall research project grant success rate.
The percentile is a ranking that shows the relative position of each application’s priority score among all scores assigned by a scientific review group at its last three meetings.
The success rate for R01 grants differs from the percentile ranks for R01 grants in several ways:
- The percentile ranks are calculated using all applications reviewed by the initial review group, including applications assigned to other NIH institutes and centers. Grants assigned to NIGMS tend to receive better priority scores than the NIH average. Thus, more than 20 percent of NIGMS grant applications rank better than the 20th percentile.
- The NIGMS success rate is typically higher than the percentile ranks of the funded applications. Applications that are amended and resubmitted during the same fiscal year are only counted once in the success rate calculations, whereas all applications, both original and amended versions, are included when the percentiles are calculated. Therefore, funding all applications with ranks better than, say, the 20th percentile will result in a success rate greater than 20 percent when revised versions of some projects are removed from the success rate base.
Q. How does NIGMS use percentile rank order to make its grant funding decisions?
A. NIGMS does not rely solely on a percentile cutoff or "payline" to make its funding decisions. These decisions are based on a number of additional factors, including whether the proposal comes from a new investigator, the level of other funding available to the investigator, the potential of the proposal to have a large impact on science as judged by NIGMS scientific staff, and the existence of other grants funded by NIGMS or other components of NIH that cover similar scientific territory. These factors, along with the priority score, the comments on the summary statement, and the advice of the National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council, are considered together to make final funding decisions.
Q. What is the average size of an NIGMS R01 grant and how has it changed over time?
A. The current average size of an NIGMS R01 grant is approximately $190,000 in direct costs per year. The average competing award, currently at about $215,000, is typically larger than the average noncompeting renewal. Among the competing awards, new awards are slightly smaller than the average and competing renewal awards are somewhat larger. The statistics below provide some context for this grant size information.
NIGMS R01 Grants
|
|
FY 1998 |
FY 2003 |
|
Average NIGMS R01 grant size (direct costs) |
$150,000 |
$190,000 |
|
Average noncompeting renewal R01 grant size (direct costs) |
$148,000 |
$185,000 |
|
Average competing NIGMS R01 grant size (direct costs) |
$155,000 |
$215,000 |
|
Number of R01 grants funded by NIGMS |
3,029 |
3,718 |
|
Number of competing R01 grants funded by NIGMS |
820 |
991 |
All NIGMS Investigators*
| |
FY 1998 |
FY 2003 |
| Number of principal investigators supported by NIGMS |
3599 |
4111 |
| Percentage of NIGMS principal investigators with more than one NIGMS grant |
19% |
25% |
| Percentage of NIGMS principal investigators with more than one NIH grant |
33% |
42% |
* includes principal investigators of competing and noncompeting R01 and other single-project mechanisms, such as R21s and R37s
Thus, a major impact of the 5-year doubling of the NIH budget has been a significant increase in the average grant size. Smaller, but significant, increases also occurred in the number of investigators with more than one grant and in the total number of grants and investigators supported. In addition, the increased funds allowed NIGMS to make some substantial investments in high-field NMR spectrometers and synchrotron radiation facilities that serve a large number of investigators. The budget increases also allowed NIGMS to initiate several larger programs--including glue grants, the Pharmacogenetics Research Network, and the Protein Structure Initiative--over this period of time.
Q. The stipends for predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows funded by training grants and individual fellowships have increased significantly in recent years. How can these increases be accommodated within the budget restrictions of research grants?
A. For FY 2004, predoctoral fellow stipend levels on Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award training grants are $20,772 and first-year postdoctoral fellow stipend levels on Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award individual and institutional fellowships are $35,568. These represent 75 percent and 70 percent increases, respectively, from FY 1998. It is certainly true that these increases add pressure to research grant budgets, as these stipend levels are often used as guidelines for predoctoral and postdoctoral researchers paid from research grants.
As discussed above, the average grant size has increased by approximately 40 percent over the same period. Balancing the number of grants that are funded and the average level of funding for each grant within the constraints of the overall budget is a major challenge for NIGMS staff, who make such decisions on a case-by-case basis.
