NIH Paylines & Resources

I update this page as ICs revise their funding strategies. I’ve also included links to “cleared concepts” (i.e., potential funding initiatives approved by the IC’s Advisory Council for future development into PAs or RFAs) and to IC program contacts (program officers). Those ICs that traditionally do not publish payline or percentile guidance are indicated by “no payline data available” (& none probably ever will be). You can find details on the scoring procedure and interpretation as well as reviewer guidelines by mechanism at the Enhancing Peer Review Website.
Last updated: 15 April 2014

NIH Institutes & Centers
(descending order of budget, percentiles for established/new PIs)

NCI ($4.92B): FY13: 9th percentile for R01s & R21s (applications at higher percentiles considered on a case-by-case basis to fill gaps & address high priority needs, with special consideration to new/ESI applications); priority score of 25 for R03s & R15. 17% reduction in budgets
NCI cleared concepts
NCI program contacts

NIAID ($4.36B):  FY14 payline: 9th percentile for established PIs; FY14 interim paylines: 12th percentile for new/ESI PIs for R01s; impact score of 20 for R03 & R15; impact score of 23 for R21; impact score of 26 for R41/R42; impact score of 21 for R43/R44; impact score of 20 for Ks except K99; impact score of 13 for F30, of 30 for F31, and of 25 for F32; impact score of 14 for T32

NIAID cleared concepts
NIAID program contacts
NIAID Paylines (historic data by year and mechanism)

NHLBI ($2.99B): FY14 payline: 11th percentile for established PIs/21st percentile for ESI PIs; 11th percentile for R21s; 30th percentile for F31/F32/F33; 21st percentile for AIDS grants; impact score of 20 for R15s, 20 for R41/R42, 24 for R43/R44, 25 for Ks, 15 for F30, 15/25 for P01/P01 subproject, and 25 for T32 {FY13 payline: 11th/21st percentile for established/ESI R01s; 11th percentile for R21s; impact scores at 20 for R15, 20 for R41/42, 29 for R43/44, 10 for P01s and 20 for P01 subprojects; 25 for Ks; 25 for T32/35s; 15 for F30s; and 30th percentile for F31/F32/F33s.}
Translating NIH Peer Review Changes into Funding Policies
NHLBI cleared concepts (click on most recent Council minutes, see proposed initiatives)
NHLBI program contacts
New Investigator Policy Change: “The applications from New investigators (NI) who do not qualify as early stage investigators (ESI) are no longer considered for special funding as of FY 2010. This policy continues into FY2011.”
Duration of RPGs: “Beginning in FY 2014, it is anticipated that NHLBI policy will be to fund investigator-initiated R01 competing applications, regardless of percentile or priority score, for a period of 4 years [see policy for exceptions ... [therefore] researchers are encouraged to submit for review only applications with a project period of 4 years or less.”

NIGMS ($2.36B): No specific payline – explanation of how funding decisions are made by Program Staff and Council
NIGMS cleared concepts (click on most recent Council minutes)
NIGMS program contacts

NIDDK ($1.74B): FY14 payline of 13th percentile for established and new investigators (8th percentile for annual DC of $500K or more), 18th percentile for ESI applicants {FY13 payline of 11th percentile for R01s (Type 1 or 2) from established investigators (7th percentile for R01s with budgets >$500K), 16th percentile from ESI investigators}
NIDDK cleared concepts (click on most recent Council minutes)
NIDDK program contacts

NINDS ($1.59B): interim FY14 payline: 14th percentile for R01s
NINDS cleared concepts
(click on most recent Council minutes)
NINDS program contacts

NIMH ($1.45B):Interim FY14: 10th/15th percentile for established/ESI-new investigators. FY13: 10th percentile for R01s (special consideration of new/ESI applicants but no stated payline break0
NIMH cleared concepts
NIMH program contacts

NICHD ($1.28B): FY13 paylines: 9th/13th percentile for established/new-ESI investigators; 7th percentile for R03s & R21s; 8th percentile for P01s; 16th percentile for Fs; priority score of 30 for R13/U13, 24 for R15s, 20 for R34s, 33 for STTR, 38 for SBIR, 18 for Ks, 17 for T32s.
NICHD cleared concepts
NICHD program contacts

NIA ($1.17B): Interim FY14 paylines: 7th percentile or priority score of 11 for RPGs, priority score of 20 for Ks; FY13 payline for R01s below $500K at 11th percentile, with new investigator applications considered up to the 14th percentile and ESI to the 16th percentile; R01s above $500K at the 8th percentile, with new investigator applications considered up to the 11th percentile and ESI up to the 13th percentile; priority score of 13 for P01s & NIA-reviewed RPGs (some R01s, R34s, U01s, & U19s).
NIA program contacts and priorities (click through most relevant division)

NIDA ($1.03B): FY13 policy but no paylines
NIDA program contacts (click on relevant Division)
NIDA cleared concepts (click on latest Council minutes)
Funding priorities & policies

NIEHS ($665M): FY13 payline adjusted down from 15th to 13th percentile for R01s, R03s, & R21s
NIEHS cleared concepts (click on latest Council minutes)
NIEHS program contacts

NEI ($682M): No FY13 payline data available
NEI cleared concepts (click on latest Council minutes)
NEI program contacts

NCATS ($633M): No payline data available
NCATS cleared concepts (click on latest Council minutes)
NCATS program contacts

NIAMS ($520M): FY14: 12th/15th percentile for established/new PI R01s, 12th percentile for R21s, impact score of 20 for R03s, 24 for SBIR, 20 for F31/F32/F33, 21 for F30, 20 for T32, 24 for K99, 26 for K01/K08/K25, 30 for K23/K24

NIAMS cleared concepts (click on latest Council minutes)
NIAMS program contacts (click on relevant scientific area)
FY10 Budget Request

NHGRI ($498M): FY13 fiscal policy but no paylines (funding priorities listed)
NHGRI cleared concepts (click on most recent meeting agenda & documents)
NHGRI program contacts (click on relevant program)

NIAAA ($446M): FY13 policy but no paylines
NIAAA cleared concepts (click on most recent Council minutes)
Training & Career Development Contacts
Division Contacts (check organizational chart as well)

NIDCD ($404M): FY13 policy
NIDCD cleared concepts
NIDCD program contacts

NIDCR ($399M): FY13 policy but no paylines
NIDCR cleared concepts
NIDCR program contacts

NLM ($328M): FY13: For experienced investigators, applications with scores 30 or better are the most likely to be funded. For Early Stage Investigators and New Investigators seeking their first R01 research grant, and for K award applicants, applications with scores of 35 or better will be considered for funding.
NLM cleared concepts
NLM program contacts

NIBIB ($329M): FY13 payline at 9th/14th percentile for established/new investigator R01s; 9th percentile for R21s; impact score at 20 for R03s &amp R15s; 9th percentil for U01s; impact score of 24 (interim) for SBIR. NIBIB cleared concepts (click on most recent minutes)
NIBIB program contacts

NIMHD ($268M): no payline data available (traditionally no funding policy is posted for this Center)

NINR ($141M): No FY13 payline data available
NINR program contacts

NCCAM ($124M): FY13 fiscal policy but no payline data
NCCAM cleared concepts
NCCAM program contacts

FIC ($68M): No FY13 payline data provided
FIC program contacts

Other Resources

NIH Advisory Council Meeting Dates (all ICs)
NIH Funding Strategies
NIH Paylines & Percentiles explained
NIH Success Rates
NIH Budget Allocation by Disease/Disorder
IC Strategic Plans (priorities)
Einstein College of Medicine Paylines-Success Rates Page

Please note that because this page attracts so many comments (and becomes very slow to load/refresh as a result), I am moving comments by calendar year onto archived pages, which has the added benefit of making them searchable.


  1. h123 said

    My F31 grant was just transferred to NINDS from a different Institute to be recommended for funding. Does this mean I am going to be funded, or is this just another step in the process?

    • writedit said

      Did you submit your application this past April for FY14 or last year (April, Aug, Dec 2012) for FY13? If the former, you are just being reassigned, but you should check in with your new PO.

      If the latter, I think they would only undertake a transfer at this point if there were negotiations to facilitate an award for your application. You should check with your original PO and whomever you’ve been assigned to at NINDS to see what is going on.

      • h123 said

        I submitted in Dec. ’12. It seems from the email that it will be funded!

  2. jpl said

    Dear Group–I am part of a team who submitted an R15 application to NIDDK (second submission) and in March 2013 got an impact score of 17 (which as far as we can tell falls between “Exceptional” and “Outstanding” but no percentile).

    Despite this, the PO has been pessimistic about our R15 being funded. The PO said that R15s did not have a good “track record” of being funded in the portfolios that he/she managed (he/she could not or did not elaborate). The PO is encouraging us to re-package as an R01, but this seems to defeat the purpose of the R15 and we don’t have sufficient preliminary data to likely be competitive (as the R15s don’t require preliminary data).

    Is anyone aware of pay lines for NIDDK R15s? Does anyone of any advice or thoughts for us? Is it worth waiting it out? Does it make sense to talk to the division director? If R15s are not being focused on, it seems like PIs should be made aware of this before making the massive investment of time in submitting.

    Many thanks…

    • writedit said

      This is unusual advice indeed. Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell from the FY13 operating plan if NIDDK plans to cut R15 awards (or whether your PO is just unfamiliar with the mechanism). You are correct that a competitive R15 application is not necessarily competitive as an R01. You could check with the Division chief (for your Division of interest at NIDDK) or the Director of Extramural Activities to inquire as to whether the number of R15 awards are being cut to save $ for R01 and other RPG mechanisms at NIDDK and whether it is worth pursuing AREA funding in the future.

      • jpl said

        Dear writedit–Thank you for your advice.

  3. Greg said

    Anyone heard about F32s from the winter 2012 submission or gotten NoAs?

    My app placed in the 9th percentile, impact 20 at the NCI study section and they requested extensive follow-up info about our animal protocols (eventually approved after 2 rounds of back and forth).

    My PO has been very vague and non-helpful about funding potential/paylines, other than saying we were being recommended for funding at council. Council meeting has also been pushed to late June, as opposed to the printed date of May on ERA commons (even though the projected start date of the F32 is July 1st). Thus, I’m relatively unsure where I stand with regards to this app and am starting to get a little paranoid about what should be a slam-dunk.

    • writedit said

      The NCAB always meets in late June (23-25 this year). eRA Commons refers to “May Council”, since that is when most Advisory Councils meet. NCAB meets 4 rather than 3 times per year, so the timing is a bit off from the rest of the ICs. If they are now happy with your IACUC status, you should be okay – they would not bother with all that if they were not going to make an award, and your PO would not say that you were being recommended for funding. NCI is even more backed up administratively than other ICs because they only gave 6-month rather than 12-month non-competing renewals for much of FY13, so they have a huge backlog of all types of awards to issue (i.e., thousands of awards to issue twice in the same FY). Your PO genuinely has no idea when an award might be issued. NCI issued 16 F32s in March-April – their FY13 operating plan indicates that they are not cutting any individual NRSA fellowships, so they have more than 250 more F awards to make. I would not want to be an NCI GMS …

      • Greg said

        That is one hell of a grants traffic jam. I was combing Reporter earlier to see if any F32s had been issued this year by NCI. I guess I will just forge ahead and try not to think about it.

        Regardless, this experience (and others with R01s and R21s I’ve been helping out on) paint an unappealing picture for prospective TT faculty here in the US. I will be cultivating other options abroad when I go on my faculty search, particularly where I have connections in Switzerland.

      • writedit said

        The best way to check recent awards (to see what your IC is doing) is to go to and look at the Excel file for Notice of awards issued in the last 90 days. If you can hang on with F32 and then K funding, you should be looking at your first R01 at a time when hopefully the applicant pool will have been “right-sized” for the amount of $ available.You’ll want to check with your connections on funding trends in Switzerland and the EU (depending on where else you might look) as well.

      • Greg said

        Thanks for this great blog, by the way.

      • Need funding said

        Dear Writedit,

        I didn’t know about the recent Notice of Awards file and it is another great resource. However, I couldn’t figure out which award is from which IC. Is there a code for this in the award number? I’m specifically interested in NIGMS F32 awards. Thanks!

  4. Early stager said

    I got an email response from my grants management specialist today after inquiring when I would get my NOA for my NHLBI ESI 13% grant which had a start date of 4/1/13. In essence, he stated that the sequester has completely screwed up their regular funding timing and they hope that it will return to more normal in June. He also stated that they fully anticipate funding all awards within the payline by the end of the fiscal year, which is end of September.

    • Greg said

      Jeez, that is ridiculous. So you submitted Fall 2012 for FY13/start 4/1/13 and still didn’t even get an NOA and it’s June now? You are well within their published payline for NHLBI ESI too…my mentor was suggesting that maybe we would see my salary money from this F grant by December and that we would probably have already finished and published the proposed studies. I initially laughed, but maybe that is closer to reality than it should be…

      • writedit said

        Well, all FY13 awards must be made by Sept 30th, so it will be before Dec, but not a lot.

  5. jpl said

    Dear writedit–Thank you for your advise.

  6. grad student said

    First off, thank you for this blog. It is tremendously helpful, particularly to a newbie like myself.

    My situation is this:

    I submitted an F31 to NINDS in December (with a start date of 7/1/2013) and received an impact score of 20, 5th percentile and the application was recommended for funding. I was told to wait until the Advisory Council meeting that occured (according to commons) on 5/23. I still have received no word about anything, and my application status shows ‘pending.’ Furthermore, I have not received a request for a JIT, but I did receive an email asking for follow up information (to which I immediately responded).

    My PO has not been very forthcoming with information. Obviously, I’d like to know the probability of funding, but I would be very happy with info about payline and even a tentative timeline. Is there a way to tactfully press for this kind of information?


    • writedit said

      With a 5th percentile score, you should be getting an award. NINDS did not cut any fellowship training slots in their FY13 operating plan, so the payline should be the same as last year, and I cannot imagine it is lower than the 5th percentile. You didn’t mention what information was requested, but they would not ask for anything if they were not considering your application for an award. If you have a GMS assigned, you could ask him/her. However, all the ICs have a backlog of awards for applications that should have started April 1 (and maybe earlier), so yours will wait until those are done. It would be nice if the PO would at least confirm that you are getting an award – perhaps if the request for information was to clear up a potential administrative concern, your PO can now give a better response.

      • grad student said

        Thanks for the quick response. They requested my academic transcripts from my current institution as well as confirmation on the date I started my doctoral program. I sent an email to my GMS on 5/30, but haven’t received a response.

        Given the current state of things, a backlog is understandable. But as you state, it would be nice to receive some sort of confirmation one way or another.

        As I mentioned in my previous post, I’d like to keep pressing, but I’m not sure the best way to do it. Would it be best to go try my PO or GMS again? Or should I just wait it out?

      • writedit said

        If you sent the academic information last week and have not communicated with your PO since the Council meeting, you could send a message simply inquiring whether the recent request for transcripts indicates that you will receive an award (not asking when – just whether). Your PO might not want to respond with a date but should be willing to confirm that yes, you will eventually receive an award (barring any unforeseen circumstances).

  7. OnTheMarketPhD said

    FYI Fiscal year NIAID K payline’s are out (26)

  8. David said

    I was requested to provide IACUC information, I guess it is a good sign.

    • writedit said

      Yep – I cannot imagine that any IC has the time to do administrative checks on applications not on the paylist.

  9. John Worth said

    I submitted my K08 (A1) (NICHD) in November 2012, was reviewed in March (13-14) and received an impact score of 20. The grant will be reviewed this week in council. I received my summary statement only last week (is this unusual?), and I have not spoken to my PO. I just saw on your blog that the NICHD payline for K is 18! Please let me know if I still have a chance and if they will increase the payline before September 30. Also, my grant is dual assigned to NHLBI, and the payline is 25. Will my grant be automatically considered and funded by NHLBI or should I speak to someone there. Please advise.

    • writedit said

      First, receiving your summary statement so late is somewhat unusual but not unheard of. If the summary statement has not appeared in your eRA Commons account by 8 weeks after the SRG meeting, you can send a polite note to the SRO inquiring about when it might be available. Sometimes the SRO is slammed with a huge application load, and the SRO might finish the A0 summary statements before the A1s (since they are less time sensitive in terms of resubmission).

      The NICHD funding strategies page was just updated in May, so I suspect the 18 is about final in terms of the payline, but you can check with your PO. Certainly it will remain under consideration until Sept 30th, but you should be working on an R01 or other RPG application for October.

      You can talk with your NICHD PO about the likelihood of NHLBI picking up your application and whether he/she will help with transferring the application if there is a possibility of funding through NHLBI. It doesn’t sound as though you have been working with a PO at NHLBI, but if so, you could ask him/her about the likelihood of their accepting the application as well. However, I suspect very very few applications will be picked up by secondary ICs in FY13.

  10. Andrew said

    Will grants that were council reviewed in 2012 but were delayed award during sequester/budget be funded at FY2012 or FY2013 paylines?

    • writedit said

      FY13. The FY12 paylines only applied to those applications awarded up until September 30, 2012. Starting October 1, the FY13 paylines applied, including for those applications reviewed at the fall 2012 Council meetings. The FY in which the application will be funded, not the year in which it is submitted/reviewed, determines the paylines involved.

  11. Impatient Party said

    The same old question: my A1 K99 was reviewed quite favorably with a priority score of 19 at NHGRI (submitted in March) and now I am of course wondering if my application is likely to be funded. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of data out there on fundable priority scores at NHGRI.

    • writedit said

      If you just submitted in March, you probably won’t know until the end of this year or the beginning of next. NHGRI does not receive many applications but have a good success rate for those that are submitted (5 of 8 K99 applications received awards in FY12, 2 of 3 in FY11). Now, NHGRI dropped from 9 career development awards down to 6 for FY13, but they have funded a total of 7 K awards in FY12 and only 3 in FY11, so this won’t be an issue. All this means that your PO should have a reasonable idea, based on your score and summary statement, whether you are likely to get an award once the NIH appropriation is settled for FY14. My guess is that you can be optimistic, unless they received a flood of applications (something else your PO would know).

      • Impatient Party said

        Thank you! I will contact the PO once the summary statement is available.

  12. NIHNewbie said

    My F31 was submitted to the NIA in December, and just underwent Council Review earlier this week. The reviews were quite favorable citing primarily minor weaknesses. I received an impact score, but no percentile. I couldn’t find much data on NIA paylines for F31s, so it’s hard for me to determine whether I’m in the fundable range. I contacted my PO earlier in the week, but have not heard back.

    • writedit said

      You don’t say what your score is, so it is hard to gauge your chances, but your PO is likely quite busy catching up on a huge backlog of awards that were delayed by the sequester and FY13 budget approval process plus fielding questions from applicants to the June-July submission dates (and from those who submitted in Feb/March who are now being reviewed). The delay in response doesn’t mean anything other than he/she is busy. If your eRA Commons account has a GMS assigned, you could contact that person for a status update as well, though if your application is not being processed (yet), he/she would just refer you back to the PO. If you don’t hear back from the PO by next week, you could send another polite inquiry as to where your applicatoin stands.

  13. Cautiously Optimistic said

    My NIGMS R15 proposal just received a priority score of 20. It is now “pending council review”. The NIGMS has undergone a new way of reviewing R15 proposals, and I haven’t found any information about how the R15 mechanism will be affected by sequestration. Any thoughts about the fundability of this score? Typically, R15′s don’t get percentiles.

  14. OnTheMarketPhD said

    Does anyone know if FY paylines can change again before September for grants other than RO1s?

    • writedit said

      I expect paylines will be about set within the next few weeks – it’s late this year due to the sequester and delayed FY13 appropriation and all the shuffling around to accommodate budget cuts according to each IC’s priorities. At this point, the ICs know how much money they have, how many applications for each mechanism were scored, and how those scores spread out. They develop paylists (that also take into account program input on applications to be considered out of order) and start going down the list to pay out awards (negotiating project budget cuts along the way) until the money is all gone. The payline might be seen to shift a bit from the interim projection once the final paylists are organized, but there will not be a sudden jump in paylines later in July, August, or Sept since there won’t be an infusion of new money to allow ICs to make awards further down their paylists.

  15. OnTheMarketPhD said

    The reason I’m asking is I’m 1 point off a K22 and the paylines are hard for NIAID. But there was mention that the payline could change before FY end. Just didn’t know if does happen with any frequency, at least with K’s

    • writedit said

      If it were interim, you would have a chance still of falling in the payline. However, NIAID has indicated that the K payline of 26 is final for FY13 (if they thought it might move again, it would be interim still). I am not sure either whether they fund any Ks out of order, so that is something you would need to ask your PO about. If this was an A0, then you would also discuss A1 resubmission strategy for July or November.

  16. OnTheMarketPhD said

    Thanks for the advice. The PO mentioned that I should watch to see if the paylines changes and they don’t fund anything over the payline. I’m taking that as there is a chance the payline could still move before FY end. This is an A0 however my A1 is being reviewed/scored in 2 weeks. Sit tight and hold on.

    • writedit said

      Glad to hear the A1 is already in – good luck on the review.

  17. Oriade said

    Dear Writeedit: I am preparing a R21 focused on developing drug delivery systems with application in many diseases. I am thinking of either sending it to NIGMS or NIBIB. Any idea which of the two funds the most R21 or proposal in general?

    • writedit said

      Well, this is easy. NIGMS does not accept R21 applications in response to the parent announcement, so you would need to submit to NIBIB. However, you should contact the PO appropriate to your science there and discuss your aims.

      • Oriade said

        Bummer! Seems like the R21 is a dying mechanism. I guess I am stuck with NIBIB – I do not get the sense this institute funds many proposals. Thanks for your quick response.

  18. GrantWritingIs... said

    Dear Writedit, I have a pending R01 at NIMH (scored 30, no percentile). After getting the summary statement, the PO told me it is unlikely fundable due to funding cut for that particular RFA. But then a couple of weeks later (a few days before the Council meeting), I received a personalized JIT request. I submitted it immediately. But just wondering what this means. Does it mean something changed in their budget and I still have a chance? I haven’t contacted the PO after the council meeting yet. I’d really appreciate your insights and suggestions. Thank you!

    • writedit said

      I’d suggest you just contact the PO again for a status update. No need to drive yourself crazy over this. It could be the PO assumed a 5% cut to the RFA allocation that was not implemented (NCI did not uniformly apply the sequester cut), or it could be one of the better scoring applications had an administrative issue. This is a perfectly legitimate question to ask the PO, so no need to worry about being pestering or affecting your chances by doing so.

  19. New R1 Asst Prof said

    Just got my resubmission scores back. On A0 had a 20 Impact/13 percentile at NIAID — missed the Fy12 payline by 1 percentile. Resubmission was scored 40 Impact/42 Percentile; no hope. Awesome.

    • writedit said

      Oh wow. When you get your summary statement, you still might check with your PO about select pay for the A0. If he/she was excited about your science, and if the new concerns are not related to the underlying science or its significance, you might have a slim shot, since obviously there is no longer a second chance in the queue. If your PO does not think select pay will be an option, then you can move on to a discussion of repurposing the proposal.

  20. MSKIM said

    I am early stage investigator (ESI) and i submitted a R01 application in Feb’13. My era shows that the application was “not discussed”. I am planning to re-submit the application and was wondering if there is a provision for ESI to get thier “statement summary” early so that they can re-submit in next cycle (July’13) instead of waiting for November submission round (5th Nov).

    Typically how long it may be till i see the statement summary ?

    • writedit said

      You should have the summary statement no later than July 10 (probably before then though) for an Aug 10 resubmission (per policy at However, since you were not scored, you may not be able to make changes that will satisfy reviewers that quickly, especially if you need to present more preliminary data, publish your preliminary data, rework the approach significantly, etc.. If you do not have a strong A1 application ready by August, you should probably wait until Nov 5.

      • MSKIM said

        Thank you Writedit for valuable input, this is very helpful.

  21. Qi said

    Dear Writedit,

    I have a quick question. If the R01 A0 was unscored and I am planning to make substantial changes to the research plan (>50% changes in the proposal, especially approach), should I submit it as a new grant (new R01 A0) rather than a resubmission (A1)?

    • writedit said

      If you are changing the aims and the approach substantially, then you should be able to develop the proposal into a new A0 application. If you are just changing animal models or other technical aspects but pursuing the same questions in roughly the same design, maybe not. You can and should talk with your PO about your revised application, both to ensure it is sufficiently new to be an A0 and to strategize about targeting a specific FOA and/or SRG based on your revisions.

      • Women-In-Science said

        This is very helpful. Thank you so much! I will talk with my PO today.

  22. John said

    Hi Writedit,

    I’m wondering if you could answer a question about consortium F&A on mechanisms that limit F&A (in my case, a K23). Is consortium F&A on such a proposal also limited to 9% or are subawardees allowed to collect their full negotiated rate? I’ve been scanning the NIH notices but can’t find anything that pertains. This would have a huge impact on my small research budget.

    Thanks in advance for any help.

