Writedit is in Portland for the NIH Regional Grants Seminar (& I recommend everyone attend one of these or at least view the online presentations) – limited Web access and will be off the grid for a few days after. Have fun.
But … a few tidbits already. Later this afternoon, I’ll learn about plans to shorten/streamline/”enhance” the writing of FOAs. More on that later.
At one talk, an SRO shared a good rule of thumb for differentiating Impact from Significance: Significance is the hypothetical benefit to science/technology/clinical practice *if* the aims are achieved … Impact is the real-world impact, taking into account why the investigators & environment will really make this cool study work & shift a paradigmm or two.
Also, for resubmissions, SROs really want the reviewers to look at the A1 as a “new” application (reviewers don’t see old application in any case) evaluated based on its own merit – not in relation to how much it improved from the prior submission or whether all the reviewer critiques were met. Not news – but clearly laid out today.
And Sally Rockey (head of OER) confirmed that the NIH is rigorously sniffing out “new” applications that are not new. Rigorously (investing time & personnel needed). Please remember that just changing PAs does not make the application new (changing mechanisms, resubmission after failing at an RFA do qualify as new). She also noted that so far, there has only been a 10% bump in applications submitted. The next big jump will likely be in 2012, when everyone who had ARRA funding and asked for no-cost extensions comes back to the trough for more ….