NIH SBIT/STTR Grant Review (Grants Workshop), presented by Dale Christensen

1,059 views
959 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,059
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
80
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

NIH SBIT/STTR Grant Review (Grants Workshop), presented by Dale Christensen

  1. 1. NIH SBIR/STTR Grant Review: A reviewer’s perspective. Dale Christensen, Ph.D. President & CSO
  2. 2. Core Criteria for Review The core criteria: – Significance – Innovation – Investigators – Approach – Environment
  3. 3. How are grants scored???
  4. 4. SignificanceThe evaluation of significance assumes that the “aims of theproject are achieved” and/or will be “successfully completed.” – Reviewers evaluate the significance of the project within the context of a field. For example, autism is a significant field of study but not all studies of autism are significant. – Research field may vary widely, so it would be helpful if reviewers identify in their reviews the research field within which the project addresses an important problem or critical barrier to progress. – The research field may be focused on a specific basic research area (enzymology) or a specific disease (e.g., autism), or may be more broadly defined to cut across many health issues (e.g., language training, psychology).
  5. 5. Approach: The Key Criteria• Is there a clear hypothesis being tested?• Will the proposed experiments give meaningful results? – Are appropriate controls included? – Are the sample numbers sufficient to allow for statistical significance?• Do the proposed experiments advance the development of a product?• Are the experiments likely to be completed in the proposed timeline of the grant?
  6. 6. Overall Impact ScoreGuidance: Reviewers will provide an overall impactscore to reflect their assessment of the likelihood forthe project to exert a sustained, powerful influence onthe research field(s) involved, in consideration of thefollowing five core review criteria, and additionalreview criteria (as applicable for the project proposed). Will most often parallel the Approach Score

×