    • writedit said

      Hmm. I am wondering how/why you would need a consortium subcontract on a K23, since you only get $25-50K in research expenses, depending on the IC. The overall F&A rate for a K23 is 8%. The line item for a subcontract includes direct and indirect costs, which, as far as I know, is their F&A rate. The total consortium/subcontract cost becomes part of your direct cost then (basis for calculating your indirects). Your PO can confirm this – and you might also run your subcontract idea past him/her to be sure they think it is advisable, given the limited amount of research funds available to you.

      • John said

        Thanks Writedit — there’s a small neuroimaging component, with the scans done at another institution. They won’t sign off on the consortium agreement unless they get full F&A. Is it the case then that consortium F&A costs on a K23 don’t count toward the research budget cap ($50k in my case) and aren’t limited to 8%? The PO referred me to my institution’s grant management people, who also didn’t know.

  23. Hi, I applied for a Ro1 (regular, no RFA). Can I submit the same grant with some modifications for PQ?

    Thank you very much for any advice

    • writedit said

      If the regular R01 has already been reviewed (and not scored well enough for funding), then you could repurpose the application for the provocative questions RFA (though clearly you would need to make changes to be competitive). However, if you just submitted the R01, then no – you cannot have the same application under review at the same time (at the NIH or other federal agencies).

  24. Hi, I applied for a Ro1 (regular, no RFA). Can I submit the same grant with some modifications for PQ?

    Thank you very much for any advice

    Also want to add to my previous post that I just submitted RO1 few days ago and want to submit PQ also for the same cycle.

    Thanks again

    • writedit said

      No, as I noted above, you cannot submit essentially the same application for simultaneous review. The modifications would need to be so substantial as to require different aims and approach (i.e., a new & different application).

  25. LGB said

    Hello, I just received scores for my R21/NIBIB and I am a couple of points above the published 2013 payline (9%). Do you know if NIBIB funds (selected) grants above paylines? Thanks for your feedback and hosting this forum!

    • writedit said

      Congratulations on the excellent score. Award decisions for your application will fall under FY14 paylines, which may or may not be better than FY13 – we’re a long way off from an FY14 federal budget. If the FY14 appropriation for NHLBI does not go up, any select pay decisions would likely not be made until all three review cycles had passed (so not until about this time next year). At this point, your PO will have no idea about paylines or select pay, so if you decide to get in touch with him/her, it should be after you have your summary statement to discuss resubmission strategy (if this was your A0).

  26. OnTheMarketPhD said

    This question is along the same lines. Do you know if all ICs pay outside paylines at the end of the fiscal year? And, is it only for specific awards (RO1 compared to R21, K22 et.)? I guess kind of complicated question.

    • writedit said

      While making awards beyond the payline for R01s is universal (and seems to be true for other RPGs), I do not know about other mechanisms as a general rule (I have asked), but I assume this varies by IC and mechanism. There is no NIH-wide policy on any of this, and how much $ is aside for select pay likewise varies by IC and by FY. I’ve seen reports of up to 10% of the budget set aside for select pay, and whether ICs dial this up or down in times of tight budgets, such as FY13, is hard to say. The PO decides whether to advocate for select pay, so once it is clear you are outside the payline (published or putative), you can ask if your application is still (or will be, toward the end of the FY) under consideration.

  27. dbar said

    I wanted to share my experience with an NHLBI SBIR from this year. I received a score of 26 back in July last year. Because of sequestration my PO didn’t have any idea whether it will get funded until last month. Now that there is a published payline I am waiting for a JIT and an NoA “soon”. My PO however told me that this soon may be as far as September. Meanwhile a check in the Reporter shows that NHLBI has awarded only 6 SBIR Phase 1 awards this year. So this is how Congress protects small businesses.

    • writedit said

      Congratulations and thank you so much for sharing your experience … and ouch on waiting until Sept 2013 for funding of an application submitted in April 2012. Best wishes for success with the research and future development of your ideas.

    • Andrew said

      I was in the same boat but with a 31 score. The NHLBI payline dropped from 35, to 29, which may(?) have lost it. I could have resubmitted it in Dec or April much improved. The uncertainty is the real business killer. 6 SBIRs is astonishing. A body blow to our industry.

  28. stillwaiting said

    Does anyone have an idea about how long it usually takes from “pending administrative review” to “NOA”? This is about R01. Thank you.

  29. Holla said

    Recently saw an email from an NCI PO that handles the K99 applications. The email said that the payline for FY2013 K99 from NCI was impact score of 20, which is down from 27 for FY2012…I wonder if this is interim or final? Seems like a pretty huge drop to me. Writedit, I was wondering if I could get you to comment on this observation?

    • writedit said

      That is a big drop, but I expect it was due to shifting budget priorities under the sequester needed to protect the RPG funding. I don’t know for sure & am on vacation so can’t check the NCI operating plan for FY13. I do expect any payline given now to be final.

      • akas said

        If it matters. I just received an email from the PO at NCI that affirmed that the pay line is 20; however, I was informed that with an impact score of 27 I still have a moderate-to-good chance of getting funded. This is actually really god news. Hopefully this means that the pay line is not completely set. More news in July/August based on his email. Hope this helps those that are waiting.

      • writedit said

        Thanks so much for sharing this information – hopefully it will mean good news for a lot more people.

    • Dave said

      Yep, the attack on the K’s continues across the NIH. It’s like digging behind your couch for pennies at this point at the NIH.

  30. NewInvst said

    Anyone knows how NEI is going to digest the budget cut? Will that impact the funding rate for R21?
    Just got a impact score of 30 for my R21 (improved from 1st submission) to NEI. Is the chance of getting funded really low?

    • writedit said

      You will be funded in FY14, so it will depend on whether something closer to the House budget, which continues the sequester and then some (cuts), prevails or not. Also, if your SRG was one that underwent a scoring recalibration, your score could be more fundable than might appear at first glance. When you get your summary statement, you can check in with the PO.

  31. Z PI said

    Writedit- We just received an impact score of 20 on ourPhase I STTR (submitted April 2013). Do you know what the NCI post-sequester fundable range looks like? Also, any idea if this will be funded at full amount or will it be cut? Thanks as always!

    • writedit said

      As I keep noting, the FY14 budget is a real crap shoot right now, so it will be hard to say for a few months, but I would certainly hope a score of 20 would be within funding range for an STTR. Your PO should be able to give you an inkling of how you would have fared in FY13, and I hope FY14 would be no worse.

  32. Ouch said

    The NIAID just released some FY 2013 paylines and I was surprised to see the SBIR R43/44 did not go up from the interim cutoff of 22. This is well below historic values. Any idea why it’s so low and is there still a chance for the payline to go up?

    • writedit said

      If it says final, that’s usually it at NIAID. The SBIR funding goes down in proportion to the total extramural budget, so it will only go up when the NIAID appropriation does.

      • Ouch said

        I see the NIAID raised the R03 and R21 paylines to 23, after a FY cutoff of 20 was posted. This gives me some hope the SBIR cutoff could go up as well.

  33. akas said

    I am trying to find out if it is possible to transition to the R00 portion of a K99/R00 award almost immediately after getting the award. I am not completely certain about my chances but I may be in line for getting the award this year from the NCI. My score was in the grey zone, but appears to be fundable based on the emails from the PO.

    I had also applied for a few faculty positions and unexpectedly got an offer from a great institute. Due to the job market and uncertainty in the K99 at the time, I accepted the offer for the faculty job and will begin mid November. If the K99/R00 gets awarded I will only be on the K99 part for 2.5 months. Will this be an issue? I am reluctant to discuss this with the PO since council happens next week. I don’t want to have any negatives associated with my application when they review it. Any thoughts on this (other than starting the faculty job later, which I’d rater not do – already have animal protocols approved, and such)?

    • writedit said

      This is a common issue, and the ICs can be flexible in in how the implement this award, especially given the typical time passage between application & award. I have known PIs who not only go straight to the R00 but also get their K99 $ – but each IC is different. When your PO indicates you are slated to receive an award, you can let him/her know about your position and how to manage the award.

    • K99 applicant said

      I just thought I’d relay my experiences with the K99. When I applied, the PO told me that K99′s can be awarded only if you have not yet accepted a job offer. Before they give the final notice of award, the PO goes through the applicants that are considered fundable, and eliminate those who have accepted an offer somewhere. I’m not sure what would happen if you chose not to disclose the fact that you are no longer eligible to accept the award.
      In any case, one of the requirements for accepting the K99 is that you stay at your current institution for at least 1 full year.
      You probably should investigate a little – whether you are allowed to accept the award at all, and if you can, whether your new institution will let you defer your start date for another year.
      Whatever happens with the K99, congrats on getting a great job offer!

      • writedit said

        Thanks so much for sharing your experience and congratulations on your K99. Each IC is different, but this is excellent advice. Best wishes for success with your own research career.

  34. NEIdea said

    Just received a score for my F32. Impact of 29 and in the 11th percentile at NEI. I know they restarted the scoring, so the impact score might not be as bad as it looks, but I have no idea if it will get funded. Also since it is for FY2014 I know it is up in the air. Any idea on what to expect?

    • mlk said

      The percentile is the more important number, and while we will have no idea about FY14 paylines for several months, you should be in good shape. When you get your summary statement, you can talk with your PO about resubmission strategy, at which point your PO might give some indication about your funding chances (though will not discourage you from resubmitting in all likelihood).

      • NEIdea said

        Is there any chance of being able to reapply for the August 8th deadline given it will take a good month to get a summary statement?

      • writedit said

        If the concerns are all that readily fixable, possibly, but it would be for the same FY whether you submit in Aug or Dec. If you might get a publication out or more preliminary data this fall, you might want to wait. You want to resubmit the strongest application, which may not be possible in Aug.

  35. New R1 Asst Prof said

    NIAID has final 2013 paylines for everything except T32s up on their website. While the F grant paylines actually rose from 2012, the drops for the R grants were significant.

    R01 (NI/ESI, percentile) — 14 -> 12 (14% drop)
    R01 (Established, percentile) — 10 -> 8 (20% drop)
    R21 (Impact Score) — 28 -> 20 (29% drop)
    R03 (Impact Score) — 28 -> 20 (29% drop)

    F31 (Impact Score) — 24 -> 30 (25% increase)
    F32 (Impact Score — 22 -> 25 (14% increase)

  36. ssh81 said

    My SBIR R44 application scored 33, which is outside the 2013 NHLBI payline 29. The NHLBI council review for my application was completed on June 19 but I have not heard anything from the PO or the GMS or seen any activity in my eRA account. How long does it generally take after the council review for the final decision to be posted in eRA Commons? I have tried to get in touch with my PO and GMS but they haven’t responded to my emails so far.

    The reason I am very inclined to find out is because another PO at NICHD recently agreed to pick-up my application as a secondary IC if NHLBI is unable to fund it. The PO at NICHD has indicated that he may have a short window because ad-hoc council meeting will be necessary to fund my application in fy2013. [Ad-hoc because the final fy13 NICHD council review was completed before NHLBI council review and NICHD was not originally listed as a secondary IC on my application at that time.]

    • writedit said

      In this situation, the NICHD PO should get in touch with NHLBI directly (they will respond to him, and they will need to coordinate transfer of the application in any case). NICHD should be able to get Council approval electronically, and I assume yours is not the only application to be added for consideration at the end of the FY. Congratulations on this possible pick-up, in an FY in which I suspect very very few applications will be considered by secondary ICs.

  37. Joseph said

    On a somewhat related topic: does anybody knows what was unofficial payline for Fast-track SBIR in NCI in 2011-2012-2013

  38. SG said

    This sounds like Spam to me…Or a PI who has no hope of getting an R01 ;-)

    • Jerry said

      Is there a good strategy to renew two R01s at the same time?
      Thanks in advance

      • writedit said

        The general strategy is the same whether you have one or two Type 2 applications due: good publications and data from each and a transition to new compelling aims. Best case scenario would be that they go to different study sections, but if not, the applications are presumably scientifically distinct and meritorious for different reasons (otherwise, both would not have been awarded in the first place). Whether these are funded by the same IC or (ideally) different ICs, if the reviewers judge the science of each worth maintaining into another funding period, you should not be penalized for renewing both at the same time. Now, working on two renewal A0s simultaneously and doing a good job on each could be a challenge, especially if you are trying to publish for each at the same time. If one application might benefit from extra time to get a manuscript out, then you could stagger them. I would not recommend hustling two renewals in for the March deadline since saving one for July would probably keep the actual funding in the same timeframe (i.e., Cycle 1 is usually delayed almost to match Cycle 2). Splitting the renewals between FYs (Nov & March, for example) would allow you to hedge your bets as to whether one FY payline might be better than another.

  39. bbcnews said

    Joseph, could you please explain what is unofficial payline? is the published one official? I am confused. Thanks

  40. Raju said

    I got 26 impact score on my K22 revised application in June 2013. Can any one through some light on possibility of getting fuding through NCI with 26 impact score?

    • writedit said

      Your PO should be able and willing to tell you how that score would have fared in FY13 … while we won’t know FY14 paylines for several months, I would not expect it to be lower than FY13.

  41. AlexB said

    I am in the first year of a K99. I am a researcher, but I also run a small consulting business. I’ve been contacted by a research group asking me to do some work for them. They’d be paying me using NIH funds. The payment would come through my consulting business, not through my university. Is this a problem? I know that K awards have restrictions on receiving other federal funding.

    I apologize asking this question here because this seems like a good question for my PO to answer… but the PO hasn’t responded to my inquires and it’s been a few weeks now. I’m concerned about timing because the research group needs to allocate its funds ASAP or they will lose them. They need an answer for me.

    Thank you for any knowledge you can share!

    • abcd said

      Hello AlexB,

      I do not know the answer to your question, however, I do know that you need to maintain a minimum percentage effort (75%) through the K99 grant.

      Regarding the nature of the funds, federal or non-federal, does this mean that its ok to receive non-federal funds while being funded for 100% effort on a NIH project.

      • writedit said

        Not from your awardee institution (that is using NIH $ to pay 100% of your salary).

    • writedit said

      The GMS might be able to clarify this as well, but this notice on Career Award effort ( recognizes that you might have commitments to organizations outside your university. I believe as long as the consulting does not interfere with your ability to meet your award effort, you should be okay, but it would be important to confirm with someone at the NIH. Another option would be to contact the NIH-wide training officer (, Dr. Nancy Desmond) or the NIH grants policy help desk (

  42. doggeroo said

    Hi Writedit,
    I have posted before on this site regarding my K22 application at NCI. I submitted my A0 in June last year and received a score of 21. Council review was completed in Feb of 2013. I have contacted my PO a few times since then and she has routinely said she is optimistic about my chances of getting funded. But she has not been able to tell me when I will receive any official news. Can you shed some light on how and when these funding decisions are made and why it takes so long?
    Thank you for the great resource!

    • writedit said

      NCI has issued only 1 new K22 award so far this year. In FY12, they issued 1 K22 award in July and 5 awards in September, so I expect the same pattern will hold true for FY13. The final group of awards was delayed until NCI was sure how much $ they still had in the K22 pot ($ gets shuffled around based on priorities up until the end of the FY). Plus, NCI needs to reissue all the noncompeting renewals that were only paid out for 6 months earlier this year, so the grants management folks are no doubt especially busy. Your PO probably does not know for sure how many more awards will be made at this point so cannot make a commitment with regard to your application, but her optimism is a good sign.

  43. akas said

    Status on my K99 (NCI) changed from pending to “council review completed”. Fingers crossed that the status progresses in the next few week. At least it is still being considered.

  44. FadiK said

    To Cautiously Optimistic,

    Good question. I meant to include my score in the message, but completely forgot. My score was “14″, and NHLBI’s payline was “20″. By the way, I just saw the award letter (NOA) on my eRA commons… All the best to all who are still waiting….

  45. Biotech Prof said

    I am resubmitting an SBIR grant. In the >1 year interim, I have formed a new company as investment vehicle for this work. Can I do the re-submission and change the company details? Indeed, the new company was even a trading name of the old-co.

    • writedit said

      If the proposal (science, aims, benchmarks) is the same, the change in applicant company should not matter, since the reviewers are assessing scientific merit. The same would be true for a PI changing universities between an A0 and A1, assuming the same (or stronger) experiments/trial could be conducted to achieve the proposed aims at the new university. You should check with your PO to be sure this is true for SBIR applications, but I cannot imagine why it would not be.

  46. Biotech Prof said

    On a second note, I wonder if a Q/A blog like this exists for grants management questions.

  47. Academic hack said

    Question: Just got this email from my PO—can you tell me if this is good news? The impact score was one over the previous year payline. It has already been through council.

    “We are starting to process your application (1K99XXXXXXX) for potential funding – please submit your Just-In-Time (JIT) Information.”

    • akas said

      Yep – good news. Just got the same from NCI for my K99. This means that funding is very likely. My score was also one point over last years payline. They claimed that this year was going to be 20. I think that was a very conservative estimate. Good luck (and an early congratulations). Time to adjust animal protocols on my end for JIT request.

      • writedit said

        Indeed, good news for you both. Assuming no administrative or regulatory issues arise, you should have award news soon (you want to get the JIT in promptly). Congratulations and best wishes for success with your projects and careers in academic research.

      • HOPE said

        Thank you Writedit for keeping this great website! Really learn a lot from here.

        My score was also one point over last years payline and got similar Email today. Cross my finger and hope it will get funded!

      • Newbie said

        Could you both enlighten us with your impact score?

      • Academic hack said

        Writedit, akas, and Newbie–
        Mine was a 28 as well, and my JIT is already in. Early congrats to you to akas. I will post my timeline, etc about everything if/when I receive the NoGA.

        Writedit–any ideas about when this would all happen, or at least when my status might change to “pending admin review”? I was told by my PO to have my JIT in by the end of the week, if that helps you predict. like I said, JIT is already in–just trying not to burn a hole in my era commons page with my eyeballs the next few weeks. I had totally given up!

      • writedit said

        Depends on the IC, but probably within 2 weeks. It is certainly not instantaneous. I don’t think the Pending administrative review will pop up until the GMS is working on it. It depends on where you are in the queue and how busy the GMS folks are.

      • HOPE said

        Congats to Academic hack and akas! Thank you for sharing your experience! I feel we are on the same ship.

        Newbie, I got a 28 as well! One reviewer had more questions but still positive and the other two reviewers were more positive. But I think the score is voted from 10 SRG members and not only relay on the comments from reviewers.

      • writedit said

        The comments you read in your summary statement reflect (most of) what was presented orally as part of the discussion but are not considered again in calculating the final score (nor are the individual criterion scores). The scoring range is set at the meeting by the assigned reviewers (in your case, this might have been simply 2, 2, and 3 or 2, 3, and 3), after which all members present (those who are in conflict have left the room) assign their score. Only the scores of study section members who stay the entire meeting are used to calculate the overall impact scores (incentive to keep reviewers from leaving early).

    • academic hack said

      OK–so I got an email from the GMS saying the K99 is funded…but have not seen an update with a NoGA on era commons…is this really the official notification that says I am good???? THANKS SO MUCH WRITEDIT!!!!!

      • writedit said

        Congratulations – the GMS would only say that if he/she were in the process of processing your award. Your status might say Pending or Award being prepared in the meantime, but don’t worry about it if not.

      • akas said

        Congrats. Still waiting on mine but need to wait on IACUC approval for the final JIT. Did you have to get animal approval for your grant academic hack?

      • writedit said

        If the proposed research requires IRB, IACUC, or other regulatory approval, the award will not be issued without it. Anyone who needs regulatory approval for their JIT should start the process as soon as they know they have a potentially fundable score. If your JIT is not submitted in a timely manner, there are scores more potential awardees in line behind you.

    • Academic hack said

      akas–I already had IACUC approval from the first submission (the animal experiments did not change at all for the resubmisson). So, when the PO contacted me, the JIT actually was already submitted. You will be fine once you get that JIT in—hopefully IACUC won’t be dragging it’s feet like it seems to at my institution!

      Writedit-I will post my timeline once I get the NoGA.

      Hang in there and keep us posted!

      • HOPE said

        Big congrats! The GMS was so efficient. I am also waiting for mine. I just updated the other support from my co-mentors and uploaded my final JIT last Friday. Hope will get it soon! Also wish akas got the IACUC approval soon!

        I will share my timeline as well!!

    • Academic hack said

      Received my NoGA this morning! Now I can give you all the timeline:

      First submission was Feb 2012.
      Received score of 22 in June 2012.
      Resubmitted Nov 2012.
      Received score of 28 in Feb 2013 (Yes…the score got worse! Devastating!).
      Received NoGA today.

      Basically, keep hope alive! This has been a crazy roller coaster. Glad it is over for now!

      Thanks for all the support Writedit!!! Good luck to everyone else waiting.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations again and thank you so much for posting your timeline details (especially great for all those who worry about what happens if they submit an A1 that scores higher). Best wishes for success with your project and your career in academic research!

      • THINK said

        Just curiously want to know why you couldn’t get funded last year. Based on the payline 27, you were much lower than that. Have you get some reasons from program officer or suggestion to resubmit the A1?

      • THINK said

        Do you think your award this year is based on the score last year or this year?

        Also congratulations for your final award! Thank you for sharing the timeline!

  48. doggeroo said

    Hi writedit,
    I had a question about the timing of the K22 grant and applying for faculty positions.
    I submitted a K22 last summer and scored a 21 and my PO said she is optimistic that it will be funded. I was planning to apply for positions next fall but if I were to get the grant funded this year, my one year of mentored support would expire next fall. Will this affect continued funding of the grant for the remaining 2 years since I would probably not take up a position till sometime in 2015?
    Thank you for your help!

  49. doggeroo said

    Hi Writedit,
    I posted earlier about my K22. Good news! I got the unofficial word from my PO that it was funded!
    My timeline for anyone also in the same position:
    Submitted A0 last June 2012 to NCI
    Scientific review complete in October 2012. Impact score :21
    Council review completed Feb 2013
    Unofficial word from my PO: Today!
    Letter of intent to commit funds is scheduled tentatively for Sept 30th.
    Thanks for your help and good luck to everyone out there.

    • writedit said

      Thanks so much for responding to your own earlier post with this great news and excellent, informative timeline. I assume you mean you will receive your notice of award on Septemeber 30th (last possible day – hopefully you will have the award in hand sooner than that). Congratulations and best wishes for success with your project and your career in academic research!

    • Murli said

      Congratulations and Best wishes. Is it possible to share your K22 proposal with me? I appreciate your help. I am submitting one in two weeks to NCI.


  50. luckyNI said

    I just learned that NCI has selected to fund two of the three aims proposed in my R01 application. The study section had concern with one of the aims, but really liked the other two. Does anyone know how this works? Will they give me the option of having it funded for three years fully or five years at a lower amount? Which is better? I have another R01 that was just funded in April, so if both are funded for five years I guess I would have to renew two grants at the same time. Thanks in advance for any advice that you can provide. I know this is not a question with regards to funding grants/grantsmanship, but hopefully someone can give me some advice (don’t really know who else to ask).

    • writedit said

      They will probably offer you a shorter award (plus the standard budget cut), probably 2-3 years, depending on the aims and nature of the research. I am almost sure you will not be offered any sort of 5-year option, especially since R01s are often routinely limited to 4 y now except for ESI, clinical trials, & some other exceptions. Some ICs offer a one-year R56, which is not renewable, so you would apply for an R01 again. If this was an A0, your only other option (other than what they offer) is to hold out for the A1 being fully funded, but I advise PIs to take the reduced award if there is any question about the A1 (if scored and especially if not yet reviewed).

      • luckyNI said

        Thanks writedit! It was already an A1, so I am sure that it will probably be a 2-3 year award as you suggest. I did have ESI status when I applied for the award, but I don’t think that will impact the length of the award, but I will let you know what they decide.

      • writedit said

        Good luck and thanks for keeping us posted – it will be interesting to see how they handle this for an ESI PI.

      • luckyNI said

        FYI, they are going to give me a five year award with a 1/3 cut for each year ($166K). So I guess my ESI PI status must have factored into their decision

      • writedit said

        Cool beans – thanks for sharing this update. I think you must be correct that the ESI status trumped any cut to the project period, even with the reduction in aims (covered instead by the 1/3 cut). Congratulations on the two awards and best wishes for success with the research – and renewals.

  51. Arnold said

    Does anyone know how many applications were submitted to the recent (2013) 2nd round of Provocative Questions RFA (from the NCI)?

  52. paco said

    My K status on era commons switched to ‘pending administrative review’ which I understand from this site is very good news. This is an application for FY13. I’m changing universities (in a good way) in the near future, likely this September. My inclination is to have the grant awarded now and transfer it later. I can see the potential benefit of asking for NOA to be delayed until I’m at the new place, but I’m worried that I wouldn’t have everything lined up (like IACUC) at the new place by Sept 30th. Do you know if an NOA can be delayed beyond the current fiscal year? If not, I would not want to risk asking for a delayed NOA. Thanks in advance!

