Awards of R01 and R21 Grants in FY 2011
Beginning in FY 2011, NCI adopted a new approach to the selection of grant applications for funding that sets a zone within which nearly all applications are selected for funding. In both 2011 and 2012, that zone extended to the 7th percentile[1]. Beyond that point, all applications are considered, resulting in a final success rate[2]
of 15% in 2011. The charts and table below summarize the overall funding patterns
for R01s and R21s in various categories of investigators.
Funding Patterns for R01 applications:
Figure 1 summarizes the number of R01
applications received and grants funded at each percentile, among all
investigators. As is evident, the number of grants funded decreased in
direct proportion to the percentile ranking. Nevertheless, 48% of the
grants funded had rankings greater than the 7th percentile.
NCI FY2011 Competing R01 Applications and Awards
TOPFigure 1: All Investigators: Experienced, New and Early Stage
Figure 1 includes data from all categories of
investigators: experienced investigators who have had NIH grants in the
past, new investigators who previously have not had a substantial
independent NIH award, and early stage investigators who are within 10
years of completing their training and have not had a previous grant. If
applications from only experienced investigators are considered, the
same pattern of funding success is observed (Figure 2).
In striking contrast, if R01 applications only from new
investigators (Figure 3) or only from early stage investigators (Figure
4) are considered, there is a much broader spread in the percentile
rankings of applications, extending to higher percentiles, that were selected for funding. This
distribution, across a wide range of scores, reflects NCI's commitment
to ensuring that the overall success rate for new investigators
approximates that for established investigators.
NCI FY2011 Competing R01 Applications and Awards
TOPFigure 3: New Investigators
TOPFigure 4: Early Stage Investigators
Figures 1-4:
Excludes applications that did not receive a percentile ranking. When
an amended application is considered in the same fiscal year as the
original, only the one with the better ranking is counted.
Funding patterns for R21 grant applications:
The funding patterns for R21 grant applications differ
markedly from those of the R01. This difference is explained by the fact
that NCI receives a disproportionate number of applications relative to
the number of R21 grants that can be funded (see Table 1). Thus, the
cut-off for funding of R21 grant applications is more stringent than
that for R01 applications for all investigators (Figure 5-7). Thirty percent of the grants funded had rankings beyond the 7th percentile.
In contrast to the case with the
R01 funding patterns, success rates for R21 funding of applications
from new and early stage investigators[3] are significantly lower than for
established investigators (8% versus 14% success rates, respectively)
(Table 1). The difference in success rates for R21 compared to R01
applications from new investigators is striking: 8% compared with 13%.
This disparity results from the fact that R01, but not R21 applications,
from new investigators are given preferential consideration.
NCI FY2011 Competing R21 Applications and Awards
TOPFigure 5: All Investigators: Experienced and New
TOPFigure 6: Experienced Investigators
NCI FY2011 Competing R21 Applications and Awards
TOPFigure 7: New Investigators
Figures 5-7:
Excludes applications that did not receive a percentile ranking. When
an amended application is considered in the same fiscal year as the
original, only the one with the better ranking is counted.
TOP
Table 1: Fiscal Year 2011 R01 and R21 All Investigators Success Rates
Total Applications | Number with Percentiles of 25 or better | Number with Percentiles of 10 or better | Funded | Success Rate | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
R01 - All Investigators |
4,477 | 1,145 | 487 | 652 | 15% |
Experienced Investigator - Total | 3,005 | 837 | 396 | 468 | 16% |
Type 1 | 2,440 | 586 | 265 | 314 | 13% |
Type 2 | 565 | 251 | 131 | 154 | 27% |
*New Investigator | 1,472 | 308 | 91 | 184 | 13% |
**Early Stage Investigator | 545 | 143 | 37 | 91 | 17% |
R21 - All Investigators |
2,242 | 484 | 201 | 223 | 10% |
Experienced Investigator | 780 | 222 | 97 | 106 | 14% |
New Investigator | 1,462 | 262 | 104 | 117 | 8% |
Total applications include all new and competing renewals that received a
percentile, those with just an impact score as well as triaged or not
recommended for funding.
When an amended application is considered in the same fiscal year as the original, only the one with the better percentile is counted.
* Includes Early Stage Investigators
**Included in New Investigators
When an amended application is considered in the same fiscal year as the original, only the one with the better percentile is counted.
* Includes Early Stage Investigators
**Included in New Investigators
[1]
A percentile is a score that ranks competing applications against
others in the same study section in the past year. It is intended to
allow a comparison of impact scores of applications across all study
sections. The impact score is given by scientific reviewers based on
the overall impact that the project is likely to have on the research
field(s) involved.
[2]
The success rate is the percentage of applications received that are
funded. It is calculated by dividing the number of funded grants by the
number of applications received. When an amended application is
considered in the same fiscal year as the original, only the one with
the better score is counted in the number of applications received.
[3]The NIH does not separate the categories, nor report the R21 grants in terms of experienced or new investigators. The NCI was able to apply the R01 rules to the R21 to extract, and generate the data that distinguishes the 2 groups in these graphs.
TOPPosted at 08:00AM May 01, 2012 by NCI DEA in General | Comments[28]
Posted on May 02, 2012 at 02:05 PM EDT #
Posted on May 02, 2012 at 02:19 PM EDT #
Posted on May 02, 2012 at 02:27 PM EDT #
Posted on May 02, 2012 at 09:31 PM EDT #
Posted on May 03, 2012 at 07:36 PM EDT #
Posted on May 03, 2012 at 07:53 PM EDT #
Posted on May 03, 2012 at 07:55 PM EDT #
Posted on May 03, 2012 at 08:08 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 10:39 AM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 11:13 AM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 12:34 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 01:05 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 01:25 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 04:21 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 04:35 PM EDT #
Posted on May 04, 2012 at 04:44 PM EDT #
Posted on May 05, 2012 at 12:27 AM EDT #
Posted on May 05, 2012 at 01:23 PM EDT #
Posted on May 05, 2012 at 01:56 PM EDT #
Posted on May 07, 2012 at 02:32 PM EDT #
Posted on May 07, 2012 at 03:41 PM EDT #
Posted on May 07, 2012 at 08:18 PM EDT #
Posted on May 08, 2012 at 05:50 PM EDT #
Posted on May 09, 2012 at 04:53 PM EDT #
Posted on May 14, 2012 at 02:05 PM EDT #
Posted on June 06, 2012 at 08:50 PM EDT #
Posted on June 07, 2012 at 10:56 PM EDT #
Posted on June 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM EDT #