Some links will work for NIAID staff only. |
Standard Operating Procedure Table of Contents
|
Purpose
To enable applicants to dispute the results
of an initial
peer review based on an error in the review process such as reviewer
bias, factual error, or reviewer conflict of interest but not a difference
of scientific opinion.
Procedure
Program
officers, either alone or with scientific
review officers (SROs), usually
resolve issues with applicants before reaching the formal appeal stage.
For applications reviewed at NIAID or the Center for Scientific Review, the Institute's Council determines if there is a basis for an appeal if the program officer, SRO, and PI cannot agree.
NIAID's Council considers all formal appeals. Council
members rarely
overturn
initial peer review results; in most cases, they recommend that investigators resubmit their
applications.
If either Council or program officers and SROs
recommend re-review, one of the following groups will evaluate the original application, not
a revised version:
- Same scientific
review group (SRG) -- reviewers will have access
to the summary statement, applicant’s appeal letter, and
any relevant comments from reviewers or the SRO.
- Different
SRG -- reviewers will not have access to the summary
statement or the applicant’s appeal letter.
NIAID staff place applicant’s original correspondence
and copies of NIH-originated correspondence in the official electronic
grant file. They will also provide appeal-related materials to Council.
Applicants
- Before initiating a formal appeal, discuss
your concerns with your program officer. Keep in mind that most appeals result in revising and resubmitting an application. For advice, read Should You Appeal? in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal.
- If your program officer advises
you to submit a new or resubmission application and you
agree,
submit the application by the appropriate receipt date.
- If, after talking with your program officer,
you would like to pursue a formal appeal,
send
him or her a formal letter
of appeal.
- You can submit a formal appeal
at any point in the peer
review process from before the initial peer review until after
the Council meeting
(second-level
review); however, it's best to submit an appeal as soon as possible.
Program Officers
Potential Appeals
- After learning of a potential appeal, notify
the appeals officer, and contact your program
division coordinator about policies and procedures.
- Work with the applicant and SRO to
resolve issues before they reach the formal appeal stage. Emphasize that even if an appeal succeeds, the likely result is resubmitting the application.
- If you cannot resolve matters, the appeals officer will take the appeal to Council..
Formal Appeals
- If an applicant sends you an appeal letter, reply in an Acknowledgement
Letter of Peer Review Appeal -- not an email -- within 10 working days.
- Your response
must indicate the following:
- The appeal will be presented to Council.
- The
applicant will receive a final decision within 30 working days after either
the Council
meeting
or the date the
appeal letter was received, whichever is later.
- Council's decision will be final and there are no further options for recourse.
- If you receive a letter from an applicant
withdrawing an appeal, forward a copy to the appeals officer.
- If you
and the SRO agree
that an application should be deferred for re-review, notify the
applicant and appeals officer.
- If you and review staff cannot
agree on a resolution or if you disagree
with the investigator, send
the following to your division coordinator:
- Written appeal.
- Summary statement.
- Your
recommendations.
- All related correspondence,
e.g., emails between you, the SRO, and reviewers.
- The division coordinator will forward
a copy
to the appeals officer.
- The appeals officer
will provide Council members with the appeal
letter along with the Institute’s
recommendation
and any written comments from the SRO
or SRG.
- You present the case to Council.
- Council can take any
of the following actions:
- Concur with the SRG, thereby
denying the appeal.
- Recommend the application be
deferred for re-review by
the same or different SRG.
- After Council, notify program division coordinator
of outcome.
- The executive secretary of Council will notify the PI in writing of the outcome and send a copy to you and the division coordinator.
Program Division Coordinators
- The program officer will send you a written appeal, summary statement, the PO's recommendations, and all related correspondence.
- Forward
a copy
of the material provided by the PO to the appeals officer.
Scientific Review Officers
- Notify your supervisor upon learning of a potential
appeal.
- Gather all pertinent information remaining in your files, such as the summary statement.
- Work with the program officer to resolve appeal
requests.
- Discuss with reviewers,
if appropriate, and provide the appeals officer with their comments
and yours.
- Attend Council meeting for cases that proceed for Council consideration, and be prepared to address review issues related to the appeal.
Appeals Officer
- Provide guidance to NIAID staff to help resolve issues.
- Review cases, oversee preparation of documentation, and forward appeals for Council consideration.
- As executive secretary of Council, send a Post-Council
Appeal Disposition Letter to advise the PI of the appeal outcome. Send a copy to the program officer and the division coordinator.
Contacts
Investigators with questions should talk to the program officer listed on the summary statement. Or, Contact Staff for Help.
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- NIAID appeals officer
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- Executive secretary of Council
Contact for NIAID Staff -- DART team leader
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- Committee management officer
Program Division Coordinators
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- DAIDS
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- DAIT
Contact
for NIAID Staff -- DMID
If you have knowledge to share or want more information on this topic, email deaweb@niaid.nih.gov with the title of this page or its URL and your question or comment. Thanks for helping us clarify and expand our knowledge base.
Links
NIH Policy Manual Chapter 4204-204B -- Peer Review Process, July 12, 2006
Grants Negotiation SOP |