  53. paco said

    My K status on era commons switched to ‘pending administrative review’ which I understand from this site is very good news. This is an application for FY13. I’m changing universities (in a good way) in the near future, likely this September. My inclination is to have the grant awarded now and transfer it later. I can see the potential benefit of asking for NOA to be delayed until I’m at the new place, but I’m worried that I wouldn’t have everything lined up (like IACUC) at the new place by Sept 30th. Do you know if an NOA can be delayed beyond the current fiscal year? If not, I would not want to risk asking for a delayed NOA. Thanks in advance!

    • writedit said

      Your award would need to be made by Sept 30, and in such a crazy FY as this, I don’t think your IC would want to delay making the award. I assume everyone knows about your impending move. You can instruct your current university not to activate the award by drawing funds on it, which should make the release to the new institution more straightforward – though you would need IACUC approval at the new institution before the award could be transferred. Your IC will need to approve moving the award to new institution as well (appropriate resources to conduct the proposed project, appropriate & funded mentor committed to your career development), but that does not sound like a problem. You will want to communicate with the PO as soon as you have an idea of the timing. If you change institutions after the award is issued, you will need to use this PA:

      • paco said

        thank you for the suggestions!

  54. Michael Turner said

    I am physician scientist. Submitted a K08 (A1) in November 2012 (NICHD). Got a 20 in March IRG, and was told I will not get funded (I received a letter from PO few weeks ago saying that my grant will not be funded. As we know the payline for Ks is 18. I am dual assigned to NHLBI, whose K payline is 25. The PO at NHLBI also said no, as they do not have funds for secondary assignments. I almost gave up, but today my NICHD PO emailed me and asked me to call him. When I called, he said he has some good news and that they might pick up my application, but no promises and that I should still apply for other grants etc. He also said if I get funded it will be after a few weeks. What do you think are my chances? I am optimistic because why would a PO call if I was not getting funded? I have not yet submitted my JIT documents. Should I do that now, or wait for an email from PO or G<S/ Please advise.


    • writedit said

      This does sound like an instance in which you can be cautiously optimistic, though certainly against all odds. If your project requires any regulatory approval (IRB, IACUC, etc.), be sure you have that in hand now, as well as the rest of the JIT requirements. You will need to submit it ASAP when requested – no need to send it now though.

  55. dim said

    Hello, I received a 6% percentile for a new RO1 (NEI) and got my JIT last week, Thursday. How soon should I expect the note of Award? Shouldn’t that be really fast? Thanks

    • writedit said

      When did you submit your application? If in 2012 (for FY13), you should get your award soon (within 2-3 weeks). If in 2013 for FY14, not until November or December at the earliest.

      • dim said

        2012 for 2013. yes

  56. Jim said

    I am not sure how to react to this but I just received the summary statement of my triaged SBIR application. The first reviewer gave 1s to all categories, and the other two gave 4s and 5s. I am not sure how an application which has one excellent review can be triaged and not left to discussion. I am wondering whether this is a common occurrence or I should complain to somebody.

    • writedit said

      Not too unusual, since 2 of the 3 reviewers would not have ranked it for discussion (SRO uses preliminary priority scores assigned to rank applications for discussion). The primary reviewer could have asked for your application to be discussed anyway, but either he/she did not do so, or they ran out of time. Many, many PIs receive glowing reviews and 1s and 2s and no score, though. Your PO should be able to help you interpret the summary statement and why your application wasn’t discussed – as well as strategy for resubmission.

  57. BKD said

    I submitted an R15 in June 2012 to NIDDK and received a score that is “not typically funded”, but recently I was assigned a GMS (June 2013). I thought the role of the GMS was to administer the award, but I am hesitant to think that the application is in the cue to be funded. Does anyone have any experience with this type of situation or with R15s that get scored but outside of the typical fundable range?

    • writedit said

      If your eRA Commons status for this application changes, then something is happening. In the meantime, just ask your PO if your application is being considered for an award. It could be that yours might be picked up for programmatic interest. If not, and if you have not talked with your PO about this before, you can discuss resubmission (if that application was an A0) or other application strategies.

      • BKD said

        Based on my discussions with my PO I submitted an A1, but the original A0 application is still active with a status “council review completed”. My PO has not gotten back with me regarding the GMS assignment; i am sure that he/she is quite busy. My impression was that if an A1 was submitted it overtook the original application. Is that correct?

      • writedit said

        Both the A0 and the A1 are active and eligible for funding. You will be asked for JIT before the award can be processed. Hopefully your PO will get back to you soon.

  58. akas said

    Does anyone have experience with asking for a restricted NoA at the end of the fiscal year with NCI? I ask because I am waiting for IACUC approval (I would have had it earlier however I was not expecting to get funded based on the payline/score. Our IACUC is pretty particular about not asking for congruency until you are certain). Anyhow, I read that at the end of the fiscal year it is possible to ask for a NoA with restrictions to animal studies. The restriction is removed following IACUC approval. I have sent a mail to the GMS but have not heard back. Figured I’d check here if anyone has experience with this. This is for a K99 BTW.

    • writedit said

      I think you’ll have to wait to hear back from your GMS. Even though the K99 is mostly salary, if all your work is in animals, the question would be what would you do. If you have some in vitro or other bench work you can do, they might be able to give you, say, a 3-month award, and then issue the rest of the year once your IACUC is in (while sequestration was pending, NCI was making 6-month non-competing renewals). You can talk with your PO about this, too. Hopefully you’ll have the IACUC approval before the end of Sept.

  59. I am a behavioral clinical researcher. I just got an impact score of 14 on a R34 proposal. Can I celebrate yet?!? It is a certain thing that I will land this grant, or not? (I know nothing is truly certain in this world.)

    Also, I do not have IRB approval yet – if I submit all my other JIT but my IRB proposal is still under review, what happens at that point?

    Thanks so much for your perspective and advice!

  60. I am a behavioral clinical researcher. I just got an impact score of 14 on a R34 proposal from NIDA. Can I celebrate yet?!? It is a certain thing that I will land this grant, or not? (I know nothing is truly certain in this world.)

    Also, I do not have IRB approval yet – if I submit all my other JIT but my IRB proposal is still under review, what happens at that point?

    Thanks so much for your perspective and advice!

    • writedit said

      First, you won’t need to submit the JIT for a few months, but you will need the IRB approval when you do so (need to have everything in for the award to be processed). You can ask your PO how your score would have fared in FY13 (I do not expect FY14 to be worse). In FY12, NIDA funded 33 of 104 applications, so I assume a score of 14 would have received an award.

      • Thank you for your perspective, and for clarifying the IRB/JIT issue. I too assume that a 14 is a fundable score, but the whole percentiling thing is a mystery. From what I’ve read, it sounds like the impact score is less important than the overall percentile, given that SRGs vary with regard to their propensity to give high or low scores. I don’t know – I’m just praying that I land this one – it would be a key step in my scientific career and enable me to do some truly meaningful work.

      • writedit said

        You might not get a percentile for the R34 (you didn’t mention one – I am not sure there are enough applications). Your PO probably won’t know for several months whether you will be funded (depends on federal budget process), but, again, he or she should be willing to say how your score would have fared this year – and whether you should be working on the A1 for November.

  61. hong said

    Hope all is well with everyone. My NCI resubmitted R03 got a score of 26 (summary statement is not available yet) 7/23/2013. I know that the payline is 25 or less for year 2012. Given current funding climate, I would expect payline could be even less than 25 this year. What a pity. Anyone know 2013 NCI R03 payline? Any possibility to get my R03 funded? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      If you were just scored, then you will be considered for funding in FY14, which may have a better payline than FY13 but probably not worse. We won’t know for months, though. Your PO won’t know about FY14 funding, but he or she might give you an idea of how you would have fared in FY13 with that score. Your PO might have suggestions for what to try next in terms of application strategy, too (after you get your summary statement).

  62. Academic hack said

    So I heard a rumor…

    the rumor is that with all of the budget cuts, the NCI is pretty testy about people who are granted a K99 who want to apply to transition to the R00 phase earlier than a year after being awarded the grant. Of course, it took me about a year and a half after the intial submission to be awarded the grant. Now, my hard work in finding a place to be independent (all the while not ever knowing if the grant will be funded) has generated several leads.

    Writedit or other people listening, do you know if there is any truth to this?

    • writedit said

      I do not know about how the NCI handles early K99 transitions, but most ICs have been flexible for just the reasons you note (anyone competitive for the award would also be competitive as job candidate – and would be looking during the year+ between submission and potential award). Hopefully someone in the know will respond, and I’ll see if I can find anything out.

    • akas said

      Have you had any luck finding out about this? I am in the same position and currently dealing with the institute that I am supposed to start at in November. Of course they are willing to work with me but I’d still like to start in November if possible.

      • writedit said

        I asked at the NIH level, and this decision is left up to each IC. Now, I assume your award has still not been issued, so you would be looking at ~2 months on the K99. I also assume your new position is not contingent on your bringing an award (since you secured it before you knew what would happen with the K99/R00). Since you would have to terminate the K99 portion so quickly after receiving the NoA, your PO will know you were aware of the position at the time of the award, so my advice would be to talk with the PO now. Depending on the nature of the position and your appointment, you might be able to complete the K99 year (or an acceptable portion of it) at the new institute. If not, the PO may be willing to work with you, given the extended time lag between when you first applied and when a funding decision was finally made (or impending), since K99 early termination is allowed in “unusual circumstances”. My point is, you will want to go back to NCI for funding again, and you do not want your first interaction with them to be one in which you fail to disclose facts that you know to be pertinent. You can ask your mentor – and any colleagues with whom you have a good relationship at the new institute – for advice in this regard, too, especially if any of them know the PO involved or have had experience with other postdocs securing K99s. It seems that you would have been in danger of falling through the cracks if you had waited but not received the K99 (if there were no other lab funding to support you) and had not proactively looked for jobs in the interim, which I think the PO should recognize as circumstances not under your control.

      • Academic hack said

        I totally agree with Writedit…

        I spoke with someone at the NCI (higher up than my PO), and I was told that there are plans to place a mandatory 1 year requirement on the K99 phase (you must complete one year of K99 before you transition) in the coming year. But I was also told that they would still be accepting applications to transition early until then.

      • writedit said

        Yes, the mandatory 1 year on the K99 will coincide with the new requirement starting next Feb that applicants be within 4 (vs 5) years of their terminal degree. Hope folks are aware of this change to the program (

  63. GotHope said

    Would the recalibration of scores at CSR SRGs lead to fewer grants with identical scores at the lower percentiles? If so, would this then lead to somewhat high paylines assuming the FY14 NIH budget remains flat or, better yet, slightly above FY13?

    • writedit said

      The recalibration won’t affect paylines at all. Hopefully the House and Senate will get together on a budget that is closer to the Senate version, in which case paylines would go up a bit (somewhere between FY12 & FY13 paylines). We won’t know this for months, though.

  64. grantwriter said

    Hi writedit,
    My F30 application for NHLBI went to study section on 7/23 — the status date changed on 7/26 but no score is posted yet on era commons…is this something to be worried about?

    • writedit said

      No – a little slow, but the SRO probably worked on getting the R01 and other RPG scores up first. If nothing shows up next week, you could check in with the SRO.

    • effthirtee said

      I’m in the same boat. My application is a resubmission, and I got a decent priority score last time (20), but well away from the paylines for F30s (15). I only have a year left in grad school, so I thought maybe NHLBI triaged my application. Hopefully they update next week.

    • effthirtee said

      I just got back my score on eRA commons even though the date wasn’t updated. I got the exact same score for my resubmission. At least they’re consistent.

      • writedit said

        Hopefully the FY14 payline will get back up to 20.

  65. Academic hack said

    In response to the questions from THINK:

    Basically, the question is why did I resubmit after I got a 22, and the previous years payline was 27. Great question. First of all, pretty much everyone who was a faculty member with mucho experience writing grants told me to resubmit. Other successfull K99ers also told me to resubmit as well. Most of this advice came in light of the fact that sequestration was looming, and the comments were all easily adressible. Also, I can tell you if you get a summary statment that says “we love everything about your proposal except these minor things” you, as a motivated person want to fix it. Also, I had three program officers during the course of my intial submission and resubmission. None of them could tell me if I should resubmit or not—because they had no budgetary information to work from. They had no idea what the payline was going to be. As a side note, the payline for these grants is supposed to be 20 this year (although mine with a 28 got funded, as apparently are others…). So if I did not resubmit with a 22, and the payline really was 20—that would have been terrible.

    Bottom line–in normal years you would not resubmit, because your PO would have been able to tell you your chance of getting funded. But in FY2013, no one knew the budget situation, so I had to resubmit.

    I don’t know how much the first score factored in to the decision to fund, but the 28 score is the one that got funded. My guess is the first score did not hurt, but my area may have also been a programatic priority. I have no clue! Hope this answers all your questions.

    • writedit said

      Thanks very much for your detailed history, Academic hack. Really helpful for folks here, especially your resubmission history (for those who are told a higher A1 score will sink them – I know of many cases such as yours, and others have posted here, too). I have not heard back about the issue of shortening the K99 award for an early transition to the R00, but especially since you applied twice and had to wait so long, I would hope the NCI will be flexible.

  66. THINK said

    Thank you so much for your detailed information! I really appreciate your time and input! Hope you will have a very successful academic career!

  67. Academic hack said

    I am happy to give back writedit–your website has been a great source of information over the past two years or so. In keeping with that spirit, I spoke with someone at the NCI (higher up than my PO), and I was told that there are plans to place a mandatory 1 year requirement on the K99 phase (you must complete one year of K99 before you transition) in the coming year. But I was also told that they would still be accepting applications to transition early until then. Got to get these negotiations wrappped up!

    • writedit said

      Great – thanks for this update, too. (I had asked the NIH training officer.) I am glad to hear they will remain flexible for this last year or so of transition. The K99 eligibility criteria have been changed so that applicants must be within 4 years of their doctorate, and in this case, a mandatory 1-year mentored period would not be unreasonable. But for someone who was 5 years out when they applied and closer to 7 years out when the award finally looked certain … Anyway, congratulations again and best of luck with those negotiations.

  68. jason said

    Dear Writedit,
    I has been over a year since my F32 NCI submission (April 2012). Would you please give me some feedback on how to interpret this email?

    “We are in the process of reviewing the above referenced application (1F32 – 01) for possible funding by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). NCI wishes to proceed with reviewing the original application for possible funding as it received a better score than the amended application (1F32 – 01A1).
    Please let me know by the close of business, Friday, July 26th, if Dr. Jason is still eligible and interested in receiving this award and if the University is interested in accepting the offer of this F32 NRSA fellowship award”

    In your experience, does an email of this language suggest a very high likelihood of funding?


  69. writedit said

    Yes, NCI is considering funding your A0 application (not whatever changes you made for the A1) – they would not take the time to send this inquiry if they were not going to make an award (assuming no administrative bars exist). Due to the length of time since the application, they are just checking to be sure you are still there & will remain there for the time needed to complete your project & training (i.e., you have not accepted a faculty or other appointment in the meantime or left academics). You & your institution want to say “yes” ASAP, and if you need IACUC or other approval, you need to secure that ASAP as well. You should also check in with the PO to see if he/she needs anything else.

    • jason said

      Thank you very much for the quick response!! Huge weight off my shoulders. Keep up the wonderful work here!
      - Jason

  70. Z PI said

    Does anyone have any experience with TRND? I am looking for advice on submitting an application, and would appreciate any input.


    • writedit said

      Hopefully someone who has applied (I have not been involved with any proposals to date) will post their experience, but in the meantime, you can use the main TDRN email to make initial contact with a scientist in the program (you will need to make contact as part of the pre-application screening process anyway). Your regular PO might know a good program contact as well and might have his/her own advice on application strategy. If you have previously communicated with anyone at ORDR, they might have some advice as well.

  71. wondering said

    My non-competitive renewal RO1 funding has ~6% cut this year. Is this normal?

  72. Lisa said

    I have been trying to find this information, but have not had any luck thus far. What is the FY2013 payline for K01 grant applications?

    • writedit said

      Which IC? You can check with your PO by now about funding likelihood. Now, if you submitted in 2013, you will actually fall under FY14 paylines, which will not be known for months still.

      • Lisa said


  73. R01waiting said

    Hi Writedit. At the beginning of this July, my PO told me that my NCI R01 has been approved by SPL for funding and the PO also mentioned that all grants have to be issued by the end of this July. However until now (the last day of the July) I did not receive any award information. I checked my NIH commons the status is still council review completed and no name of grant management specialist is there as well. I tried to contract my PO several days ago, unfortunately, my PO is on the vacation and could not reached at this moment. Do you have any suggestions for me?

    • writedit said

      He probably meant to say the last day of September, which is when FY13 ends. NCI will be making awards up through September, so don’t worry about not having your notice yet (or GMS). The ERA status won’t change until a GMS starts working on processing the award. I suspect NCI is especially far behind with grants management due to the manner in which they handled noncompeting renewals prior to sequestration (6-month awards, which now need to be issued again to cover the rest of the year). But, you don’t need to worry about the lack of activity yet. Congratulations on the award and best wishes for success with the research.

    • Jane said

      Did you see the name of “grant management officer” under the contact list on your NIH commons. If you do, it would be a good sign for a grant in NCI. You may contact him/her instead. Good luck.

      • R01waiting said

        Thanks all for the reply. No such name is there so I have to wait.

    • newPI said

      Have you received NoA?

  74. keepinghopealive said

    Hi writedit,

    I’ve been lurking on here on and off for awhile now, just trying to understand how this process works as I go through some of it myself and you are super helpful. Just had one question.

    I submitted my F31 A0 to NINDS last year (Aug ’12) and received a score of 30. My PO said it was in the grey area for funding, but I was not funded. I submitted my A1 this year (May ’13) and received a score of 29 (late June). I have talked to my PO and sent him a response to the critiques (2 weeks ago), as he requested, and he told me he would do what he could. I just received a JIT email from my GMS requesting some information. Is this good news or is it just an automated email sent to everyone who gets under a certain score? I didn’t receive one for my A0 so I was just curious.

    Thanks for the help and keep up the good work!

    • writedit said

      If you are getting a JIT request now (vs closer to the Oct Council meeting), it sounds like they might fund your A0. Has the status of either application changed on eRA Commons? You can ask the GMS if the request is for the A0 or the A1.

      • keepinghopealive said

        Thanks for the reply writedit.

        The JIT request email specifically named the A1 application and my PO told me that they were not funding the A0 after the last meeting. Both statuses read “SRG review completed”.

      • keepinghopealive said

        And I forgot to add that the advisory council meeting date is set for Sept 12, if that makes a difference.

      • writedit said

        Aha – the timing makes sense then. They will want to get Council approval for your application, but funding decisions will be a long way off still, since we have no idea what the FY14 budget will look like. The hope is that FY14 will be closer to FY12 than FY13 in terms of appropriation levels, so if a score of 30 was in the gray zone for FY13, a score of 29 would hopefully be fundable in FY14. But, again, we’ll have to see what happens between the House and Senate bills. So, this is good news, but nothing to get too excited about yet.

  75. akas said

    Update on time line for K99 from NCI
    10/11/12 – Submitted Application
    02/13/13 – Scientific Review Group (Score 28)
    06/19/13 – Email correspondence with PO (indicated payline is 20 for FY 2013; however likelihood for funding is moderate to good)
    07/01/13 – Council Review
    07/08/13 – Email from PO requesting JIT info (due to IACUC major time constraints on my end)
    07/16/13 – GMS contacted me question when IACUC approval will be in. A few rounds of emails with GMS
    08/07/13 – Submitted JIT with IACUC approval
    08/08/13 – Award processed and released to Yale for August funding per GMS (note – no update in era commons, yet)

    • writedit said

      Woohoo and congratulations again. Thank you so much for all you have shared along the way, especially this summary timeline. We often receive awards before the eRA Commons status changes, so thanks for the concrete data point for everyone here that the Commons application status can lag behind reality … also your IACUC experience for JIT. In these times of last-minute funding decisions (especially Cycle III), institutions are going to have to accommodate PIs who have been told to be “cautiously optimistic” versus promised an award in terms of being willing to start regulatory approvals sooner.

  76. Academic Hack said

    Hey writedit I am getting weird update emails from your blog…any idea whats going on?

    And congrats to Akas!

    • writedit said

      Sometimes spam slips through the WordPress filter, and they are distributed to anyone who subscribes to this page. I delete these as fast as I discover them, though not always right away – but it also explains why you might look for but not find these odd comments on the NIH Paylines & Resources page.

  77. akas said

    Hello Writedit,
    I am asking a question for a colleague. Do you know if you can submit an application for for a K99 and F32 at the same time? Obviously if both are awarded only one can be accepted. Just curious since the K99 would be nicer but any funding would be good. He is a 4th yr postdoc that just transitioned to our lab to get some more training. Thanks!

    • writedit said

      I assume you mean roughly the same project for each application, in which case the answer is no. NIH Grants Policy prohibits any PI from submitting more than one similar application with the same research focus at the same time (which is why you cannot submit the same project as an R01 and an R21 simultaneously – sequentially, sure, assuming the first mechanism was not awarded). There are two exceptions (projects for K02 and P01/P50 applications can be simultaneously submitted as stand-alone independent RPGs … the IC then decides which to fund, never both) The policy is here:

      Please note also that the eligibility criteria for the K99 have changed (starting Feb 2014) to shorten the application time frame from 5 to 4 years of postdoctoral training (see

  78. Gianluca said

    Dear writeedit,

    Thank you very much for all your help with this website. I was awarded my K25 fellowship with start date August 2, 2013. I need to ask a question about the time line for subsequent years. For the first year, we requested the salary of a research scientist and for years 2 to 5 the salary of an assistant professor. This is because I am currently hired as a research scientist but the department plans to promote me to research assistant professor during the first year of my K25 fellowship. We now need to find out what the best time line is to process the promotion from research scientist to faculty since in our department this involves review by a panel and takes 3-4 months. I see that I need to submit a progress report by mid May 2014. Would it be a good idea to hold the faculty position before the report is due (even if officially the position would start Aug 1st, 2014) or can I update my change in position any time before Aug 1st? When does NHI make the decision whether to fund year 2 or not (report due May, 2014, second year starts August 2014)? They will probably need to be sure that I will be holding the faculty position for the second year and beyond before approving the budget with the higher salary.

    I would like to thank you in advance for your precious advice!

    • writedit said

      First, years 2-5 of your award will be non-competing renewals. There would only be consideration of suspending your award if you did not comply with the terms of your award (or did something illegal with the funds), but I expect you are working on your research and training, so this won’t be an issue. You would want the promotion complete in time for your progress report, and I am not sure why they would not just start the process now. If your university promoted you early, you might be able to adjust some of the award to cover your higher salary sooner, depending on if you had any unspent funds (you can ask the Grants Management Specialist at the NIH). Even if the award allocation could not be adjusted to cover your salary and benefits, I would hope the university would be willing to make that much of an investment in you for a few months, although they could also schedule the appointment to start August 1, too. Does your mentor have any funding to cover the extra salary/benefits, if money is the university’s concern in not promoting you sooner?

      • Gianluca said

        Thanks for your reply. It is my understanding that as long as I am funded by the K25 I am not allowed to draw salary from any other federal grant. I had to make an explicit statement that I would not draw salary from my mentor’s federal grants where I am listed as key personnel. So, the extra salary would have to come from state funding, I guess, and we don’t have any. This is why we are trying to stick to the schedule, but we might be able to rebudget some of the K25 award.

  79. barely sane said

    Dear Writedit,

    Thank you for maintaining this wonderful website. It was essential to my coping mechanism for the past year, which was a hell of an emotional rollercoaster ride. Here is my timeline for K99 that was awarded by NHLBI:

    06/11/2012 Application entered into system

    06/15/2012 Scientific Review Group review pending.

    10/19/2012 Scientific Review Group review completed: score 22

    02/19/2013 Council review completed.

    07/01/2013 Pending administrative review.

    07/28/2013 Award prepared

    It took almost a month after a change in my commons status and the award being prepared. It also took about a little over a week getting the NGA after submitting the final JIT.

    Good luck to everyone and thanks again for the site!

    • writedit said

      Woohoo! Congratulations and thank you so much for recapping your entire roller coaster ride here. As I keep saying, you all make the site as useful as it is. Best wishes for success with the project and your career in biomedical research!

  80. waiting... said

    hi writedit,

    for grants that are not funded, are you supposed to receive some type of “not funded” notification?

    i applied for a k01 july 2012, the src reviewed and scored it (31) in october 2012, the ac met feb 2013. i did receive jit email request back in october. the score is above payline so i think it is not likely to be funded, but i have not heard back either way. multiple attempts to contact the PO for confirmation has been unsuccessful. i would like to resubmit or possibly submit as new under another activity code. but my question is, do i need to have an official rejection letter of the original submission before i can do this?

