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 in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal. 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, Advisory Council portal, 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 Contracts Involving Human Subjects or Contracts Involving 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. |