The NIH has a review that is double of applications, the GAO report explains. The first degree of review occurs in committees with members who possess expertise when you look at the subject regarding the application. A lot more than 40,000 applications are submitted towards the NIH each year, and every committee (there are about 100, with 18 to 20 members per committee) reviews as much as 100 applications. The agency usually follows the recommendations for the committee in approving grant applications. Then there’s a secondary standard of review, by an council that is advisory consisting of external scientists and lay people in the general public, including patient-group advocates in addition to clergy. Peer report about continuing grants occur at the same time as new projects.
National Science Foundation peer writeup on grants
The National Science Foundation uses the thought of merit as an element of its review that is peer process the GAO report says. Experts in the field review grant applications submitted to NSF and discover if the proposals meet certain criteria, such as the intellectual merit of the proposed activity, such as for instance its importance in advancing knowledge; the qualifications of this proposing scientist; additionally the extent to that the project is creative and original. The criteria also enquire about the broader impacts associated with the proposal, including how it advances discovery while promoting teaching, and exactly how it benefits society. How scientists fared in prior NSF grants are included in the evaluation. Proposals received by the NSF are reviewed by an NSF program officer and often three to 10 outside NSF experts in the field of the proposal. Authors can suggest names of reviewers. Program officers obtain comment by mail, panels or site visits. Program officer recommendations are further reviewed by senior staff at NSF. A division director then decides whether an award is approved. […]