    • writedit said

      No, you will not receive official notification that your application will not receive an award, and your eRA Commons status will not change until the application is administratively withdrawn, which won’t happen for more than a year. You can absolutely submit an A1 of the K01, if you have not yet (could have done so as soon as Nov 2012 or March 2013). If that was your A1 application or if you prefer to move on to a research project vs career development, you could repackage the research as an R21 or R01 for submission in October 2013 (which is after the Sept 30th conclusion to FY13).

  81. MFS said

    My Phase-I SBIR application scored was scored at 36. I was wondering about the pay lines for NIMH and NINDS?

    • writedit said

      The paylines for FY14 will not be known for a few to several months yet. When you see news that Congress has passed a budget for FY14 (and the President has signed it into law), then you can check with your PO. If this was your initial submission, when you get your summary statement, you should communicate with the PO at the primary IC (NIMH or NINDS) about strategies for resubmission. Your score is probably a little high, and you will want to submit an A1 if you can. You don’t want to wait until you know if the A0 will receive an award (both the A0 and A1 will be considered for funding, so don’t worry about the A0 being withdrawn if you submit an A1).

      • MFS said

        Thank you Wriedit. This was a A1application.

      • writedit said

        Aha. Then you should be thinking about other proposals while waiting for the federal budget to be passed. You could also talk with the PO (once you have your summary statement) about modifications to the project that might make it qualify as new, but I suspect this is more difficult with SBIR applications.

  82. HOPE said

    Just got email from GMS, update my time line for K99 from NCI to share with other folks:

    02/09/12 – Submitted Application
    06/12/12 – Scientific Review Group (Score 31)
    11/07/12 – Resubmitted Application
    02/13/13 – Scientific Review Group (Score 28)
    06/27/13 – Email correspondence with PO (indicated payline is 20 for FY 2013; however likelihood for funding is moderate to good)
    07/01/13 – Council Review
    07/08/13 – Email from PO requesting JIT info
    07/12/13 – Submitted JIT
    08/15/13 – Got Email from GMS: planning on making an award on the date requested

    Thanks again for this great site and writedit’s help!

    • writedit said

      Woohoo! Congratulations and thank you for posting your detailed timeline and great outcome after 18+ months of perseverance. Best wishes for success with your project and your career in biomedical research!

      • john said

        After the council review was completed for my K99, I got request for JIT, but my PO said grant not fundable. Then, a few weeks back the PO said that could be funded and requested JIT again, which I submitted. Does anyone here know what are the chances of the grant being funded in such a case?

        Side question – I see reference to A0 and A1 on this blog – what are those referring to?

        Thanks for keeping up this awesome resource.

    • john said

      After the council review was completed for my K99, I got request for JIT, but my PO said grant not fundable. Then, a few weeks back the PO said that could be funded and requested JIT again, which I submitted. Does anyone here know what are the chances of the grant being funded in such a case?

      Side question – I see reference to A0 and A1 on this blog – what are those referring to?

      Thanks for keeping up this awesome resource.

      • writedit said

        An A0 application is the first/initial submission of an application. The A1 is the first amended version of the same application (i.e., the resubmission). When you see a grant ID number, you will see something like K99CA8675309-01A1 if the application funded was the amended application; otherwise, the ID number stops at -01. When the NIH accepted two amendments, you would see applications with an A2 suffix.

        In your case, the Institute is figuring out how much money it has left as it makes awards. They get Council approval for all the applications that have a chance at receiving an award (hence the need for JIT then) … now that they have gotten to your application on the list and still have money left, they want to check the JIT again to be sure you don’t have other funding in the meantime and that you have all the necessary approvals ready. If your PO asked for the JIT again, you are likely to get funded … it could be enough other K99s on the list ahead of you (i.e., better scores) became ineligible in the intervening months since they had their application reviewed because the PI got a faculty job, received other funding, etc.

  83. Secondaire said

    Hi Writedit. Your blog is terrific! Perhaps you can offer a newbie like me some advice! I submitted my F32 for the April 8th deadline, and about a month ago received an impact score of 17 (via NIGMS). I spoke to my program officer and he says to be optimistic, but that budgets are late and that I won’t know anything until early November. Presumably my application will go for council review now (PO says historically a 17 would be funded without any questions), but my eRA commons status has been stuck at “SRG review completed” for >30 days. Will this status change at some point prior to council review (9/13?) Am I being paranoid? Also, has anyone heard anything about whether or not the FY14 budgets for GMS look anything like FY13?

    • writedit said

      Your PO might be optimistic to think the federal budget for FY14 will be passed by early November, but maybe at that point, NIGMS will know what scores can be assured awards based on the continuing resolution (CR), which should just extend FY13 levels. Your eRA Commons status won’t change again until after Council meets, unless your application is approved to be considered for funding before that (Fs don’t go to Council). Unfortunately, this is a period of hurry up and wait, so do not be paranoid at all about the radio silence. No one at NIGMS knows what the funding levels will be like, and they won’t for months yet. If your PO did not advise getting an A1 application ready, then you just need to wait for Congress to act on the appropriations bills. While you’re waiting, you could send your Congressional delegation a reminder of how important federal funding of the NIH is to the economy, public health, and their constituents (everyone at your university, for example).

      • Secondaire said

        My PO was optimistic about my chances of getting funded, and he thought getting an A1 ready would be a waste of time with a 17. Fs don’t go to council? He said they did, unless I am getting confused somehow. Time to sit on my hands. As you can tell, I’m incredibly clueless about this whole process still! :) Thanks for the quick reply!

      • writedit said

        Great news about your PO (& I agree it would be tough to lower the score further). Like everything else, where Fs undergo their second level of review varies by IC … and Council no doubt likely still concurs with the list of F applications to be considered for funding. If your PO thought you would know by November, it could be they only need to wait for the CR before acting. No matter what, though, don’t worry about your eRA Commons status (if you look back at others who have posted here, often they have their award before their eRA Commons status changes – status often lags behind actual activity). Information from your PO (and later your GMS) will be much more relevant and timely … but still a few months away. Hang in there, knowing that good news awaits in your case.

      • Secondaire said

        Thanks for your optimism! I had no idea how eRA commons statuses work. Sounds like they are indeed just waiting for the CR. I’ll call my PO again in about a month and see if there are any new updates.

      • writedit said

        FY14 does not start until Oct 1, which is when the first CR will start. The NIH will be busy closing out FY13 until mid-Oct, so there won’t be any FY14 activity until Nov at least. You should wait until later in Oct to check with your PO.

  84. Arnold said

    Does anyone know how many applications were submitted to the recent (2013) 2nd round of Provocative Questions RFA (from the NCI)? I heard it was many fewer than the first time.

    • writedit said

      I do not know. I would be interested in the distribution of applications among the announcements, since they broke up the questions into different groups and mechanisms this cycle (vs one R01 and one R21 announcement last time).

    • Jane said

      around 400, based on my PO…

      • writedit said

        Great – thanks so much for sharing what you learned.

      • Arnold said

        Thanks, Jane. Good luck!

  85. Cautiously Optimistic said

    I’m curious if there is a rationale behind the single award limitation for the R15 mechanism. The way I understand it is that an investigator can have a single current R15 and no other project funding from the NIH. Is this an accurate definition?

    • writedit said

      You cannot be the PI on another NIH research grant (including another R15), but you can receive support (as senior/key personnel) from an award held by another PI. If your question is about overlap with support from a career development award, I assume timing and percent effort come into play, but that would be a question for your PO (specific to your situation). As to the rationale, I assume the RPG award restriction is to prevent the mechanism from being abused.

    • some other guy said

      Writedit and all— thanks for your responses. These are very helpful to me as a junior investigator.

      I am also interested in the R15 question since it seems that there are multiple ways to interpret the guidance provided on the NIH website. The website states:

      “The PD(s)/PI(s) may not be the PD(s)/PI(s) of any active NIH research grant, including another AREA grant, at the time of an AREA award (although he or she may be one of the project personnel for an active NIH grant held by another PD(s)/PI(s)).
      The PD(s)/PI(s) may not be awarded more than one AREA grant at a time (although he or she may hold successive new or renewal AREA grants). ”

      So, if I receive a R15 award, am I prohibited from applying for FUTURE NIH research grants (e.g. R01, R21) as a PI? That is, can you apply as a PI for these grants while you have an active R15? My confusion is in the interpretation of “at the time of an AREA award”. Does this mean when it initiates OR as long as it is funding your salary? The latter seems less likely since these are essentially bridge awards.

      One other query-
      If one receives a R15 and you are allowed to apply for a R21, does the active R21 disqualify you from renewing the R15?

      I hope this makes sense. Thanks in advance!

      • writedit said

        You should talk with your PO, but my interpretation is that you can apply for other RPG funding while you have the R15, but if you (as PI) receive another award (e.g., R21), you would not be able to renew the R15. The R15 is a small project award, not bridge funding (see R56), and it is intended to help PIs who would not be competitive for other RPG mechanisms secure research funding. Once the PI can compete for other RPG funding (such as through the acquisition of preliminary data using R15 support), the R15 is no longer relevant, nor would it make sense to allow PIs to hold multiple awards including an R15. Some institutions do not have the facilities & resources to support larger research projects, so PIs there might only ever be competitive for R15s (hence the eligibility of renewal/successive R15 awards).

  86. NewbiePI said

    Hi Writedit and all,

    I have an R00 and a great postdoc joining the lab soon. It was suggested to me by a ‘wise one’ that the new postdoc apply for an F32. My question is how closely related should the F32 be to my R00 – in an ideal world that is?

    • writedit said

      If your postdoc is eligible for an F32 (citzen/non-citizen national/permanent resident), he or she certainly should apply early in the project period (great for both of you if awarded). You will want to check the F32 rules for the target IC and talk with the PO about the project (see the IC instructions/contacts list in the F32 announcement), but since you are the sponsor, the research will necessarily be related to your work. Ideally, the F32 project itself would evolve into something the postdoc can take with him/her or convert to their own K99/R00. Now, since you have an R00, I assume you do not have much of a training record (ie, grad students who defended, postdocs who secured their own appointments, etc.), so you may want to identify a co-sponsor who does have an established mentoring track record and who conducts research in the area being pursued by your postdoc. It would also be good if you could publish something with this postdoc before the application is reviewed.

  87. Kian said

    Thank you for posting the current year paylines. Do you happen to have an archive of previous years SBIR/STTR paylines that we can access?

    Thanks again

    • writedit said

      Unfortunately, I have not been saving past year payline information, though some of the ICs that post paylines do make available prior year listings. I archive and make available all comments and discussions on separate pages, so you can search those to see if anyone posted information about SBIR/STTR paylines for a specific IC in the past (often blog readers post their funded score or the payline quoted by their PO but not published officially by the IC).

  88. F30 writer said

    Hi writedit,

    I submitted an F30 application last spring (April 8th deadline). I got my priority score a few weeks ago and it is below the 2013 payline. Should I be concerned that I haven’t heard re: funding status? Or should I just sit tight until after the advisory council meeting 10/2013? I was under the impression that I would get a JIT request.


    • writedit said

      You have nothing to be concerned about – I would not expect them to ask about JIT for FY14 awards until after they close out FY13. They will not know the FY14 budget for a few months, but if you are below the FY13 payline, you should be fine.

  89. Hi writedit (and all),

    In July I received an impact score of 14 on a R34 proposal to NIDA. Last week my PO asked me to respond to several criticisms prior to the final council meeting. She then told me that they are trying to get the proposal funded and it looks positive. I just saw my eRA commons status changed to: “Award prepared; refer questions to Grants Management Specialist.” Does that mean that my proposal has been funded and I will be receiving the NOA soon?


    • writedit said

      Congratulations – yes, you will receive your award notice soon (definitely before the end of the month). Best wishes for success with preparing for & conducting the trial.

      • Dear Writedit,

        Thanks so much for your guidance and this amazing site! I wanted to contribute to the ongoing database on timelines for the NIH process:

        1. Submitted grant 4/24/13
        2. Scientific review 7/17/13
        3. Scored 7/19/13 (impact score 14)
        4. Asked to respond to several criticisms by PO, 8/29/13
        5. Final Council 9/2/13
        6. Award prepared 9/3/13
        7. Notice of award 9/9/13


      • writedit said

        Congratulations and thank you so much for sharing your detailed timeline! Others here maybe interested in the funding mechanism and IC. Best wishes for success with the project and your careering biomedical research.

      • Funding mechanism: R34.
        IC: NIDA.

        Thanks again and good luck everyone with your grantsmanship in these lean times!

  90. jmanuel said

    Hello writedit et al,

    I’m new to this blog/resource and am glad I found it. I received a score of 13 on resubmission of a K01 proposal to NIDA. Council met on Wednesday, and before the meeting my PO said that he would be in touch soon. I noticed there was a status update on 9/5/13, but I don’t see any changes other than Council Review Completed. How long after Council does it usually take to find out whether a proposal is funded?

    Also, just a quick question about era commons, what does it mean if you have an FSR accepted code as N. I received this on the first submission and resubmission, and now I’m worried I might not get funded. Thanks so for any advice you might. have.

    • jmanuel said

      Heard from PO late yesterday that my K01 will be reviewed for funding at the next Council meeting.

    • writedit said

      Not to worry about the FSR status (financial reporting). Also not to worry (probably) about the delay in Council consideration. Congress will not have any news on the budget for months still, so only applications that definitely would have been funded in FY13 are probably being considered at Councils this cycle. Now, I would have thought a K01 with a score of 13 would fall in that category, but most of the NIH pushed the majority of funding decisions to the ~February Council last year, and I expect the general pattern will hold for FY14 (hopefully the federal budget – and funding decisions – will be available a little earlier). In the meantime, you could ask your PO whether you should be considering an RPG application in the meantime (if not for October then for Feb).

      • jmanuel said

        Good news–heard from the NIDA grants management specialist that the NGA for my K01 will likely arrive in the next week with a May 1st start date. Other good news is that I landed a great opportunity at another university, so I’ll be working on transferring the grant over the summer. MY PO is supportive of the move–part of my mentoring team is at this university and the school has a strong research infrastructure–but I’m expecting a lengthy transfer process based on a colleague’s experience. I’m planning to get an early start on the process.

        Thanks for hosting this blog. It’s a great resource, and I’ve really appreciated the advice.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations and best wishes for success with your project and career in academic research! Did your PO suggest delaying the NGA until you move? If this is not possible, you can ask your current institution not to activate the award (by drawing on the funds), especially if you will be too busy with the move to do any work toward the K01 project. On the other hand, if you need the funds now and will start the research, starting the award where you are and moving will certainly work, too.

      • jmanuel said

        Thanks, writedit. I did look into the possibility of re-routing the grant, but my PO said it wasn’t possible since the NGA was already in progress.

  91. YMKP said

    My SBIR was scored in the grey zone. Just received a request letter from NIH through the email, and stated “It has been brought to our attention that the above referenced proposal which is being considered for funding involves the use of animals. Accordingly, it will be necessary for you to complete and submit an Animal Welfare Assurance of Compliance (Assurance) with the revised Public Health Service (PHS) Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (Policy) as soon as possible”. What is the chance of getting funded?

    • writedit said

      This request has nothing to do with your funding likelihood. It means you must obtain an animal welfare assurance number from PHS before you can be considered for an award. Your proposal will not go to Council without this, and it will take some time to secure the assurance number, so you should start the process as soon as possible (check this link at OLAW if you have not already:

  92. Sixyrpd said

    Hi all,
    I am a senior postdoc K99 just missed the pay line (IS: 19) and I cannot revise because I am into >5 yrs of postdoc. With that score I and few papers, I got two interviews. In both cases they “liked me very much” and told me to wait if negotiations with their first choice breaks down. Unfortunately it didn’t .
    So under these circumstances I was wondering what are the grant options? Are there any bridge grants which a senior postdoc at 6 years can apply? Any help would be highly appreciated. I am still sticking to academia for one more year…..just wanted to make sure that the system is not as broken as I have been led to believe.

    • applicant said

      Sorry to hear about that. And with such a good score too….
      I think K01 grants are also career transition grants, and they do not have eligibility time limits. You may have to check with specific IC’s though. Good luck!

      • Sixyrpd said

        Thanks applicant! I have started looking at Ko1s. Seems like that is the only viable option. The eligibility criteria varies greatly among institutes. Once I decide on an inst. I will come up with more specific questions….and as usual I will be searching this forum with keyword K01 now. Thanks writedit for maintaining this awesome blog.

    • BSIM said

      If your work is cancer related, NCI K22 can be an option (8 year eligibility limit) although they don’t fund as many as they use to anymore.

      • Sixyrpd said

        Thanks BSIM! But I think I will go with K01. Looks like NIA could be an appropriate IC.

    • writedit said

      You don’t mention to which IC you sent your K99/R00, but that PO should be willing to help guide you with your next grant application. A few ICs use the K22 as a career transition award, though not NIA. You will want to communicate with the NIA career development PO for the K01 mechanism (ditto for any IC you might target – both because communicating with POs is almost always helpful and especially for K awards since most are still reviewed by IC-specific review groups vs CSR). I assume you meet the citizenship/residency requirements for non-K99 career development applicants. If the science is really good and you have some publications, you might consider an RPG application as well.

      • Sixyrpd said

        Hi Writedit,
        Thanks so much ! It was NIAID. I did not know that I could bug my PO for future grants . That is nice to know. I think I have passed the deadline for K22 eligibility and it seems like the only option I am left with that is K01 through NIA. NIAID’s K01s are very specific fields none of which I am remotely close to work on. I will be changing my field of research learn new things extending my previous experience and publications from my current research..all this fits with the K01 mechanism. I will contact someone at NIA for the K01 soon.
        Thanks again for the help.

  93. non believer said


  94. R00 transition said

    Hi, I am currently writing my R00 transition proposal from the K99, which requires me to detail the budget. Considering the university takes so much through indirects, it would be nice to put as much of the expensive equipment like physiology rigs or 2-photon microscopes on the R00 so you can recover indirects.
    However, I have heard from people that the NIH frowns upon R00 budgets that are equipment-heavy because that is not how normal R01 budgets are typically distributed.
    Does anyone have any experience with this? How much of the R00 budget can be dedicated to equipment (as opposed to salary, for example)?

    • NewbiePI said

      I am also interested in the answer to this question.

  95. akas said

    My self and a colleague submitted ours with roughly $125,000 in equipment in year #1 (justified at the bottom that the equipment was necessary for the proposed studies) and an anticipated equipment budget of $100,000 in year two and year three stating that as the lab expanded additional equipment (scopes, freezers, etc) would be required. No problems with NCI or with NIA when the budget had this much equipment. Not sure about other institutes or if the equipment budget is higher.

    • madness007 said

      I’m in the same boat too – just to clarify as I work on my R00 budget – I guess I’m confused – I thought that your entire budget would be subject to your institution’s indirect cost F/A rate – so why would it matter what you budget for equipment vs. salary? I was operating under the assumption that I would be losing over half of my $250K per year no matter what I budgeted, am I wrong?

      • writedit said

        Now, different universities have different bases for the calculation of indirect costs. I do not think there are ever indirect costs generated through equipment requests in the budget, but not all applicant institutions include everything but equipment. If you do a lot of genomic work, the cost of all those chips no longer is regarded as a supply capable of generating indirect costs, either. Your institution (university) should have a Website indicating on how indirect costs are calculated – and what your institution’s F&A (indirect costs) rate is. For major research institutions, it is generally 50% or higher … and it can be much, much higher at some places (e.g., closer to 90% of the direct costs), but lower than 50% at others.

      • Jane said

        if your institute has rebudgetary authority, you should use your R01 to purchase equipment. Talking to senior colleagues in your department.

      • writedit said

        Yes, R01s should certainly be used for equipment purchases. The issue here was an R00, which is limited to $249K in total (direct + indirect) costs, in which case equipment purchases are nice for the R00 PI, because they (equipment purchases) do not generate indirects (& therefore do not eat into the $249K cap), but may not be as acceptable to some ICs (which might expect to see institutional investment) or, for that matter, universities, who want indirects & want their PIs to cover their salaries with grant funding. The PO can give advice from the IC perspective, mentor (& department grant administrator) from the university perspective.

    • akas said

      Also, because I just went through this….
      The RFP states that you must have 75% effort. This should not be confused with having to cover 75% of your salary. The institute that you are going to should agree to cost share your salary since they most likely detailed that your salary would be covered in the offer letter. Don’t let the institute try to have you pay a substantial portion of your salary from the R00. That is not what the award is intended for. In fact as little as 0% salary can be in the budget, which was what I did for year #1. In year 2 and 3 I proposed to cover my summer salary. I added a technicians salary for years 1-3, the ~100K in equipment, and the rest in consumables/overhead

      • writedit said

        If you can get away with not listing much salary, then great … but most universities and other research institutions want to see investigators, especially bench researchers, cover their salaries with soft money. Anyone deciding how to budget their award funds should talk with their department or other appropriate fiscal administrators. Otherwise, you could be facing a salary cut if you do not have hard start-up funds for this (and always not the best use of start-up funds).

      • K99-R00 said

        This is great advice. I am right at the R00 transition, and I have a few questions. First, does the NIH scrutinize what equipment you list in the budget? If you are asking $100K in basic equipment like freezers, do they think that your new university isn’t giving you enough startup? Second, do you need to have vendor quotes to back-up your equipment budget?

      • writedit said

        As to your second question, no, you don’t need vendor quotes for the NIH, though your university may need them internally to confirm you are asking for the right amount.

        As to the first question, you only have $249K to do the research, and this has to cover your university F&A costs, too. If $149K is enough to cover the required salaries, supplies, indirects, and any subawards, then $100K in equipment is fine, so long as it, too, is justified by the science. Using the R00 to buy equipment will both lower the amount of indirects (which might not make your university happy) and allow you to save your startup $$ for supplies, tech salary, etc., so it makes sense strategically. You can talk with your PO about your planned budget, but in general, so long as your requests are justified by the science, the rest is between you and your university (from the NIH perspective).

  96. akas said

    No overhead on major equipment. This saves a huge chunk of change. Only overhead on salaries and consumables. This is true for all NIH type grants. Pay salaries and buy consumables from your start-up. Also anything you buy from the start-up is owned by the university and you cannot take it; however, if you buy equip from your grants it is owned by the NIH and you have a better chance of being able to take it if you change institutes (plus less indirects).

    • madness007 said

      Thanks! This is a huge cost savings! Yikes – still need to get most of my equipment on start-up just b/c I need to get up and running quickly, but I can definitely shuffle things around for year 1 budget. Wish it was easier to navigate all this budget stuff, but I guess that’s what blogs like these are for!

    • writedit said

      Actually, the award is to the university or institution (for the R00 portion and any RPG et al. mechanism). The equipment (and data) are owned by the university. The NIH will not intervene if your university does not allow you to take equipment with you. A generated research resource (shared resource) is another matter, but not your data or your equipment.

      • irwin said

        Here is an equipment Q&A from the NIH:

        What happens to equipment when the PD/PI moves to another organization?

        The grantee organization is the legal entity to which a grant is awarded. When the PD/PI moves to another organization, the following options apply (1) The grantee organization may request continuation of the project under the direction of an alternate PD/PI. If the alternate PD/PI is approved by NIH, the grant will continue and thus title to the equipment purchased under the grant will remain with the original grantee organization.

        (2) The organization may relinquish its interests and rights in the grant to the PD/PI’s new organization. If the new organization is approved by NIH to continue the grant activity, then the grant will be awarded and any equipment purchased with grant funds and still needed for the grant project would be expected to transfer to the new grantee organization, which would assume title. If the original grantee does not voluntarily agree to relinquish equipment with the grant, HHS may require transfer of the equipment as specified in 45 CFR Part 74.34(h).
        (3) If an alternate PD/PI is not accepted by the NIH (or no alternate is nominated), and the original grantee refuses to relinquish its rights in the grant to the new organization (or if the new organization is not accepted by NIH to continue the research), then the grant will be terminated. Title to equipment will remain with the original grantee organization, subject to disposition or use as described in 45 CFR Part 74.34. The PD/PI’s new organization may submit a new application through the regular NIH peer review process to request support for the research.

        The transfer of a grant to a foreign organization or between foreign organizations requires the additional approval of the National Advisory Council/Board of the awarding NIH IC.

      • writedit said

        Thanks so much for posting the full NIH policy. Negotiations between the original grantee, the moving PI, and the new university generally are not a big deal, but things can get hairy depending on the grants and equipment involved and any animosity that might have arisen between the PI and original institution. In this case, too, the R00 is only 3 years (and not renewable), so I wasn’t thinking of equipment being purchased and moved all in that time frame by a new investigator. This situation arises more commonly in long-term R01s and other RPGs.

  97. R00 transition said

    $125K for equipment is pretty good for things like freezers and other things that are more than $5K. But I guess for big ticket items that are ~$200K have to be bought from startup then?

    Also, the NIH allows 90-day pre-award spending, but how is the start of the 90day period determined? Is it only after you have submitted the transition proposal?

