review system. The Center for Scientific
Review homepage^4 is an excellent place to
start. It contains the policies, procedures,
and review guidelines that NIH study
sections follow, and are sent to the
reviewers with the applications under
review. Particularly noteworthy are the five
major review criteria—(1) Significance,
(2) Approach, (3) Innovation, (4) Investigator,
and (5) Environment—that are used in the
evaluation of the vast majority of research
applications that are submitted to the NIH, as
are the special guidelines that are used in the
evaluation of research applications from new
investigators. Equally important are the doc-
uments that describe the format of a study
section meeting and the responsibilities of the
assigned reviewers.It is critical to understand the different
responsibilities of review staff and program
staff at the NIH, and where an application
goes within the NIH. The initial phase ofreceipt and referral is managed by a Referral
Officer in the Center for Scientific Review.
Referral officers make initial decisions con-
cerning the assignment of the application to
an appropriate study section for initial peer
review and to an appropriate Institute or
Center for funding consideration.
The next phase, peer review by a study
section and preparation of the summary
statement, is managed by a Scientific Review
Administrator (SRA). Most SRAs and their
study sections reside in the Center for
Scientific Review, but some reside in the
Institutes and Centers. After the initial peer
review, your application is in the hands of a
Program Officer, all of whom reside in an
Institute or Center.
Questions concerning study section assess-
ments for a pending grant application, or the
likelihood for funding, should be directed to
the appropriate Program Officer—the indi-
vidual listed in the upper left corner of the
summary statement and on the priority score
notification letter. After the meeting of the
study section, the SRA is no longer your point
of contact concerning the application, but he
or she can discuss matters of general review
policy and procedure. It may be tempting to
contact a reviewer to find out “the real story”
of how your application was discussed. Yo u
should not do so.Reviewers understand the
need for complete confidentiality regarding
the discussions in the study section.
You should not attempt to discuss your
application, the manner in which it was
reviewed, or an appropriate course of action
until you have the summary statement in
hand and have given it adequate considera-
tion. The summary statement is mailed to
the Principal Investigator within six to
eight weeks after the study section meeting.
The summary statement includes a resume
and summary of discussion written by the
SRA, the (largely unedited) reviewers’ cri-204 CAREER ADVICE FOR LIFE SCIENTISTS II
It is critical to understand the
different responsibilities of
review staff and program staff
at NIH, and where your
application goes within the NIH.Particularly noteworthy are
the five major review criteria—
Significance, Approach,
Innovation, Investigator, and
Environment—that are used in
the evaluation of most research
applications submitted to NIH.