In a previous blog, we described the outcomes of grant applications according to the initial peer review score. Some of you have wondered about the peer review scores of amended (“A1”) applications. More specifically, some of you have asked about amended applications getting worse scores than first applications; some of you have experienced amended applications not even being discussed after the first application received a priority score and… Read more about Outcomes of Amended (“A1”) Applications
Appointed members of standing NIH study sections, NIH Boards of Scientific Counselors, NIH Advisory Boards or Councils, or NIH Program Advisory Committees are all eligible for continuous submission (submitting R01, R21, and R34 applications at any time in response to active funding opportunity announcements (FOAs) that have standard due dates). Reviewers who have served on at least 6 qualifying NIH study sections during an 18-month period starting January 1 of one year and ending June 30 of the following year are also eligible for continuous submission under the “recent substantial service… Read more about Who is Eligible to Submit an Application Under NIH’s Continuous Submission Policy?
NIH’s continuous submission policy provides members of review and advisory groups and reviewers with recent substantial service the benefit of submitting R01, R21, and R34 applications at any time in response to active funding opportunity announcements (FOAs) that have standard due dates. Check your eligibility to submit applications under NIH’s continuous submission policy by logging into eRA Commons, and following the instructions outlined here.