    • writedit said

      The 90-day pre-award spending is something you need to arrange with your university/institution, not the NIH, and they will have a policy as to when the clock starts – but probably when the transition proposal is submitted (though I am not sure how R00s are handled, so be sure to ask in your department).

  98. KB said

    Hi Writedit,

    Originally I was planning to submit the grant as a normal R01 to the parental RA. However, I just found out that my application matches with a special FOA.
    I have two questions:
    1. Would the special FOA give an advantage for the funding opportunity?
    2. Is there any major difference in terms of study section between a special FOA and a normal R01 application?

    Thanks a lot.

    • writedit said

      If the FOA is an RFA (not just a program announcement), then you should apply to the RFA. If the RFA application is not funded, you still have 2 more chances with the same application (modified to address the RFA reviewer comments) via the parent announcement or a program announcement. This is one of the few cases in which you still have 3 shots with the same application. If your special FOA is just a program announcement, then you only get the usual A0 and A1 submissions. Submitting to a more targeted program announcement is generally better than the parent announcement if your research matches the focus well. However, unless it is a PAS, there are no special funds set aside – the targeted program announcement simply means your IC is looking for applications in this area of research, which could be beneficial when funding decisions are made (limited number of awards for many applications with similar scores). You can check with the PO for the FOA to be sure your proposal matches what they are looking for, but most POs listed on specific FOAs will suggest that you apply, as it is in their interest to demonstrate a lot of applicant interest in this area of funding (so they can get additional budget $ to expand their portfolio). Unless it is an RFA or a PAR, you will still request a CSR review group – but check the locus of review in the FOA itself. If it is an IC contact, then your application would be reviewed by an IC panel (in all likelihood), which would mean a better (more focused & interested) set of reviewers.

  99. Mimble said

    Just throwing this out there meaning no offense but is there any chance you could have one blog devoted to research grants R01 and such and another to training and transition type grants K99 and others. It feels like we are not really looking at this from the same perspective here and it makes sifting through this a real slog.

    • writedit said

      Sorry about that (& no offense taken). The comments are searchable, so you can click through by K99 and so on, but that is the best I can do … everyone comes to this one page to post questions/comments, and I do not think if I created new pages for R vs K applications that folks would go to them (versus this one). Early on, I tried to start a separate Discussion page, but most everyone comes here instead. Probably after the Oct deadlines, I’ll have time to pull of a large chunk of the comments here so this page is more manageable again (and the archived pages of comments are also searchable – though with some advice specific to that FY). I’ve been out of the country with limited electricity & Internet, so I’ve been slow answering questions, too. However, I probably will try to finally overhaul the overall structure in Oct-Nov, so maybe then I’ll try to break things out again. Thanks for your input.

  100. boulder said

    Hi, I was wondering if someone knows answer to my question. Several years ago my adviser submitted a proposal on one research topic, but was not funded. I was not co-PI in that proposal. Now I moved to another university as a faculty, and want to submit similar R01 proposal on the same topic. I wonder, if this will be considered as resubmission of the same proposal third time? I would expect NO, because I was not co-PI in that proposal and I am independent PI now. Am I correct? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      I assume by now the field has moved on and you have collected and published data since the original submission by your mentor, so the application should be new by definition (new aims, new approach). You do not need to avoid the same research focus certainly.

      • boulder said

        Thank you very much!

  101. ETNEO said

    Please would you let me know if there is still any chance for R01 Grants in the gray zone to be funded for the fiscal year 2013. Thank You!

    • SG said

      If you haven’t heard from you PO in a while then the answer is very, very, very small. Ask you PO. They should know if you even have this much of a chance.

  102. WFE said

    Dear Writedit,
    My RO1 renewal (A0) was reviewed in June, scored in the grey zone. I spoke to PO and he is positive. He told me that I have to wait until Dec/Jan to know about the funding. Regarding the A1, he said I can delay the A1 submission if I want. However, my current funding will be over by next summer. I can submit a much better revised version in March as we are generating more data. I would appreciate if you could comment whether I need to submit my A1 in November instead of waiting until March. MANY THANKS FOR YOUR GREAT WORK.

    • SG said

      The real questions are when will the grant be at its best? November or March? And, how soon do you need the money?

      If the PO put you in the grey zone I would suggest resubmitting sooner rather than later. Especially if you think the new grant will be significantly better.

      Remember, NIH doesn’t know what its budget will be for FY 2014. So, the grey zone could become the “out of luck” zone very quickly.

    • writedit said

      As SG said, the question is when will the application be strongest. If you will publish between now and March (or at least have manuscripts accepted prior to the review in May-June) and will generate data that will satisfy reviewers, then waiting until the application is as strong as possible is the best strategy.

      However, waiting until March pushes you into FY15, and funding decisions for this first cycle will, as always (including your A0), be late. I assume you will have some carryover when the award period ends to keep your lab afloat. Unless you have an exceptional score, you likely will not receive an award until 2015 (i.e., not by the Dec 1, 2014 start date), though the potential for spending funds 90 days in advance of an award exists. If you have a fundable score, your institution might help with some bridge funding until the renewal award comes through, but that depends on policies and practices where you are.

      • WFE said

        Dear SG and Writedit,
        Many thanks for the comments.

  103. ETNEO said

    Thanks for your answer, my PO told me that the grant has been proposed for funding but the NCI leaders will make the final decision. My question is if there is hope until the end of FY2013 or those grants can be funded also in FY2014

    • writedit said

      FY13 ends on Monday (9/30), so as SG indicated, your PO now knows whether your application will receive an award (it will not be considered for funding indefinitely).

  104. ETNEO said

    Thank you very much for your prompt response! I appreciate it

  105. ETNEO said

    I sent an email to my PO, she didin’t answer yet…I’m a NI/ESI my grant was scored 14 percentile. Do you think they will review grants until next monday or those grants in the gray zone have already been selected. Sorry to bother you but the all process has been very stressful! Thanks!

    • SG said

      My guess is that they have to “close the books” on this fiscal year this week at the latest if they haven’t already. You could try sending an Email to the grants management person assigned to your grant. But, they are so busy right now you might not get an answer until next week anyway.

  106. ETNEO said

    Thank you SG, I appreciate your response

  107. John Ward said

    I submitted my competitive renewal of a RO1 in July, and my grant will be reviewed by study section on October 2. I would like to know as to what will happen if the govt is shut down on October 1. Will they have to reschedule the meeting? Please advise.


    • writedit said

      In all likelihood, yes. Review of grant applications is not an essential government service, and even the Internet reviews will be on hold since the computer systems will not be supported. Now, whether SROs are allowed to show up and run the session (with no pay), since they are off-site from the NIH itself, I am not sure. This would be a good time to contact your Congressional delegation and urge them to pass the CR (Senate version) so the federal government does not shut down on Tuesday (Oct 1).

  108. 4th year PI said

    Hello writedit — I am in the first months of my 4th R01 year (out of 5) and preparing for a competitive renewal submission in July 2014. This was my first R01, so I am in obvious need of advice.
    My lab is working on several papers that we need to push before the renewal submission. From the reviewer’s perspective which I assume should coincide with the NIH scoring criteria, do you think my application would be more competitive with additional first author, or rather with additional last author manuscripts? I want to prioritize work on these manuscripts to maximize my potential for continued funding.
    Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

    • writedit said

      I am not sure position matters for reviewers – it depends on your role for the work and the scope of the project. As you know, whoever does the most hands-on work (grad student, postdoc) is generally first author, though for big collaborative studies (GWAS, multisite RCTs, etc.), this is usually reserved for the most senior, leading contributor. Of course, if it’s pretty much you running the show at the bench, then first and corresponding author might be most appropriate. The senior author position conveys that you are developing the hypotheses and running your own independent research group, which is important early in your career and secures your place in the discipline.

  109. John Ward said

    As I said in my last message my competitive renewal is scheduled to be reviewed by study section on October 2. Sinice it is almost certain that the government will be shut down and study section will not meet, I am very worried. The reviewers must have posted their critiques in commons and preliminary scores must have been assigned. Now if the study section meets say after a month, my concern is reviews would have forgotten the grants, and they may also change the scores, and all this, I am afraid could negatively impact the grant. Please let me know your thoughts. Should I contact my SRO and seek her advice regarding my concern?

    • writedit said

      I expect SROs are getting bombarded with questions, but they will have no answers, not knowing how long the shutdown could last or when SRG meetings could be rescheduled, whether in person or via video or IAR (Internet assisted review). SROs first priority is to communicate with reviewers about what to expect. Just remember that every application scheduled for review will be impacted the same way, so yours will be no worse than the others in your SRG. Other than withdrawing your application, there is nothing you (or the SRO) can do about the situation, other than contacting your Congressional delegation and urging them to vote for the continuing resolution (sans amendments).

      • SG said

        My guess is that the meetings will be rescheduled as teleconferences ASAP after the gov’t opens again. I doubt it will be closed more than a few days. But, you never know.

        Canceled IRG meetings are not as rare as you might think. Several were rescheduled after massive snowstorms in DC shut down the area.

        Plus, as Writedit points out, everyone in the study section will be in the same boat.

  110. scientist said

    I just heard that in my field they will combine two study section (a “special” R21 (clinical) and the standard study section if the government does not reopen Thursday – and then they will have to triage 75% of the grants as they cannot discuss more then that over the phone. My R21-A1 is in there so thanks to the tea party it will probably get killed. These idiots in Washington do not see the consequences (jobs and research lost).

    • ProfBSU said

      These idiots in Washington do not see the consequences (jobs and research lost).
      You are so right “scientist”….It is up to use to inform our Congressman of the impact that these decisions are having. We are running the risk of losing a whole generation of scientists and I have heard from many who say that sequestration etc. is killing basic research in USA

      • writedit said

        You can find your Senators in the upper right corner of and your Representative by entering your zip code at Your Congressional delegation needs to hear from you about the impact of the shutdown, sequestration, and the budget uncertainty that annually reigns for the first few to several months of each FY.

    • writedit said

      As of earlier today, the NIH did not seem to have figured out how everything will be handled, but it won’t be pretty. I will update my post on this ( as it becomes clear. In the meantime, there is no use contacting your PO or SRO (they are prohibited from responding during a government shutdown) – but plenty of use in contacting your Congressional delegation (see my other response here).

  111. John Ward said

    My senator is Ted Cruz, who is mainly responsible for shutting the Govt! Should I write to him??????

  112. amy said

    I know there is no pay line from GM. But information about the scores of grant that have been funded recently by GM would be helpful. This is for established PI to submit a new RO1. Thanks!

    • writedit said

      I know they were selecting applications for awards at least up to the 15th percentile – I assume they reached even higher for select awards, but those would have involved strong PO support and advocacy (true at the 15th percentile as well). At this point, you want to confirm that your PO is behind your project (once the federal government comes back online – your PO is prohibited from checking email/communicating with PIs until then), though these discussions are a long way off.

  113. Amy said

    Thanks writedit for the information. I am actually at the point of having my new RO1 submitted. The grant could belong to GM or NIEHS. I would like to ask your option or any other people around here as for which institute would have a better funding rate or better chance to get funded if the grant falls to the grey area. Thanks.

    • writedit said

      They are almost comparable, since program has significant involvement in selecting applications for funding. NIGMS has a much much larger budget, but NIEHS gets fewer applications. You can do the research on who has better funding rates at RePORT ( 11.2% at EHS vs 16.5% at GMS in FY11, 16.9% vs 18.2% in FY12. Also check RePORTER for projects similar to yours (you can also do this to check SRGs). At either IC, though, you will want to be in communication with a PO – prior to submission, though this is a little late, if you are submitting for Oct 5 (and no one can reply to you now during the shutdown).

      • amy said

        Thanks for your reply and the information. After some research, I would like to ask another question. Is it true that the most important factor for enhancing the chance of being funded is the pay line rather than funding rate and total grant dollars that each IC has? If this is likely the case, then GM is a better choice over NIEHS for my case, I guess. Thanks.

      • writedit said

        The most important factor for enhancing your chances of being funded is to pick the right study section and prepare a compelling application. At NIGMS and NIEHS, the same percentile stands about the same chance of being funded, and its likelihood is higher if you have communicated with a PO who is engaged with and supports your project.

      • Amy said

        For communicating with a PO and finding out if he or she likes my grant will take some time but it is important. May be I will have this grant submitted next cycle in Feb.

        This grant is a basic mechanistic study of DNA repair. I checked the grants being funded by NIGMS and NHEHS, they both fund basic research stuff similar to what I proposed in my proposal. Many of them do not have or do not disclose in the abstract if there is an Aim or sub-aim targeting a particular disease model. If they actually do not have it, probably because most basic studies do not have the link yet? My question is is it essential for a basic research grant to go to GM or NIEHS to have at least a small portion of work proposed to target disease related clinical samples or models? I know having it would probably help, but if do not have it, would it hurt? Thanks.

      • writedit said

        As our furloughed friend said, NIEHS would take the application if you were looking at UV damage or other environmental causes of the DNA damage and its repair. With regard to the clinical samples (e.g., cancer, neurodegeneration, aging), it depends on if they are a model of the type of DNA damage you are studying, or if you are focused on mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of that disease specifically (and looking to identify preventive/therapeutic models). Neither NIGMS nor NIEHS will be interested in any study with therapeutic intent for a condition that is the focus of another IC (e.g., NCI, NINDS, NIA, respectively). However, if you are using the samples to study mechanisms of DNA damage versus the disease, then you should be fine. This is where a conversation with a PO would be important – to clarify whether you have crossed the boundary from one IC’s mission to another and how you might tailor your application, as needed, to fit a gap in the porfolio of your target IC. Of course, that conversation now needs to wait.

      • Bored Furloughed Fed. said

        Amy, try not to over think this. If you are studying basic mechanisms of DNA repair your grant will go to NIGMS. If you are studying how certain environmental toxins affect DNA repair mechanisms it might go to NIEHS. Now, if you are using a toxin to probe basic mechanisms of DNA repair it will probably to to NIGMS*. As Writedit pointed out, what is most important is to find the right study section to review your grant and speak with POs from both institutes once NIH is back in business.

        *No Federal Funds have been obligated to provide this advice. ;-)

      • Amy said

        Thanks Bored and Writedit for your explanations and recommendation. Hope to be able to talk to the PO in both institutes. Best regards.

  114. Bucos said

    Any thoughts on the likelihood of PO approving a second year of no-cost-extension? Would it need to be justified by major/unforeseen reasons (e.g. moving to another institution)? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      Yes, if you can justify the need for the second NCE, including changing institutions, that should not be a problem. No need to worry about discussing this with your PO – and you definitely should in case there needs to be special advance planning to move the NCE award to the your institution (I am not sure of the grant administration logistics in this situation). However, none of this can happen until the lights go back on in DC (your PO cannot read or respond to work emails even).

      Go Bucs!

      • Bucos said

        Thanks and yes go Bucs!

  115. k01_r01 said

    Hi all,
    I am in the process of writing a K01. My future mentor wants to write an R01 some of which will overlap with my K01. This is to maximize the chances of getting the projects funded. I am pretty sure a K01 and an R01 (with different PIs) with similar themes can be reviewed in the same cycle, unless I missed something completely. Can anyone clarify this a bit? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      The applications wouldn’t go to the same study sections, but I assume the same IC would be considering them for funding, and they won’t fund both if they overlap significantly. Further, they might kick them back due to scientific overlap, per NIH policy (below). I would suggest you and/or your mentor talk with the PO about how to minimize overlap to the point that both applications will be acceptable. The K01 should not be proposing R01-level work, so you should be able to work something out and plan accordingly.

      Submissions of identical applications to one or more components of the PHS are not allowed, and the NIH will not accept similar grant applications with essentially the same research focus from the same applicant organization. This includes derivative or multiple applications that propose to develop a single product, process or service that, with non-substantive modifications, can be applied to a variety of purposes. Likewise, identical or essentially identical grant applications submitted by different applicant organizations will not be accepted. Applicant organizations should ascertain and assure that the materials they are submitting on behalf of the principal investigator are the original work of the principal investigator and have not been used elsewhere in the preparation and submission of a similar grant application. Applications to the NIH are grouped by scientific discipline for review by individual Scientific Review Groups and not by disease or disease state. The reviewers can thus easily identify multiple grant applications for essentially the same project. In these cases, application processing may be delayed or the application(s) may not be reviewed. Essentially identical applications will not be reviewed except for: 1) individuals submitting an application for an Independent Scientist Award (K02) proposing essentially identical research in an application for an individual research project; and 2) individuals submitting an individual research project identical to a subproject that is part of a program project or center grant application.

      • k01_r01 said

        Thanks so much for your reply and the relevant information. This is most helpful…. will definitely help me a lot in planning for the K01.

  116. k01_r01 said

    Mailed PO, got automated reply: “Thank you for your email. Due to the absence of either an FY 2014 appropriation or Continuing Resolution for the Department of Health and Human Services, I am out of the office on furlough and I am not able to read or respond to your message.”


    • strange said

      It seems as though the furloughed NIHiers have not been rescued yet from the shutdown. The main website still has the Shutdown Notice in their main page. Strange, very strange!.

      • writedit said

        Given the ridiculous amount of backlogged work and other much more significant priorities to address first, the Website notice is not a big deal. Please be patient and give them a chance to sort out this mess. I would suggest that everyone to resist the urge to email their PO/SRO until next week at the earliest – please wait for a notice in the Guide (your PO/SRO will not have any details about how the delays will be managed until about the same time the Notice is issued).

      • Back to Work Fed. said

        Most NIH Computer Folks are contractors. Many just received a notice to be in today by 10AM. It is hoped that most systems will be online by the end of the day. Assuming no major computer problems resulted for the shut down.

        Of course policy issues (e.g., new deadline for R01s, review of previously submitted grants etc.) will take longer to resolve.

        POs, SROs and such should be back in the office. But, they will not have any answers to the most questions. Keep an eye open for NIH Guide Notices.

      • k01_r01 said

        completely understand how much things could be backlogged ..
        Best to wait a couple of weeks before mailing them. Once again, thanks writedit.

      • writedit said

        Well, no – do not wait a couple of weeks to submit your application. Please watch the NIH Guide for a notice as to when applications should be submitted (which I expect will be next week). Your institution will submit the application, so be sure to check with your Office of Sponsored Programs or Office of Research to see when they need all your final materials.

  117. R21 said

    For this Oct cycle, is it better to not to submit my application and wait until appropriations are enacted?

    • writedit said

      The October cycle is the last cycle of applications that will be considered for funding in FY14. Waiting until February means you are waiting until FY15. October-November is always the best cycle to submit, since you have the shortest wait to find out about funding (most potentially fundable applications submitted in February-March won’t be decided on until next year). If you submit in February 2014, you probably won’t know about funding until ~Feb in 2015, and if you are in the gray zone, you may need to wait until the end of the FY (July-Aug-Sept 2015) before a select pay decision might be made. If you have a competitive application ready now, don’t wait to submit it.

  118. R21 said

    NIH recommend to wait until appropriations are enacted even electronic submission, right?

    • writedit said

      Okay – the appropriation won’t be enacted until next year. Tonight/tomorrow, the House will pass and the President will sign a Continuing Resolution to re-open the government tomorrow. But that won’t be the final appropriation for the NIH or any other federal agency.

      So the answer to the question about not submitting while the government is shut down, yes, you should wait until the NIH issues a notice explaining how they will handle grant submissions for deadlines during the government shutdown (including today’s for R21s).

  119. writedit said

    In case you don’t know to click on the main blog page (, I have a post about the resumption of NIH extramural activities there (Keep Calm and …), and the NIH has issued an interim Notice.

  120. writedit said

    And now the NIH has issued additional Guidance, which I also summarized on the main blog here.

  121. Cautiously Optimistic said

    I just read on the NIH website that awards will start to be made after November 1st. Does this refer to the pre-shutdown council meeting for FY2014? I was curious if the NIH would fund anything from FY2014 with the CR until January.

    • writedit said

      Yes, this would be for Cycle I applications (Feb-March) sent to the fall Council meetings. The shutdown has less of an impact on the timing of awards than the lack of a final NIH appropriation, which won’t be known until next January (at the earliest). The GMS folks still need to close out the books on FY13, and then they can start considering FY14 awards. However, as usual, ICs will be extremely conservative in making awards until the federal budget situation is resolved. Only very low score/percentile applications (my guess would be ~5-7% or lower) will receive awards before then, depending on the IC’s interim payline.

      • NEIdea said

        Is this true of fellowships as well? I have an F32 that is going to a rescheduled NEI council meeting 8/28, and was wondering when I would get a decision. It scored in the 10th percentile, which I was told was always good enough for this funding agency for F32s, but is not better the the 7th percentile you mentioned. If I don’t get it I will put in another application for the December 8th deadline and was really hoping to know before then so I don’t go through all the unnecessary work. Basically any chance I will know either way before November 15th?

      • writedit said

        The percentile range was mainly for R01s, and ICs are more likely to fund Fs on time, but you should still check with your PO – probably not right now, since it’s so crazy there, but maybe in early November. He or she won’t know when you will get funded but should be able to give advice on whether to resubmit. My main point before was that even for applications with a score that would have been funded in FY13, such as your 10th percentile, ICs might wait to make similar FY14 awards until the federal budget is passed or closer to being settled at least (sometime next year).

      • Secondaire said

        I am in a similar situation to you (NEIdea) – my F32 went to council on 9/19 via GMS, I got an impact score of 17 (idk what percentile that is, PO says to be optimistic) and I am worried now that if I don’t hear anything until January that I will no longer be eligible (as I will have been in my current lab for one year in December) – Will a delayed funding decision forfeit my eligibility, or is that determined at the council meeting (for me, on 9/19?) This is making me so stressed out!

      • NEIdea said

        Secondaire, I can’t speak as to when you will find out, but you will still be eligible for an F32 past 1 year. That being said we are likely in the same boat and will have to resubmit for December because we won’t know about funding in time.

      • Secondaire said

        I was told by the PO that re-submitting would be a waste of time, but I still have no idea what to do here. I may contact him again. I was told that eligibility expired after one year.

      • CVT said

        Secondaire, the information about the one year expiration is incorrect. I had an F32 funded this year, but thanks to sequestration, etc. it took 13 months from the date I applied to receive that the application would be funded. By the time the award was activated, I had already been in my current postdoc position for two years.

      • Secondaire said

        Thank you very much, CVT, for the clarification! I have NO idea where I heard that from – I thought it was my PO, but the last time I spoke to him was July and I may have remembered incorrectly.

      • writedit said

        The language used to be in the announcement – that’s where. However, different ICs may have different policies, so be sure to check with your PO again, though you should be fine.

  122. Cathy said

    Hi, Forgive me for what is probably an elementary question, but is it permissible to have Co-PIs on an R03? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      You are permitted to have multiple PIs for an R03 (no such thing as “co-PIs” in NIH-speak), in which case you would need a multiple PI plan. The science should drive whether there is more than one PI involved, and each should clearly be in charge of the portions of the project that falls under their expertise. There is not a lot of money with an R03, certainly, but that does not mean the project would not be better managed/conducted with more than one PI.

  123. Cathy said

    Thank you, Writeit! Also, fyi, I recently received my first R01 and I owe most of it to reading your blog. You’re awesome!

    • writedit said

      Great – and congratulations on the R01! Best wishes for success with the project and your career in academic research.

  124. NewPI said

    I also received my RO1 award right before the government shut down (Feb. submission, Sept. council). Thank you for all the helpful information posted here!

    • writedit said

      Congratulations and best wishes for success with the project and your career in academic research!

  125. K99 recipient said

    Does anyone here have experience purchasing equipment with K99 money and taking the equipment to their new independent lab? First, does the K99 allow you to purchase “capital equipment” greater than $5000, and second, how do you get your university to allow you to take such equipment with you when you leave (I know this is somewhat university-dependent)?
    My program officer said that unlike R01 grants where the grant is given to the university, the R00 grant is the only R mechanism where the grant is administered to the applicant (although the money goes to you through the university), much like a fellowship. In that case, shouldn’t the equipment you buy automatically belong to you, no matter how much it costs?
    Thanks for any tips!

    • writedit said

      The K99 portion is awarded directly to the applicant and includes $20-25K in research costs (exact amount depends on IC). If you use these funds to buy equipment, which is allowable, whether you can take it with you probably depends on whether the university had to pay for installation (or any necessary renovation to accommodate the equipment), maintenance fees, etc. You should talk with the grant/fiscal administrator in your department for clarification on what you can take. I would assume if it is just benchtop and shippable, it can go with you (and there shouldn’t be a problem). The R00 portion is not activated until you have a faculty appointment, so presumably any equipment you buy under the R00 would be staying put for a while – at least the 3 years of the award and likely longer.

  126. Nammi said

    I received an 11 percentile score on an R01 to NHLBI. It was reviewed last week at October Council. The GMS said they do not have a budget or payline- so no final funding decisions have been made. The PO said there is no update on the status of my grant. What does this mean and what can I expect?

    • writedit said

      NHLBI (and the entire NIH) will not know their appropriation until Congress passes a budget for the federal government. Right now, they are operating under a continuing resolution, which continues FY13 funding levels, and NHLBI does not know if it will end up with more or less money when the final appropriation is passed. The House and Senate budget bills are $90M apart, so this will not be resolved any time soon – and probably not by next January, when the CR ends (hopefully they will pass another CR rather than shut down the government again). With the debt ceiling issue to come up again in February, budget negotiations will be even more strident as the division between those favoring greater spending cuts (like the NIH) versus increasing revenue (taxes etc.) becomes sharper. I am a little surprised your PO did not offer any optimism about your application, given its 11th percentile (especially if you are ESI). However, the interim NHLBI payline will be much lower, so you won’t know until next year what your chances of funding will be. If this was an A0, you can ask your PO if you should be preparing an A1 for March (which might also give you some insight as to his perspective of your funding likelihood).

      • alex said

        Nammi, I am not surprised at the lack of optimism coming from your PO they are really in bad position here, esp without a resolution and still dealing with the shutdown mess. My new investigator application scored 6% in June, the council concurred with the recommendations and priority score before the shutdown, back in Sep, and, yet, the application is still on hold for funding pending resolution of the budget and formulation of the funding plan for this round. So for now no news is good news and I am not giving up hope, talk to your PO and see if this warrants a new application, which can always be turned into another successful grant applications if the first is funded. What else can we do?

      • Nammi said

        Thanks Alex. Helps me to hear from other people so I can get some perspective. Honestly feel like I need people to talk me off the ledge at times. You get a great score and then…..this happens: Nothing. I think I will try to schedule a phone call with the PO. Back in the summer when the score first came out she told me “Don’t lose sleep over this.” Easy for her to say, but maybe a sign of optimism? You are all right- have to stay positive. Have a great day!

      • writedit said

        Alex gave a perfect reply, and I will add that usually GMSs spend a good chunk of October closing out the books on the prior FY. Because the government shutdown delayed this process and added considerable additional work, they are behind on closing out FY13, and I see only a handful of noncompeting renewals have been issued thus far for FY14. Even exceptionally scored competing applications tapped for awards under the conservative CR interim paylines (i.e., before the final NIH appropriation for FY14 is passed) will be delayed for some time due to the recent kerfuffle in DC. So, yes, patience and optimism remain the watchwords of the day.

      • NK said

        The NHLBI GMS contacted me about this R01 on November 13 asking for some specific just in time information, such as the FWA # for my consultant’s institution, since he is at a foreign institution. I also got an email from them asking about IRB status. However, since then…..nothing. Each email ends with “This is not a notice of grant award.” This process is so drawn out and I just don’t get it. How does one stop worrying in this business, and can I interpret these emails as a positive sign?

      • writedit said

        Your foreign consultant could still be part of the delay, since the State Department gets involved in clearing these awards. The federal shutdown probably has them backed up, too, and if there are human subjects involved, there is a higher bar. Shouldn’t be anything to worry about, but depending on the country involved, it could delay things a bit (with no news for you in the interim).

      • Nammi said

        On December 5th my R01 status went from council review completed to Pending. All JIT information was submitted, this is the 11 percentile. What does that mean “Pending”

      • writedit said

        Congratulations – it means they are preparing an award (or at least doing the administrative review in preparation for an award). Your PO can confirm and give you an idea on timing.

      • Nammi said

        Hi Everyone- Just want to report back that I received my NOA on December 21st. Was very happy and thanks for your support! Happy New Year to all.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations again and best wishes for success with the research.

  127. Red said

    Are the F32′s limited in terms of years of postdoctoral experience after completion of the PhD? I couldn’t find the language that says they’re for new PDs only.

    • writedit said

      No, there was language in prior announcements discouraging applicants from applying at institutions where they had trained for more than a year already, but that is gone. However, each IC has its own spin on how the F32 is awarded, so you should check with the PO. If your IC generally prefers to make these awards to applicants with fewer than a certain number of years of postdoctoral training, that would be good to know. The second level of review is at the IC itself versus at Council, so the PO’s insight about your target IC is key.

  128. RASpubhealth said

    I have a question. I’m a new investigator and received an impact score of 20 on my first R01 submission. The reviews were extremely positive and supportive. Because it’s an RFA, there is not percentile rank. It was reviewed at NHLBI council in Sept 2013 but I was told the RFA itself was deferred to FY2014 and they won’t know about funding until appropriations are made. What are the chances of this being funded still? Is 20 even a fundable score, given the climate of all going on? The suggested start date had been 9/1/2013 – I’m assuming that NOAs are issued, the start date will be pushed back considerably… I know sometimes they truncate the first year of work (but award the same $), but it would be impossible to get the year 1 work done with such a condensed timeline as it takes so much time just to get staff hired and get things off the ground. Thoughts or insights are most welcome!

    • writedit said

      Congratulations on the excellent score. The PO should be able to provide a gauge of where your application ranks in the pile in terms of likelihood of funding. Since this is an RFA, I am not sure whether final funding decisions will need to wait until a final appropriation is passed (not until next year sometime). There should be funds marked for these awards, but I am not sure they can be issued under a CR. Your PO could speak to that as well. You should ask, too, if the PO recommends that you submit the application as a new R01 to, well, either the October deadline (now set for Nov 12) or Feb 5; since your proposal was in response to an RFA, you can now submit it as a new A0 application to a program announcement (either the parent announcement or an appropriate PA). His or her advice in that regard might give some insight into your finding chances under the RFA. And, if the PO is “cautiously optimistic” that your RFA application will receive an award, you can ask for an inkling of the timing, so you can do the legwork in advance that you mention and consider the pre-award spending option (up to 90 d in advance).

      • RASpubhealth said

        Thank you so much. Unfortunately, I have asked all of these questions – where I rank, should I resubmit as a new R01, timing, etc, and she has not be able/willing to answer any of those questions. The only thing she will say is that they have not received appropriations for fiscal year 2014, they cannot say what the status of the funding will be, and that I’ll be informed once they know. That’s it; not even an indication of whether I should resubmit as a new R01 or whether the funds for this RFA can be issued under a CR. I’m not sure if she doesn’t have answers or just isn’t allowed to share them at this point, but I am trying to remain hopeful nonetheless… many thanks for the thoughts and guidance!

      • writedit said

        Well, if she referred to the FY14 appropriation, then none of the RFA applications will be funded under the CR, which means you won’t know until next year. You could submit a standard R01 in the meantime and withdraw it if the RFA application were funded. It would be nice if the PO would give you a little insight as to how you could improve the application, if she attended the study section meeting. You would need to pick a standing CSR review group (the RFA would have had a special study section), so different reviewers could and probably will react differently, but she might have some insight from the discussion as to where to put your efforts (and might know the SRG you would target). And if this RFA PO is not your “usual” PO, you could seek advice from your usual PO (or one appropriate for your science, in whose portfolio a regular R01 would go, if you don’t currently work with a PO) about all this.

      • StillOptimistic said

        RASpublichealth: Did you talk to the PO in person or got these responses in email? Most POs are not likely to answer these questions with email: they are more lenient in describing the current situation on the phone. If you have not already done so, email to schedule an appointment to speak with her. You might already have, but just in case.

      • RASpubhealth said

        That is a great idea about scheduling a time to talk; all correspondence has been by email. I figured it may be difficult to be as clear/direct via email as would be possible by phone. I will do that. Thanks for the nudge!

  129. diabetesresearcher said

    I have a question about administrative supplement for diversity (at post doc level). What is the likelihood of receiving such supplement under the current funding environment?

    Also, any word of advice about writing a winning proposal is appreciated.

    • writedit said

      Administrative supplements are reviewed internally at the IC, so you should just ask the PO of the application for which you plan to submit the administrative supplement. Some ICs have cut back on supplements to cover more RPGs, some have maintained their support. The PO will tell you whether or not to apply (based on your proposed application and the funding situation) and give advice on how to target the application. These are quite straightforward and mainly explain the role of the applicant and why he or she will be a strength to the parent project.

  130. new investigator said

    I can attest to writedit comments. I received an impact score of 11 back in June for an A1 K22 and nothing has changed except status updates such as Council Review being completed. This whole process was hit real hard.

  131. I am having difficulting wading through all of the information on NIH and NCI’s websites. My F31 was supposed to go to council 10/13. I’m not sure if the meeting was rescheduled, and if so, when is it now?

    • writedit said

      Actually, fellowships usually do not go to Council but receive their second level of review within the IC. You could ask your PO if this is how NCI handles fellowship applications and, if so, when you might expect to hear whether your application is on the paylist and, if so, when an award might be processed (possibly not until next year if they need to wait for the FY14 appropriation rather than make an award under the CR).

  132. John Worth said

    I am an established PI, and I submitted a competitive renewal of one of my R01s. I had made excellent progress with 21 papers, out of which 10 were related to the funded project. I also felt it was a very good grant and some of colleagues who read the grant also shared my views. I was shocked to learn that the grant was unscored! Should I re-submit as a renewal, or should I look at the comments and send it as a new one. Please advise.

    • writedit said

      Oh wow – very sorry to hear this. I would suggest you wait for the summary statement and then talk with your PO. Was this reviewed in person or as a rescheduled Internet-assisted meeting? If the former, your PO will likely have attended, and while your application won’t have been discussed obviously, your PO might have some insight based on what was scored. Either way, knowing what the assigned reviewers took away from your application will be critical to deciding what to do next. Your best chances would be with a Type 2 A1, though, so the key will be to figure out what about your productivity and research plan they didn’t like.

      • John Worth said

        Dear Writedit: Thank you very much for your quick response and for your advice. This was a re-scheduled telephone review. Yes, I will look at the comments, and will try and re-submit as a A1. My concern is that it might be very difficult to go back as a A1, considering that the NHLBI paylines at 11 percentile for 2013, any drop to 9 or so in 2014!. Also, is it possible to get a score of 20 or lower in a re-submission from unscored? Have you seen this happen? I am still shocked at what happened!


      • writedit said

        If it was a teleconference, your PO may still have listened in and may have an idea of the triage rate (i.e., whether more than half the applications were streamlined to accommodate the rescheduling). Yes, I have seen applications go from unscored to funded in one submission (rare but possible), but your PO, who knows all the details and players, would be best to gauge whether this is possible in your particular situation.

  133. John Worth said

    Dear Writedit: Thank you again for your advice. I know from my own experience as former study section member, current experience as an ad hoc that they triage 60% of the applications in a ftf meeting. So will there be more than 60% applications triaged in a teleconference call? If so, it will be sad. Please let me know.


    • writedit said

      I don’t know if they triaged more than 60%, but if the SRO had to shorten the meeting from 1.5 or 2 days down to 1 day, then fewer applications would get reviewed. It depends on how the rescheduling was handled, which your PO might know. My thought is that if you were just unfortunate due to time compression as a result of rescheduling, the application is more likely to do well as an A1 next time in. Mainly, though, you need to wait for the summary statement.

      • NIH PO said

        I have listened in to 2 meetings so far and the amount of triage was about the same. 50-60%.

    • Jane said

      John, sorry for the bad news. However, it’s very common now. There are not too many sympathetic reviewers in the current situation. I have gone through the similar situation several times already these years. If I was you, I will submit the A1 and a new grant to two different study sections on two different topics.

  134. ssh81 said

    I submitted a R44 SBIR application last fall and it was unscored. Unfortunately the reviewer comments were extremely vague and unhelpful. I have noticed that every time my application goes to this particular SRG, it is always comes back unscored (happened three times).

    I am wondering if can I resubmit my old application as a new as STTR, instead of SBIR, without making substantial changes? That way I justify asking for a different SRG.

    • writedit said

      Since this is a Phase II application that has been reviewed by anywhere from 5-9 different reviewers (and I assume this included submission to an RFA and a program announcement, for you to have submitted 3 times), I suspect trying to repackage without significant changes will not affect the outcome. In any case, your STTR application would be reviewed by the same study section (determined by science/IC, not mechanism). Your PO’s input will be critical in deciding what to do next.

  135. PB said

    I received an impact score of 49 for Phase 2 SBIR application submitted to NIBIB. Haven’t received reviewer’s comments as yet. Any chance of getting funded? Or should I prepare to resubmit?

    • writedit said

      You should start working on the resubmission … your PO might be able to offer insight and advice after you receive your summary statement.

  136. BrianM said

    Does anyone know how SBIR funding was affected post-shutdown? I had good feedback from the PO prior to Council so was hopeful. While the funding institute has been very informative (NCHGR) about the other mechanisms, there’s nothing about SBIR/STTR.

    • writedit said

      I assume you mean NHGRI. The small business program funding is a set percentage of each IC’s extramural budget, so the shutdown won’t affect the timing of funding decisions so much as the lack of a final FY14 appropriation, which will determine the amount of $ available for SBIR/STTR. I expect a few of the best-scoring applications will be funded during the CR, but this probably varies by IC. The shutdown did delay the issuing of any awards under the CR due to the need for each GMS office to first close out FY13 first (something usually done during October). If your PO thinks you will be issued an award under the CR, that will probably happen in late November or more likely December at the earliest.

      • BrianM said

        Oh boy, I actually meant NIGMS. Senior moment, I actually did my postdoc at NIH in what was then called NCHGR. Thanks for the info.

  137. Secondaire said

    So I contacted my PO at NIGMS and he said that they were working on funding decisions for F32s, and to bother him again if I’ve heard nothing by November 30th. It was two weeks ago that I last heard from him (or from anyone) – has anyone (Writedit or others) – heard any news from GMS yet regarding their applications?

  138. ab4166 said

    I wrote a R43 for NHLBI that received a score of 27. I contacted the PO to see what my chances were. The PO couldn’t give me much info (other than payline in 2013 was 30, though started at 25 at the beginning of last year) and told me to wait for the FY 2014 pay lines.

    Any thoughts on whether this submission has a chance? Could it be deferred to later in the year when the payline moves up?


    • writedit said

      Yes, if the interim payline is less than 27 but goes up later in the FY, your application will be considered for an award then. The FY14 paylines won’t be out until next year – not until after the federal budget is set, which probably won’t be until next Jan or Feb at the earliest. Watch what’s going on in DC (and be sure to let your Congressional delegation know that you support an increase – at least revocation of the sequester – in the NIH appropriation).

  139. NewPI said

    NHLBL has set FY14 interim payline at the 10th percentile (inclusive) for R01/R21.

    • Nammi said

      so, if my R01 got an 11 percentile, i won’t get funded? I have ESI status

      • NewPI said

        Similar to FY13, the payline for ESI applications will be 5 percentile points above the regular R01 payline. In addition, new, competing (Type 1) investigator-initiated ESI R01 applications that have percentile scores greater than 5 and less than or equal to 10 percentile points above the regular R01 payline may undergo an expedited program review to resolve comments in the summary statement. So, your RO1 should get funded based on he interim payline.

      • writedit said

        NewPI is correct – your ESI status will allow your application to be funded under the interim payline. Your PO will probably have an idea on the timing of the award next January (assuming you were just reviewed).

      • Nammi said

        This morning, I called the GMS about my R01 with the 11th percentile at NHLBI. I have been asked for official JIT information, IRB status a few weeks ago. She asked, “Are you ESI?” I said yes, and she said to hold on. She came back and said, “At this time, we are still waiting for paylines and we have no authorization at this time to pay yours.” What does this mean? .

      • writedit said

        It just means NHLBI is not making any awards above the 10th percentile yet. Their interim payline of 10th percentile is inclusive, which means no exceptions yet, but they will expand the payline for ESI later in the FY. That was nice of your GMS to check to be sure nothing has changed yet. The extra level of caution is no doubt due to the next budget debate in Congress coinciding again with a debt ceiling showdown. All the ICs are waiting to see what happens with the FY14 sequester (which would lower their appropriation further if enacted).

  140. AbrahamL said

    Dear Writedit,

    I submitted an R21 (A1) proposal to NIDDK and received an impact score of 19 this morning. No percentile is available at this time. Is it a fundable score at NIDDK? What a percentile could be approximately translated from a score of 19 for R21 in NIDDK? Can somebody who has won a recent R21 from NIDDK give some comments? Thank you so much!

    • Nammi said

      Congratulations. I just found out I got a 26.

      • AbrahamL said

        Thank you! Are you applying for an R21 in NIDDK? What ‘s your percentile? My percentile is still not available in ERA commons.

    • Nammi said

      Yes it was an NIDDK R21. I also have no percentile. Mine was an A1,too. Not sure that they percentile these. I think you should be optimistic with a 19. My score of 26 probably borderline at best. Good luck!

    • writedit said

      You may or may not get a percentile. Your score is good and should be in the funding range, but no one – not even your program officer – will know yet whether it will receive an award because the FY14 appropriation won’t be known until next year some time. When you get your summary statement, you can check in with the PO to see how your score would have faired in FY13. If your PO thinks the score is on the border, he/she will want to see what the concerns were (which is why it’s best to wait for the summary statement). No matter what, though, you won’t receive funding until next year, and you should be thinking about a new (different) submission for February or June, even if your PO thinks this R21 might be funded.

      • Nammi said

        I got my summary statement and contacted the PO with a brief 1 page response to reviewer comments which were quite manageable/not major. The PO said it was way to early to know anything about funding, thanked me for the response page, and said i can contact her again in January. Overall, the summary statement was positive with some addressable concerns. Onward!

      • writedit said

        Perfectly reasonable timeline, given the uncertainties of the federal budget. Please do post an update in Jan – fingers crossed until then.

  141. Student said

    I received a score of 30 for my A1, F31 today. When I was going through the process for my A0, my PO said that this center generally fund priority scores up to 20-25. I know that FY14 policies are not out yet, but is there no chance of my F31 being funded? What is one supposed to do at this point (besides read the summary statement) as no more revisions can be made? Times are tough here as my PI has no funding for my project and I still need another couple years of work to graduate. Thanks for your insight!

    • writedit said

      Well, when you get your summary statement, you can check with your PO, in case he feels he/she feels they can make a case for your application on the basis of the critiques. Be sure to let your PO know about your advisor’s loss of funding. Your program is committed to your completing your research (is there a T32 – training grant – you could be put on, assuming you are eligible in terms of citizenship/residency?). However, you may have to look outside your PhD project to find paid work to eat etc. I have a grad student friend here at BICO in that situation.

  142. MacAttack said

    My A0 F30 submission received an impact score of 17 yesterday. This is the first time this institute has participated in the F30 mechanism. What do you think the chances are it will be funded? Do you think there is a chance I can receive reviewer comments in time for the Dec 8 deadline?

    • writedit said

      Given how crazy this review cycle has been, you shouldn’t count on receiving your summary statement in time to revise for a Dec 8 submission, especially if this was a CSR study section handling a large number of applications for different grant mechanisms. In any case, depending on the critiques, you might not want to try to resubmit so quickly, especially if there was a concern about the number of publications or other issues that require time/data to resolve. With a 17, you should be in good shape, though you’ll know better if you also receive a percentile (which you should if reviewed in CSR vs your IC).

  143. jmanuel said

    I received an impact score of 13 on my NIDA A1 K01 over the summer. I submitted a letter in response to additional comments for the Sept Council meeting. However, my PO said that my application was reviewed to determine if there were additional issues outside of review, not funding per se, and that my application will be considered for funding at the Feb Council meeting.

    Is this typical? I’m wondering about the likelihood of my application being funded, and if I should start preparing a new application in case it’s not. Many thanks!

    • writedit said

      Your application probably had some administrative bars, which must be addressed before your application can be approved for funding. Your score of 13 should be fundable, and it could be as much as anything that they need to wait until the FY14 appropriation is clear before making final decisions. You cannot prepare another K01 application, but you could ask your PO if you should be preparing a research project grant (RPG) application for February. If he/she says no, then your K01 is likely to be funded eventually. Since you can’t hold both a K01 and an RPG award (at the outset anyway), there is nothing gained by preparing a R mechanism application except to have ready in case the K01 is not awarded.

  144. Charlie said

    I applied for K99 from NIGMS and i got the impact score 35. What is the chance for me? Should i prepare the resubmission?

    • writedit said

      Yes, when you receive your summary statement, you will want to get in touch with your PO about how best to address the concerns and revise your application.

  145. ben said

    I just wondering what will be the chances for a R01(A1) with 13th percentile to be funded (NIDA)

    • writedit said

      Unfortunately, no one will know for sure until the FY14 appropriation is determined (not until next year). Your PO can probably tell you how that percentile would have fared in FY13, and hopefully the FY14 paylines will not be any lower. Perhaps someone visiting here who had a NIDA F01 funded in FY13 will chime in with their experience.

  146. Melissa said


    I am preparing a F31 application for NINDS, but I have a question about what the F31 covers. I understand it covers stipend, tuition and fees, and health insurance, but does it cover research supplies? If so, for how much? The only thing I could find is an institutional allowance for $4,200/year to cover research supplies, books, and travel to scientific meetings.

    Thanks, in advance, for any information you can provide.

    • RiddleMeThis said

      For an F31: $4200/year really means a laptop + health insurance. The F mechanism is not a research grant and it is expected that your PI will fund the research work. In fact, if your PI cannot support you throughout the duration of the project, the reviewers will not look favorably at your application.

      • writedit said

        Exactly what RiddleMeThis said (you’re hired, BTW). Your Sponsor needs to do just that – sponsor your doctoral training and research (and therefore have his/her own R01 or other grant funding to cover your supplies, animal costs, etc.).

  147. HQ22 said

    Hello, I just received an impact score of 37 on the 2nd submission of my NIHM K01 application. Is there any chance that this may get funded or should I assume otherwise and move on?

    • writedit said

      You should start working on a new application for February, either an R03 or R21 to secure data for an R01 application, since I suspect you do not have enough publications or data to support an R01 yet. Be sure to pay close attention to the concerns raised about your K01 research, in particular whether the reviewers felt the work was significant and whether your approach was appropriate. You will need to work with your advisor to rework the project to be more compelling and appealing to reviewers to avoid another score that is fine but not fundable.

      • HQ22 said

        thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it. So basically my score is clearly not enough to have any hope of getting this application funded?

      • writedit said

        Not likely unless your PO is especially enthusiastic about you as a candidate and your project. If so, you could ask him/her for a gauge of funding likelihood and advice on next steps.

  148. Folding222 said

    I just received my scores for the A1 of my F32 application (NIGMS). Last time I only received an impact score, but this time it shows my impact score (20) and also gives me my percentile (8th). Any idea why it also gives me a percentile ranking; is this a good sign or do different study groups just choose whether or not to also report percentiles? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      First, your score and percentile are a good sign, certainly, in terms of scoring likelihood. If your A1 went to a different study section, that could explain the change. Also, the A0 may have been reviewed when the CSR recalibrated percentiles, and there may not have been enough applications that round to calculate percentiles. Nothing to worry about, certainly.

  149. Need R00 help said

    I have a question about the R00 transtion proposal. When I first submitted the K99 application, I had 2 “mentored phase” aims and 2 “independent phase” aims. For the R00 transition proposal, they want the aims to be updated based on new data, etc. I got preliminary data for 3 of the aims, but I didn’t complete any of them to its entirety. Should I submit the R00 proposal as essentially the same 4 aims as the K99 original application, just now with the modifications based on my new data, or do I only focus now on the two “independent phase” aims?
    Secondly, for any subaims that were completed, should I just not mention those anymore in the R00 transition proposal (just in the K99 progress report), or can I propose the important/interesting next step experiment of the same subaim?
    I am confused about the proposal update, because the grant is still essentially the same scope, but now there are only 3 yrs of funding left…on the other hand, I will have more people working on it. How do I handle the “mentored phase” aims? Thanks to anyone with advice!

    • writedit said

      I would suggest you summarize progress made on all aims in the Progress Report and update all 4 aims for the R00, with the first two modified/extended based on preliminary data obtained during the K99 phase, and the latter two updated based on preliminary data to date. This is a natural progression of your science, and the aims should reflect this. If one of the aims should just be dropped (i.e., you won’t be pursuing any work in that area during the R00 phase), that’s fine (and then just continue 3 aims in the R00 phase) – I couldn’t tell from your comment if you could pursue follow-on experiments for one or both of the K99 aims. You can ask your PO for input on your extended/expanded K99 aims and updated R00 aims as well.

  150. meshugena313 said

    I’m an ESI and just received a NIGMS R01 A1 26th percentile score. I’m in my 5th year and am explicitly in the criteria set out by Jon Lorsch in the principles for funding post here:

    Any chance I’ll be funded…? I will speak with the PO after I read my pink sheets. Although I’m not holding my breath and don’t expect much. I have another R01 pending for Feb review and an R21 for December, but I certainly would like this project to be funded.

    • writedit said

      Not impossible, but not likely obviously. Based on your pink sheets, you and your PO can discuss your options. If your PO is also enthusiastic about your project, he/she might be able to advocate for bridge funding if not a scaled down award – as well as next steps if neither of these are options.

      • meshugena313 said

        Thanks for the suggestions. It will be tricky to come up with an A0 on this project that doesn’t have a lot of overlap with the current submission or the other R01 I submitted (that’s unfortunately been sent to NCI…).

  151. NEIdea said

    I submitted an F32 in April, it was reviewed well enough that I was told it was likely to be funded, but due to shutdown and funding no decisions have been made. Last week I received an email that was very positive, but in the end basically just asked for JIT info, even though it wasn’t formally called that. Now today I see on my status page its says Last Status Update Date: 11/26/2013, but I can’t see any changes on the status page and no award has been issued. Does this mean anything? Does the status update change usually proceed actual new information?

    • Red said

      Relax, kick back and enjoy the holidays, because your award is on the way! (unless Writedit disagrees)

    • writedit said

      Red is right – you can celebrate this Thanksgiving with an extra helping of thanks. I assume the email was from your PO or the GMS. They can’t prepare the award without JIT info, and they don’t ask for JIT unless they plan to do something with it (the generic eRA Commons request is another matter). You can watch your Commons account for the next change, which would be Pending or Administrative Review or some such line; the status change with no actual text change means someone twiddled with something in there. You can always just check in with your PO for confirmation, too – he/she will be happy to give you an update.

      • NEIdea said

        Thanks writedit. The status changed just this morning to pending, so seems as though everything is going in the right direction.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations and best wishes for success with your project and career in academic research!

    • Secondaire said

      I am in nearly the exact same situation you are right now; I had a positive PO and the generic JIT(?) request (a series of questions – was yours the same?) came on the 27th via GMS. No eRA commons change yet but it’s a holiday weekend. Tons of congrats on your award and happy holidays!

  152. laghs said

    Is there an interim payline for NCI? I only found 9th percentile final payline for last year, but no information is available for this year. I just got a 7th percentile for my R21 – wondering whether it is good enough for the interim payline, if any. Otherwise, funding decision might have to be delayed by one cycle. Thanks.

    • writedit said

      As I recall, last year the interim was the 6th percentile at NCI, but you can certainly check with your PO. If you have a good case for why you should be considered for an award before the federal budget is resolved (e.g., tenure decision timing, impending personnel layoffs, critical animal colony to maintain, etc.), that would be good to pass along as well. If you have other funding and are established, you’ll probably need to be patient.

      • laghs said

        Thanks, writedit. Looks like I have to wait for some time.

      • writedit said

        You can still check with the PO to confirm whether the interim is again at the 6th percentile or higher for FY14.

      • laghs said

        As an update, I just received an email from NCI this week saying that my proposal has been tentatively selected for funding. So, it seems that the interim payline is at least no lower than the 7th percentile.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations and thank you for sharing this information with us all. Best wishes for success with the research.

  153. holiday_NRSA said

    Hi — I just got the scores back on an F32 resubmission to NIMH. My impact score is 26, with a percentile of 16. I can’t find any cutoffs (percentile or impact) for F32s at NIMH, but I think I saw that the R01 cutoff was 10% (or 15% for new investigators) in FY2014. Does anyone what the cutoff is for F32 at NIMH right now? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      That’s probably close – no one will know the FY14 threshold until the federal budget is resolved (so not for a while), but your PO should be happy to tell you how you would have fared in FY13 (FY14 should be similar). If this was an A0, you should discuss your strategy for the A1 with the PO, too.

      • holiday_NRSA said

        Thanks, writedit! This was an A1 submission, so hopefully it’s close enough. I’ll check with my PO about FY13.

  154. Wangming888 said

    I have a five-year K award (it was awarded in 2012), which requires a minimum of 75% effort. This year I submitted one R21 and received a good score (it may be funded in July 2014). I plan to submit a NIH Director’s New Innovator (DP2) in September 2014. But I find DP2 requires a minimum of 25% search effort. If my R21 is funded, can I still apply my DP2 because the total effort of K award and DP2 will be 100% and the effort of my R21 will turn to zero?


    • writedit said

      I think you should be fine if all these stars align (more than fine). Your R21 would run from July 2014 to June 2016; the DP2 would start ~July 2015. Depending on when your K started in 2012, you would be in your 4th year, which is when you could have some DP2 effort replace some K effort (since it would all be research effort). Check this notice – and don’t hesitate to talk with your PO:

  155. Science_is_still_good said

    NCI just sent me an approval for the second year of my R01 award. They’ve cut it to 186K from the original budget of 250K. How are we supposed to do the experiments with a 25% budget cut? Not to mention that the University continually madates higher salaries and benefit rates for techs, post-docs etc. Frustrated.

    • writedit said

      You will have some (hopefully most) of the cut restored when the federal budget is resolved. You can talk with your PO about negotiating some back, especially if there is a grad student involved or someone’s job on the line. Their hands are tied from higher up so can’t do much, but you can let them know as an FYI if someone currently in the lab is at risk.

  156. AIRmonkey84 said

    I recently received my score for an F32 which got directed towards NIAMS – priority score 24, percentile 23. I haven’t found any information on paylines for NIAMS yet. Based on the payline score last year (24), I’m going to assume this won’t be funded this year. Any idea on how I could get my PO to stand behind me and support the project?

    • AIRmonkey84 said

      I should add that the biggest knock on the project was the lack of a more concrete training plan. Is there anything I can do to hit home the fact that the training plan is appropriate, without having to go through a resubmission?

    • writedit said

      If you’re at the FY13 cut off, then you should be fine, though you won’t know for sure until the federal budget is settled. Even if the FY14 sequestration is not modified, my guess is that fellowship paylines won’t change much (not big money items). If you resubmit next spring (I assume you won’t have anything ready for next Monday), you can tweak your training plan based on what the exact concerns were … whether you weren’t getting the right training for the work proposed (or did not really propose any additional training, whether in your current lab or somewhere else on a short-term basis). Your mentor and PO can give specific advice based on your plan and the summary statement – a bit hard to do with no specifics, but you will want to make some adjustments rather than just tell the reviewers it was appropriate as proposed.

      • AIRmonkey84 said

        Thanks for the info. Couple of other questions:
        If I resubmit in April, I’m assuming that funding for 2014-2015 is shot. Correct?
        Secondly, there is some talk about me changing the mentor completely, but keeping the same project (multiple PIs working on the same project in a consortium type of approach). Is this a viable strategy, or does it cut into credibility of the training plan if I suddenly swap out mentors?

      • writedit said

        No idea what will happen in FY15, but the sequestration cap on discretionary spending is higher (more $) rather than lower (FY14 is lower than FY13, and FY15 would be higher than both – woohoo). My guess is all that will change between now and fall/winter 2014, but you shouldn’t assume the worst. On the other hand, with each passing dismal FY, I would also guess that the applicant pool will slowly shrink as smart grad students go elsewhere with their degree (& life).

        With regard to the training plan, you can have a mentor team that includes the multiple PIs (this is often best even if you aren’t involved in a multi-PI project). Changing your primary mentor shouldn’t be a problem so long as he/she is appropriate in terms of their science and has funding, track record of successful trainees, etc. Again, the PO familiar with your particulars should be willing to offer targeted advice (he/she should also know the review committee history & preferences for F32 applications).

  157. grgmrm said

    I submitted my K01 in March for NIH FIC; Received score in June; PO asked me to submit JIT which I did. Two weeks ago, I received a call from PO to inform that my study is going to be funded. Because of the Federal funding cut, grant funding will be for 4 years instead of 5. They will send the NOA soon. I haven’t received any mails yet. Do I need to follow-up? Also, is it okay to apply for a R21/R34 in 2016 February for another study if I have a K01? Thank you.

    • writedit said

      Congratulations on the award and best wishes for success with the project and your career in academic research! You do not need to do anything else. Your institution will receive email notification that the award has been issued (so they know to set up the account for you), and the NoA will appear in your eRA Commons. You can apply for an R21 or R34 earlier than Feb 2016 if your 4-year K01 starts this December. If you apply in Feb 2016, the earliest you would be funded would be Dec 2016 (and more likely 2017). You can reduce your K effort during the final 2 years of the award to accommodate an RPG award, which for you would be 2016 and 2017, so you could apply in Feb 2015 (for a Dec 2015 or early 2016 start) and then have some breathing room for a resubmission as needed before your K01 ends. Here is the relevant notice:

      • grgmrm said

        Thank you for sharing. Very useful.

  158. alessaycy said

    I am an assistant professor just starting my second year and currently have a K99/R00 award. My colleagues invited me to be a co-investigator on their X01 award. Will that hurt my early investigator status?

    • writedit said

      The X01 does not come with any funding, so no. New/ESI status is only changed upon receipt of “a substantial NIH independent research award” (essentially, an R01 or project on a P mechanism award). You can see the list of awards that you can receive and still preserve your new/ESI status here:

      • alessaycy said

        Thank you writedit! My colleague corrected me, saying that their screen grant is actually an R01, not an X01. Could I still be a co-investigator? What is the difference between co-PI and co-investigator?

      • writedit said

        Yes, you can be a co-investigator. There is really no such thing as a “co-PI”, though the term is used informally & means different things to different people. The NIH refers to applications with more than one PI as Multiple PD/PI awards. You can be key personnel (co-investigator) on as many grant awards as your % effort allows without endangering your new/ESI status. If you were a PI on a multiple PI application and the application were funded, you would lose your new/ESI status – and the application would not benefit from the review and payline breaks unless each of the PIs on the application also had new/ESI status (i.e., you would lose this designation without ever having benefited from it). It sounds like your colleagues want you just to be a co-investigator (so you’ll give them your biosketch & be listed to receive salary), which is fine. Just be careful when considering requests to be a PI on a multiple PI application.

  159. wantfund said

    I have a question I am a little embarrassed to ask re: IRB approval and JIT. Received a score March 2013 for an A1 R21 (NIMH) that while quite a bit outside the payline (20%-ile) my PO thinks has a chance given institute priorities. I have not been formally asked to submit JIT (outside of the link that becomes active for any grant score under 40) although I did submit a response to summary statements at the request of my PO. I do not currently have IRB approval. Is this something I should seek now just in case the grant comes through? Or is this something I wait on until I receive a request for JIT?

    • writedit said

      Unless your institution turns around IRB approval quickly, you should submit your protocol sooner than the JIT request. Your PO might have a better idea of the odds of funding in a week or two (if budget deal goes through), but your award will be held up until IRB approval is secured. Because this is so early in the FY, a delay due to the lack of IRB approval shouldn’t be a problem (late in the FY, some ICs move on to the next worthy applicant to be sure the money gets spent before the books are closed), but you would still lose time. Maybe check with your PO in a week or so about whether IRB approval should be sought and start working on the protocol in the meantime, just in case.

  160. wantfund said

    very helpful! Thanks

  161. jingdh836 said

    I had a R01 scored 8 percentile in Nov. Do you think it could be funded by NCI? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      I would say yes. Last year the “hard” payline was the 9th percentile (with many applications above that discussed and funded), and assuming the bipartisan budget accord holds as the appropriation language is drawn up, the NIH will get a little $ back this year (above FY13 but probably not back to FY12 levels). Unless you are particularly well funded or the topic area is overrepresented in their portfolio, you should have good news about an award. If your PO says you can be cautiously optimistic, be happy.

      • Jingdh836 said

        Thanks a lot! This really helps!

      • jcdh836 said

        I got this one funded as well. Thanks again for all the help!

      • writedit said

        Great – not surprised (would have been if you had not received an award), but thanks so much for the update. Congratulations and best wishes for success with your research!

  162. JTNII said

    Anyone know what NIDCR K99 cutoff was last year?

    • Skyline said

      What is your score? NIDCR may have a different payline system

    • writedit said

      If no one here has an NIDCR score to share, you can just ask your PO there what score they funded up to in FY13 – he/she should be willing to tell you this.

  163. alessaycy said

    This is an odd question for a friend, but can you apply for K99 if you already have a K01 award, assuming you will drop the K01 if awarded with K99?

    • writedit said

      It is odd, with the first question in response being, why would someone want to do this? The K01 should mean that your friend has some sort of faculty appointment (vs postdoc), so no, he/she would not be eligible to apply for a K99. The R00 portion is not a good deal, so if that is what attracts your friend, he/she should be applying for other RPG mechanisms during the K01 period.

      • JT said

        Dear Writedit, can you clarify why you think the R00 is not a good deal?

      • writedit said

        Well, it’s a great deal if you have a K99, of course, but it shouldn’t be the main reason to pursue a K99/R00 award. The $249K per year needs to cover direct and indirect costs, so unless your institution waives the indirects or has a low F&A rate, R00 PIs lose ~50% of the award to indirects right off the bat, so it’s generally more like a 3-y R21 than an R01 (which is how a lot of investigators think of it). Like an R21, it is not renewable. However, the benefit it has over other Ks is the greater $ for research (vs salary support), though you can’t afford to buy as much time on the R00 as would be covered with a traditional K. This is more important for clinical PIs who need protected time for research. Everyone’s situation is different, so you need to look carefully at the pros and cons of each mechanism in the context of your career path (basic vs clinical) & status and the target IC (to gauge how competitive the K99/R00).

  164. AirMonkey84 said

    I recently submitted an R21 which was triaged at this past SAT meeting. What is the next course of action I should take (if any is even possible) to get this thing back in the game?

    • writedit said

      If this was an A0, you would want to look carefully at the weaknesses cited. If 2 or 3 reviewers cited the same issues and they are readily addressed, you might consider a resubmission. You would want to confirm with your PO that your work is compelling to your target IC and get any advice specific to the study section in making your revisions. If the concerns related to the significance of the work or your overall approach, then you would probably have a more difficult time overcoming the bar. It’s hard to give specific advice without knowing the work and the rest of your situation – other funding, grant submission track record (e.g., was this previously submitted as an unsuccessful R01 & then chopped up for an R21?), what you need for this project (i.e., proof-of-concept or preliminary data for an R01, exploratory clinical trial, etc.), how you might modify the proposal to be new, etc. You could consider submitting a smaller chunk of the R21 work that did appeal to reviewers as an R03, if you need $ to get some data for publications & a stronger R21 or R01 application. Your PO, mentor, colleagues, et al. who are familiar with where you are at would have the best insight along these lines, but these are the sorts of options to consider.

  165. anyhope said

    I submitted a K01 to NIMH in Jan. 2013 (AIDS panel). Got a score of 40. Resubmitted in September, it was reviewed yesterday (12/12) and I received my score today of 30. Surprisingly fast! My PO looked at my Intro to resubmission and thought all my responses were excellent and actually made recommendations on what we should do for certain responses, which is why I’m surprised at the score. My mentors think there might be a tiny amount of hope given some review panels have been rather harsh since the gov’t shutdown and my score would be relative to others in this review cycle. Realistically, do you think I have any chance of being funded?

    • writedit said

      Well, your PO would be the best judge of that, based on how high they went in FY13. My guess is they went to the upper 20s for some K awards, not sure how competitive the K01 is there. The budget will be better in FY14, and this wasn’t a typical review cycle, certainly (not compared with the summer reviews). If your PO thinks you award is worth pushing for, then you do have a chance. You’ll want to think of responses to the A1 summary statement, since your PO will likely want this information to help advocate for your application at the Division level, if he/she can and is willing to do so. Sounds likely, though, given the help you’ve already received.

      • anyhope said

        Thanks for your quick response! I will indeed look at the summary statement and formulate the best responses possible with my mentors. I’m hoping to talk with my PO next week; besides the questions of how high they went in FY13 and my POs willingness to advocate, what else should I discuss with the PO?

      • writedit said

        You might also ask about whether to pursue your project as an RPG (research project grant), since you can’t resubmit as a K01 again. Hopefully not necessary, but you want to know your best alternative to secure funding to support your research.

  166. MKIM said

    Hi writedit- I was wanted to check on my R01 is 14tth percentile would fall in funded pay lines for NINDS. input for paylines for established and new investigators would be appreciated. Thank you.

    • writedit said

      Given that their interim payline is the 12th percentile, and the payline for FY13 was the 14th percentile, and the FY14 budget will be better than in FY13, I think you are likely to receive an award, assuming no administrative problems or significant other funding sources. If you are new/ESI, you are very likely to receive an award. Your PO won’t know until the appropriations become more clear (only have broad budget plan right now), so probably nothing definitive until next January or February – but it should be good news then.

  167. MKIM said

    Thank you writedit- great hope. I am new/ESI. I am assuming the cutt-off percentile would be higher.

  168. newPI said

    I have a question about budgeting. I am currently on my second year of my K01. I have three and half year left with 90% effort (and salary) covered by my K01. I am interested in submitting a mid-size grant like R15, R21 or private fund, putting 10% effort in time but am looking into a possibility of putting 0% effort for the purpose of budget (salary). There are two reasons. First, I am in a state-funded position so my department has hard money to provide 10% difference. But second, what I am wandering is if it is possible to maintain 90% effort for the purpose of budget on my K01 while lowering time devoted to 80%. The reason why I ask this is because the way K01 is structured I will essentially need to relinquish the 10% difference in salary because it cannot be used for any other purposes. I am inquiring my K01 PO/GMS but wanted to see if you may have any advise here.

  169. Dave said

    @writedit: A good day for the NIH today with the budget vote. You agree? God knows what has happened to the GOP, but I like this new budget for the NIH. All the chatter indicates (to me at least) that the NIH will get a lot of the sequester cut back this year, especially with Mikulski heading up the appropriations process. Seems to have barely been noticed by the science community, however, which I think is odd given that the FY14 sequester would have been absolutely horrible for the NIH.

  170. sugar science said

    Hi – I am writing to see if anyone has insight into what R01 percentiles were fundable at NIGMS in FY13. I just had my A1 submission of my R01 renewal scored at 14%. Looks like this would have been funded in FY12, but I’m not so sure about last year. I hope that Dave is right and FY14 is better. I am up for tenure next year and not having active federal funding will be a deal-breaker.

    • Not your PO but... said

      Your PO would probably tell you to be cautiously optimistic. Good score plus you are the type of lab Jon Lorsch says that he wants to focus on funding. Let’s see what kind of budget Congress provides NIH for FY14….

      • sugar science said

        Thanks – I haven’t been able to talk with my PO yet, but that is what I am hoping to hear. In the meantime, it is encouraging that others think this looks promising.

    • writedit said

      I agree completely with Not Your PO – and you want to be sure you let your PO know about your tenure situation – it does make a difference (at NIGMS anyway, but it’s always worth letting your PO know when you have a borderline score). I know of two PIs with scores at or above yours, also at tenure decision time, who were funded in FY13, and the budget for FY14 will be better.

  171. RQ said

    Has anyone ever NOT gotten the R00 portion of the K99/R00 grant even after securing a tenure-track position on time? If so, what are the reasons? Is this transition application more of a formality to make sure your new position is supportive of your future success, or does the NIH really evaluate your R00 scientific proposal?

    • writedit said

      The science was reviewed by the study section and won’t be re-reviewed; the request for the updated research plan is, I believe, more to gauge subsequent progress reports, since presumably work done during the K99 portion will require modifications to the R00 aims/approach. However, the PI must have an academic appointment at an institution where the research can be performed and where there is sufficient institutional commitment. I don’t know whether any K99 PI has not had his or her R00 activated, but if not, I would guess it is due to their dropping out of an academic career or not getting appropriate institutional support.

  172. chimps said

    Any thoughts on the likelihood of a F32 application scored in 22 percentile with an impact score of 37? Application was assigned to NCI (primary) and NIAID. Thanks

    • writedit said

      Even with the improved budget outlook for FY14, that is probably a little high, but your PO can give some insight. If this was an A0, you certainly want to submit an A1 next spring.

  173. PVM said

    Hi writedit: We finally received the scores on our R01- 9% (impact score of 23). Does it stand a chance of making it within the 2014 payline at the NIBIB? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      Stands a great chance – you can absolutely be cautiously optimistic about that score. The FY14 paylines will be better than FY13, assuming the debt ceiling debate does not take another bite out of discretionary spending (but even Republicans are in favor of NIH/biomedical research $, so the NIH should be okay).

      • PVM said

        Guess what? I heard back from the PD– current paylines for NIBIB are at 7% — she wants us to prepare a resubmission… Do you think they may relax the paylines once the funding scenarios look better in the Spring??

      • writedit said

        This is always good advice, since they might not know what the paylines will do until after the next application cycle. We are waiting on the appropriations language to be drafted, which should be kind to the NIH and hence NIBIB final paylines but still must get past the debt ceiling hurdle.

  174. newpi said

    I have a question about budgeting. I just started a tenure-track faculty position at a state university. What I am finding out is not all dollars are equal, and for some things I need to properly justify use at the point of grant application. For example, I have been told that I cannot use my grant money (K23) to fund potential students/postdocs to fly in for an interview. Is this correct? I can use the discretionary funds that are generated with indirects, but at this point I do not have enough. Traditionally, PIs have used their startup money to sponsor these costs but their is a new state policy that would not allow me to use state money to pay for student interviews (not sure about postdocs, still checking on this). We just have been informed of this policy change so my department chair is scrambling to get some F&A allocated so PIs without F&A can still interview candidates. My question is this. When you provide budget justification for grants K23, R grants or other, are we able to allocate money specifically for interviewing candidates? Even for a grant such as R15 which has a heavy emphasis for student training?

  175. NIH Budget Nerd. said

    For R grants you can.

    For R15s it would seem to be waste of money since you are supposed to already have the students recruited at your school. And Post-docs shouldn’t count as student oriented research.

    For Ks it depends on the IC funding you but generally they are not. Plus, for Ks the school gets a 8% for F&A so you are not generating much indirect for the schools. Since the research dollars you get from a K is pretty limited ($25k-50K) it seems a waste of dollars to fly out Post-doc candidates for interviews anyway. How about Skype?

    • newpi said

      Thank you NIHBN.
      To reiterate what you said and reading from the link above, it does sound like you can fly in students for interviews (I am interviewing students in a couple of months and R15 will go out shortly after) with my K23 direct cost?? Is this true even though I did not mention this specifically in my K23 budget justification (I have $23000 for “supplies” and $2000 for “travel for conference”)? I strongly prefer to see candidates in person and feel that it is a worthwhile investment. Thank you for your input.

    • newpi said

      Sorry, I misread. It sounds like I cannot use direct costs for K23, but possibly for R grant. Do I need to specify student/postdoc recruitment costs in all future R grant budget justifications?

      • writedit said

        Thanks to NIH Budget Nerd – I am not one, so this is helpful for me to learn as well. It sounds as though you could but maybe shouldn’t use the R15 $ for this. My advice would be to talk with your department or school grant administrator (depending on the level of fiscal administrators at your institution), who should know this and if not could communicate with the appropriate GMS to clarify what funds could be applied to these costs.

      • NIH Budget Nerd. said

        If you use a R01 modular budget you do not need to specify how you will spend the money. If you want more than $250k then you porbably should specify recruitment costs.

  176. Psyance said

    I recently had an R21 (A1) reviewed for NIDA. They don’t percentile R21s, but the impact score was a 20. Prior to seeing my summary statement, my PO couldn’t give me any indication of funding likelihood. I just received my summary statement. Does it do any good to contact my PO to discuss the likelihood of funding again? If so, are there specific things I should address with them (fyi, the only two weaknesses noted were that the senior investigators don’t seem to have a large enough role in the project and my attrition rate is conservative which may affect power – though this latter issue is less of a concern as the primary goal is proof of concept). Finally, any guess as to what the odds of funding at this score are (NIDA doesn’t publish paylines, so I’m in the dark here).

    • writedit said

      You should assume that R21s are as or more competitive than R01s, but you might be okay with that score, especially if the PO was interested in your summary statement. I assume the score got better with the A1, which is a good thing, and the major concerns you mention are just what the PO would want to hear – addressable weaknesses unrelated to the underlying science, its significance, or your overall approach. For the attrition concern, you should talk with your biostatistician for the proper response. I would suggest you write a 1 page response to the concerns raised in the discussion and send that to your PO, arranging a time to talk after he/she has reviewed your summary statement and response. This information is important for internal discussions about which applications to include on the paylist, which is not necessarily governed solely by score.

      • Psyance said

        Hi writedit – I just wanted to say thanks for your very helpful advice. I would have never thought to write a letter given that it was an A1 and not going back to the SRG. I wrote the letter, as suggested, and had a phone call with my PO this week. Though nothing is set in stone, things seem promising, and I think the letter had a hand in that.

      • writedit said

        Great news – thanks so much for sharing this update, which I hope turns into even better news. With the appropriation set, your PO may have better insight in the next week or so.

      • Psyance said

        Hi writedit – Last week, I got emails from my GMS asking for JIT and from my PO asking for a DSMP (she also suggested I could email the DSMP directly to her, for review, before I submit it with my JIT). I emailed the DSMP, which she approved of, and I am waiting on the IRB, which likely will not be done by council (occurring later this week). So, a few questions: I assume this is all good news, however, how likely is it that an application gets to this stage, but does not get funded? Is it going to be a major issue if my JIT is not submitted prior council? From what I have read above, it seems many JIT requests follow council. Any idea how long after council it takes to hear whether or not the application is going to be processed? Does this depend on when the JIT is submitted?

      • writedit said

        Congratulations … although it is not impossible that your award won’t be processed, highly unlikely. ICs do not go through the motions of collecting JIT and helping with DSMPs unless an award is planned. POs are always happy to look at JIT items like DSMPs just to be sure there is no hang-up in processing the award. You didn’t mention your eRA Commons status for this application, your status might be “Council review completed” in advance of Council meeting if it underwent early electronic concurrence. If there was a human subjects protection concern raised on your summary statement, though, the application would need to be discussed at Council, which is why you would have needed to submit JIT, including the DSMP, in advance (Council must see documentation that administrative concerns raised at review have been addressed before they can concur that the application can/should be considered for funding).

      • Psyance said

        Thanks for your reply! The status is still ‘pending council review’. To my knowledge, there were no human subjects issues raised during the review (or at least none that made it onto my summary statement). I’ll update with a full timeline (as others have done above), once I know for sure. I really appreciate your insights!

      • writedit said

        Great – thanks for the future update. I listed all the possibilities, because each IC handles things differently, but I still think this is good news for your application.

  177. Brenda said

    I submitted an administrative supplement to NICHD in June 2013 for our third through fifth year of funding on a R01 which begins on February 1, 2014. My PO indicated full support on their part for the proposed supplement and emailed me in August 2013 that the supplement was in the queue for approval pending discussion on the amount of funds available and what to fund. Despite several attempts to contact the PO about the status of the supplement, I have not heard back and eRA Commons still has the status of the supplement as “accepted for consideration”. No movement at all is indicated on the website. Does anyone have some insight into the probability that the supplement will be funded given this scenario or who I might better contact to at least request more information? After all this time and the fact that our renewal is pending, I would have thought that the supplement would have either been funded or rejected at this point. Thanks for any help.

    • writedit said

      My guess is that your PO is not replying because everything has been up in the air until the budget agreement – though nothing will really be settled until the appropriations get hammered out. I think the NIH will do okay even with the debt ceiling looming, so hopefully after the New Year, your PO will get back to you with an optimistic update. Your PO is really the person to contact, and while it’s not great that you have not heard anything since August, you shouldn’t assume the worst yet. Certainly check in again in the second week of January if you have not heard back yet.

  178. JE said

    I submitted a K22-A0 and got a score of 21 in Feb. 2013. I received a summary statement and talked to my PD in June. She suggested me not to send a revision to run a risk of getting a poorer score. The Council review was completed in September and I was told that I will be contacted by a NCI specialist in December if my application is funded. I have not received any notification from NCI till now, does anyone receive the notice? PS. I received a JIT but did compete it since it stated that ” await instructions from the NIH on whether to complete this information.” on eRA Commons webpage. Should I contact my PD for likelihood of the funding again? Thanks for any suggestions and happy holidays!

    • writedit said

      You will get a JIT request from your GMS or PO if your application is going to be processed for an award. It could be that they need to wait to see how the appropriations negotiations go, but you could certainly check in with your PO for a status update, especially so you know how to plan your next steps.

  179. AnewPI said

    First, congrats on your A0 21 score! Fantastic. Second, I am also in the same holding pattern as you for the K22 but with NIAID. I received an 11 impact score back in June and have since corresponded with the PO. The PO said that there will be award notifications once the fiscal year budget is established (interim paylines). I’m not up on what the senate has done with the budget but I think it’s close and then interims will be set and notifications will be sent. Chain reaction. I believe last year interims were set in Jan., at least for NIAID. If you haven’t already heard, then I would think the first 2 weeks in Jan. is when it will all happen.

    • Dave said

      I think it is likely now that they are waiting for appropriations to be set in January before making ANY decisions since it is looking highly likely that the NIH will receive at least some of the sequester funds back. Also many K study sections were bounced to January so POs do not know what their pool of scores look like. There should be no need for interim paylines if the appropriations process goes smoothy, but since the NIH is lumped in with HHS (i.e. Obamacare etc), this is not a guarantee. First week or two in January is key.

  180. Wenshe Liu said

    I just checked with my application status in commons. The application was supposed to be reviewed last week. Its status says “not discussed” that was input on Dec 20 but funnily a “JIT” link is turned on. I have sent an email to PO. It is a joke at either way.

    • writedit said

      Sorry to hear about the outcome of your application. The JIT link in the Commons is always activated (& an automated eRA Commons JIT request is sent if the score is 40 or lower), but only a request from the PO or GMS is “real”. The PO won’t be able to offer much insight until you receive the summary statement, but then you can ask about advice as to your next step, whether to resubmit or repurpose the application for a new submission (different activity code etc.).

  181. zebrafizz said

    recently received the summary for my F32 proposal to NIGMS: impact 23, 12th percentile. what do you think? how do my chances look for 2014?

    • writedit said

      Probably reasonably good, since R01 awards were made at the 12th percentile in FY13. We’ll know more about what the NIH appropriation might look like in the next few weeks. Your PO should be able to give some insight as to how this score would have done last year at NIGMS (FY14 should be better).

  182. concerned student said

    I am part of a research team that had a NHLBI R01 scored at 11% in June 2013. Council met in October 2013 after the shutdown, but did not make a decision when they were operating under an interim payline of 10%

    Our PO is being very vague with us. If after appropriations the real FY 2014 payline becomes higher, would NHLBI retroactively fund all grants scored within the real payline, that were not initially within the interim?

    • writedit said

      You should be fine. Your PO is being vague because he/she does not know any more than you do: the NIH appropriation is still in the process of being bundled into the omnibus budget bill being written now, but we will know how the NIH fared by Jan 15. They final paylines will be higher than in FY13, perhaps almost back to FY12 – and yes, the final payline is retroactive to applications considered at earlier Council meetings.

  183. Impact said

    Sorry for asking, but did the nhlbi have a 2012 payline of 10 percentile??
    Thank you.

    • writedit said

      My bad, you are correct – it was 10 in FY12 and 11 in FY13. I don’t envision NHLBI having a lower final payline in FY14 than in FY13, though (appropriation will be higher unless something goes very wrong in the omnibus negotiations), and the final payline will be retroactive to the entire FY.

  184. No hope said

    What was the payline at NIGMS in 2013?

  185. AnewPI said

    I just wanted to give a timing update with a K22 scored in June of 2013. Yesterday I received the Notice of Approval (NOA) for the award. This was for NIAID.

    • writedit said

      Congratulations again and best wishes for success with your training and career in academic research.

    • JE said

      Congratulations and thank you for sharing this info with us.

  186. Sharanjot Saini said

    I am a new and early stage investigator. I recently received a 13 percentile on my R01 A1 submission. What are my chances of getting funded from NCI? I have heard that they add 5 percentile for ESI which means i should be fundable? I received the summary statement that has minor concerns. Should i address those concerns and mail to my PO? or should i wait to hear? I sent an e-mail to my PO asking if she needs any information from my side but did not hear yet. The council is scheduled to meet in January. Please advise. I did not receive any communication on JIT yet.

    • writedit said

      Most ICs add about 5% for new/ESI – I believe NCI decides how much higher to go on a case-by-case basis. You’ll need to hear from your PO about whether she wants a short (1-2 pages) response to the concerns raised in the resume & summary of discussion. She may be waiting until the appropriation is more clear – the House just announced its omnibus appropriations bill, and the NIH will get $29.9B, putting us back to 2008-2009 appropriation levels (but still $1B more than in FY13). My guess is that you will be okay, since the payline won’t be lower than the 9th percentile from FY13, and you are close to that. Don’t worry about not getting a request from your PO for information or a JIT – the JIT would not come until around (or even after) the NCAB meeting.

      • Jane said

        If you have a grant with NCI, your PO will be a critical factor for the final decision based on my personal experience. If possible, you may want to talk with her on the phone. Good luck!

  187. writedit said

    From summary of the FY14 federal spending bill: National Institutes of Health (NIH) – The bill includes $29.9 billion for the NIH, $1 billion above the fiscal year 2013 level. This funding will continue support for basic biomedical research and translational research through the programs like the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) and Institutional Development Award (IDeA) to support scientists as they conduct research to discover cures. Further, it provides full support for the NIH Office of Science Education and programs like the Science Education and Partnership Awards (SEPA) to support biomedical research for the future.

  188. Sharanjot Saini said

    Thanks! I finally heard from my PO with JIT request! Also i need to submit a statement addressing SRG concerns. Fingers crossed!

  189. nrsa_hopeful said

    Have an F32 (A0) that received impact score of 30 and 20th percentile to NICHD. Summary statement had minor concerns that looked very addressable. It looks like it wouldn’t have made the cut-off in FY13 (payline at 16th percentile), but any thoughts on its prospects for FY14? Have contacted PO by e-mail, but haven’t heard back …

    • writedit said

      Hard to say. The budget isn’t that much better for FY14, but I would imagine it going up at least a few percentile points, especially since the cut-off was the 26th percentile in FY12 & FY11 and 24th in FY10 . Your PO is probably waiting until he/she can provide more definitive infomation, now that they know their appropriation and the number of applications in contention (though final scores won’t be in for another month or so).

      • nrsa_hopeful said

        Thanks – I will continue to keep my fingers crossed then, and hope to hear from my PO in the meantime.

      • nrsa_hopeful said

        Hi writedit – wanted to update here. I submitted a JIT request from the GMS this past Friday, which got my hopes up. But, I’ve now received this message from the PO: “Based on our current budget projections and the number of high-quality applications, the priority score your proposal received is in the uncertain range for funding. You may be aware that the NIH budget has not yet been approved, and many government agencies are operating under a Continuing Resolution. The Institute is therefore limited in its ability to issue any awards at the present time. Your application is now on hold pending resolution of the budget and formulation of the NICHD funding plan for this round.”

        Do you have thoughts on why they would have requested JIT information but now say that funding is uncertain? And do you have any recommendations for what to do next? Many thanks.

      • writedit said

        Well, the CR language is old, but the intent is probably to convey they still don’t know yet how far down the paylist they can go. The JIT is never a guarantee of funding, though these days, ICs reserve these requests for applications likely to be considered. Have you asked the PO if you should prepare an A1 for August? (or did you get one ready for April?)

      • nrsa_hopeful said

        Hi writedit – I just checked eRA commons and the status has changed to “Award prepared: refer questions to Grants Management Specialist.” I assume this is good news (?!)

      • writedit said

        Congratulations — you have a grant award! Best wishes for success with your project and your career in academic research.

  190. New PI said

    Hi, I just started on a K01. I know I should probably know this, but can’t get a straight answer! For the research funding support per year ($25K), if we don’t use all of it the first year, for example, does it rollover into the second year? Or is it year dependent? Thank you!

    • writedit said

      You can have carry over (up to a certain percentage). If you had serious delays starting your project and will need to carry over most of those funds, you’ll want to let your PO know about the delay, and you’ll need to write a justification. If this is just some simple carryover (less than 25% of award), it’s not an issue. Your grant/fiscal administrator should be able to help you with the fiscal reporting component of your progress report. NIH Policy on carryover in K awards can be found here: (general carryover policy, which applies to Ks, here:, though awardees should always check their NoA as well)

      • New PI said

        Thanks so much for the quick reply, writedit! It’s incredibly helpful.

  191. mstudent said


    I was just wondering if there’s any word on paylines for the NCI FY2014 (F31) now that there’s some budgetary info from congress. I submitted in april 2013, got an impact score of 27 and percentile of 23. With the shutdown, the decision seems to be held in stasis. Any thoughts on my chances?

    • writedit said

      With the passage of the omnibus budget bill and the NCI appropriation final, your PO will now have a good idea as to whether your score is fundable. Check with him/her later next week.

      • mstudent said


      • mstudent said

        Hi writedit, just want to update for all those concerned about F31s at NCI. I have found out from my PO that the interim payline is 20%, and they will not increase that until July/Aug.

        I ended up resubmitting my grant application, and today I got my new score of 7%, which I am confident will be funded, although I don’t expect notice of award for a few weeks at least.

        Thanks again for all your help, and for maintaining this nerve- relieving site!

      • writedit said

        Congratulations on the exceptional score and thank you so much for posting your intel – your collective participation is what makes the site great. They may go back and fund your A0 now (sooner), but if not, you can relax in the knowledge your A1 will be funded this summer (will take a couple of months rather than weeks if it needs to go to Council etc.). Best wishes for success with your training and your career in academic research!

  192. Z PI said

    I would like to submit my first R01 to NCI. Is there a good resource to learn about this funding mechanism?

    • writedit said

      The NIAID has the best tutorials for developing grant applications (all advice, unless specified for a certain activity code, applies to the R01):

      They have a section specific to the R01 as well:

      You can also review example applications and their summary statements:

      NCI-specific grant preparation advice can be found here:

      You should talk with your PO at NCI, too.

      If you don’t know about finding and communicating with POs or how the NIH works, I might suggest a book (I am an author, but I wrote it based on the sort of advice people seek from me in person & on this blog):

      • Z PI said

        Thanks writ edit. I work for a small business, and we have received SBIR awards, but have never submitted an R01. We aim to use the R01 mechanism to perform IND-enabling experiments for a small molecule oncology drug. The aims will not be very innovative, but are geared to de-risk the project and advance development into the clinic. Do you see these aims as being an issue (as they are not “innovative” academic type aims).

      • writedit said

        I’d suggest you talk with your SBIR award PO about which is the best route to take. The issue may not be so much innovation as a focus on development rather than research. It’s hard to say without more detail about the project, but your SBIR PO could suggest an appropriate R01 PO, if that is the mechanism he/she suggests pursuing, who in turn could offer advice on how your aims would be received at NCI.

  193. Z PI said

    Does anyone know of any funding mechanisms that are specifically for clinical trials? We have small molecule oncology (triple negative breast cancer) and hematology (sickle cell) molecules that are about ready for IND submission. However, we would like to use non-dilutive funding to advance the molecules through first-in-human trials (P0, PI or PI/2a)

    • writedit said

      NCI has an omnibus R21 PA, and NHLBI issues R21 announcements on focused areas of research, including pilot clinical trials (many ICs issue R21 PAs specifically to support exploratory/pilot clinical research). Check the IC websites, search the NIH Guide, and talk with the appropriate POs to determine the most appropriate FOAs.

  194. SHJ said

    Hi, I submitted my first R01 in Octo… oops, I meant November.
    I’ve developed a good relationship over several years with one particular PO, who is enthusiastic about my stuff. He directed me to, and I did, ask for assignment to him in my cover letter. However, the era-notification email I got in December indicated that my grant had been assigned to a different PO, within the same IC. The study section is as I requested. The new PO is appropriate (they overlap), so I am hesitant to make a fuss, but I’d also like to benefit from the relationship that I’ve worked to develop with the first PO – what should I do here?

    • writedit said

      Best of both worlds – keep in touch with both of them. The assigned PO will be the one administering your application and (if/when made) award. You can let your first PO know about the assignment to the second, and you can let your assigned PO know you have already been working with the first. They may work it out to move the applicaiton back to the first PO, but if not, it’s great to have two good POs with whom you can communicate and who will advocate for you at the IC.

    • TCResearcher said

      Let PD who you’ve been communicating with know. This has happened to me on a number of occasions– CSR gets it to the right branch, and then let the branch take over.. sometimes a name gets put in there as a placeholder.

  195. SG said

    Ask the PO you know if he/she would be willing to take it. Usually it is not a problem to transfer within an IC. Of course it can only be a good thing if they fight over you.

  196. boo said

    Hi writedit – I received the score of my R01 A1 in December. It’s probably at the borderline of the payline for NI/ESI. I contacted the POs and he asked me to write a response to reviewers’ comments in the summary statement. The council meeting is at the end of this month but I was told the funding decision meetings will be in March or April. May I ask if there are general suggestions how to write the response? Start from the Resume from Panel? Do I need to address every one of the concerns raised by individual reviewers? Thanks!

    • writedit said

      You should address concerns raised in the Resume and Summary of Discussion. Concerns cited in an individual critique that are not mentioned in the discussion may have been raised but addressed as part of the discussion (in which case someone else on the committee responded) or may not have been so important (in the SRO’s mind) to warrant mention in the summary. If more than one individual reviewer raised the same concern (not listed in the discussion paragraph), you should address this as well. You can send your PO the response and then ask if there are individual critiques that you should also address, especially since I assume this was a rescheduled online review (versus in person meeting). I would recommend that you quote each critique verbatim (i.e., don’t paraphrase) followed by a short paragraph with your response (including literature citations as appropriate). Organize your responses by Resume/Summary, Critique 1/Overall, Critique 2/Approach, etc. If possible, keep your response to a page, but that is not required here as it is for a formal resubmission – just don’t go on too long in your response. You can include some white space to help readability. You do not need to highlight any of the strengths raised or thank reviewers for their time – you are not responding to them directly.

  197. Emily said

    Hi Writedit,
    I have found this website instrumental in a lot of ways, so THANKS.
    I was wondering what is the chance for a KO8 with a score of 25 (received ~2 mon ago) getting funded this year….

    • writedit said

      Glad to help however I can, so thanks for your support. On the score, it depends on the IC and on the current crop of applicants. Your PO should be able to give a little insight as to how that score stacks up with the rest of the pile. If this was an A0, you could also ask about how to tailor your revision for the A1, if the PO thinks that is needed.

  198. Emily said

    Thanks for the reply. Forgot to mention this K was submitted to NHLBI, the IC meeting is next month.

  199. S said

    Hi Writedit,

    I received a score of a 25 on a phase I SBIR grant application last June 2013. I have contacted the PO for the grant several times but she does not know if and when it will be funded. Who can I turn to at this point to find out if the grant will be funded.

    • writedit said

      You will need to be patient a little longer. You didn’t indicate which IC, but the NIH just received its appropriation, so the ICs will know what they are doing in the next couple of weeks. Your PO really hasn’t known whether you would be funded (especially since the last cycle of reviews have not been completed). She should have some information by early to mid February. No one above her will have any more details about your funding chances, so there is no need to ask higher up the ranks.

  200. S said

    Thanks for the info.

    • Peter said

      Could you let us know the IC?

  201. BrianM said

    Just wanted to say thanks to writedit for helping explain the process and keeping us informed. Last year was very stressful, 2014 looks to be a bit more hopeful, and many of us are on pins and needles, checking commons, and hoping for good news.

    • writedit said

      Thanks so much for taking a moment to say so. I hope you all hear good news as the appropriation is sorted out in the coming weeks – and I am very happy to have provided any help that might have gotten you closer to some good news.

  202. K99-R00 said

    Does anyone know if you can terminate your K99 early to start at your new faculty position while the R00 is still in review and not yet approved? The NIH says that “funding should be continuous,” and I wonder if this means I cannot start at my new institute until R00 approval.

    • writedit said

      If you have completed your 1 year on the K99, you can start your faculty position – you just won’t get R00 funding until it is approved. However, if you have not completed the first year on the K99 yet, you should talk with your PO. These awards now require PIs to complete at least one full year of K99 mentored training, though I am not sure if/how this is applied to current awardees. Your PO can help sort out the timing, especially since ICs will be busy soon catching up on all their back-logged awards, once their appropriation will be available.

      • K99-R00 said

        I have completed more than a year of the K99. It’s just the “continuous funding” terminology that stumped me. If I start the new appointment, my K99 will be terminated even though the R00 is still in review, and that automatically puts a break in the funding. I don’t want to jeopardize the R00 by starting my new position before the approval.

      • writedit said

        Starting your new faculty position before R00 funding is approved should not be an issue, but you won’t put anything in jeopardy by communicating with the PO about this. They want to help make the transition smooth and are not looking for a reason not to award the R00. Your grants office (at faculty appointment institution) is likely familiar with these transitions as well and can probably offer advice, but you shouldn’t worry about endangering the award by talking with the PO. I would frankly be surprised if any K99 – R00 transition that involved a change in institution (which ideally, it does) did not involve some gap in funding, though the start date of the R00 might be back dated to match the end of the K99 portion.

    • K99-R00 said

      Dear Writedit,
      Thank you for your advice. I contacted my PO, and everything is fine. It seems that having the faculty appointment before the K99 funding period ends is the more important issue. The start of the R00 is flexible.

      • writedit said

        Great – I am glad this will work out for you. Thank you so much for posting this update, and best wishes for success with your new position and your research program.

  203. PVM said

    Hello: The NIBIB informed us that the interim paylines for the R01 were at 7%! Do you think these will budge with the recent appropriations/omnibus bill? We are at 9% and were asked to prepare a resubmission to be safe. Any insights would be appreciated!

    • writedit said

      Your PO gave you the right advice about preparing the A1. The interim payline may not go up until after the last cycle of reviews in Feb/March. I’m sure your PO hopes it will go up to the 9th percentile then (me too), but if it didn’t, you would be stuck until July,so he/she is just being responsible in giving you the resubmission advice. If your A1 will be stronger if you wait (e.g., publication submitted/accepted by then) and you aren’t under time pressure for funding, you could wait for the July receipt date & see what happens in March/April – recognizing you risk losing time if the payline doesn’t go up.

  204. WJM said

    Hi Writedit,

    Our SBIR phase II submission from last spring was scored at a 22. With interim paylines set at 21 should we expect to be funded? I’m relatively new to this process and can’t find any historical data showing how interim paylines change after everything is finalized. Our PO didn’t have much info to share as the interim values have just been issued.

    • writedit said

      I assume you are referring to NIAID, in which case you can find their archive of past paylines here:

      Interim paylines generally remain in effect until after the last cycle of grant reviews coming up (Jan-March, for applications submitted last fall), at which point ICs can gauge how many applications have been scored at what percentile and what the budget can accommodate. Your 22 would have been funded last year, and I expect it will be funded again this year – but the PO probably won’t be able to say anything definitive for another month or so.

      • WJM said

        Thanks Writedit. Correct this is for NIAID. Your info on timing is very helpful.

        Sorry I may have been unclear in my original text. I was trying to find historical interim paylines and compare them to the final paylines listed in your link. Basically how much the payline changes from interim to actual. I’m assuming it varies from year to year but if there is a precedent of all interim values increasing (even a little bit) when the final values are posted it would make us feel a bit more confident in our funding chances since we were a point off.

      • writedit said

        NIAID almost always goes up a point at least. I think last year the R01 payline went from 6th to 8th percentile. SBIR is a set percentage of the budget, and there is a little more money in FY14 than in FY13, so unless there are also a lot more exceptional applications yet to be reviewed, I would imagine the payline will reach 22 and possibly higher.

      • WJM said

        Hi Writedit,

        We were pleased to see that the NIAID SBIR paylines were raised to a 32, with our Ph2 application receiving a 22 we are optimistic that we will be funded now. Could you provide any advice on when we might hear something regarding funding? We currently have an open window to apply for a state match that would provide additional funding for our project. However we need an award letter to apply.

      • writedit said

        It depends on when you submitted your application. If you were just scored in Feb/March, then you will need to wait until June/July. If you submitted last April or August, then you could have a notice of award soon – or not for several weeks still, depending on where you are in the backlog. I would suggest you contact your PO for an idea on timing and whether he/she can help with the opportunity for state matching funds. If your application has not gone to Council yet, though, I doubt they can give you any sort of guarantee.

      • SD said

        Hi WJM,

        May I ask which state you are referencing? Do you know of a list of the states offering an SBIR/STTR matching award?

      • WJM said

        Thanks Writedit. Our application went to Council last September so hopefully we will get some good news from our PO. Thanks again

        Sorry SD, I’m not aware of a list of states with matching programs, though I would think one would exist. I was referencing KY.

      • writedit said

        Oh wow – long time to wait. You should check with your PO and let him/her know about your situation. They would want to see your NIH award leveraged for additional funding.

  205. SB said

    Hi , I submitted a K99/R00 on June 13 and got an impact score 20. I don’t know whether it is still fundable or not? The council meeting is on 12 Feb. I am still eligible for resubmission on March. Don’t know what to do? Whether I should prepare to resubmit or not? Any suggestion please.

    • writedit said

      You didn’t mention which IC, but your PO can give you advice on whether to resubmit. If March is your last chance to resubmit (don’t forget the time restrictions are stricter now), then you should plan to do so unless your PO indicates you will be funded. If you submit an A1, the A0 remains active and eligible for funding, so you could receive an award before the A1 is reviewed (in which case it will be withdrawn) – and you could still receive an award for the A0 later even if your A1 score goes up. But, if you have not communicated with your PO, you should do so now and ask about both funding likelihood and resubmission strategy.

      • SB said

        Dear Writedit, thanks for your reply. I submitted to NHLBI. In 2013 NHLBI funded to applicants getting priority score of 25 and better. I already contacted to PO about the possibility of funding and whether I should prepare to resubmit on March? In his reply the PO told me that ” we are now funding K applications from the October Council Round with scores of 20 so there is high probability that your application will be included in the next pay plan issued after the February meeting.” I am not sure whether I should count it as positive or not.

      • writedit said

        Your PO is telling you he thinks you will receive an award next month. No need for an A1. Congratulations and best wishes for success with your project and your career in academic research.

      • SB said

        Thanks for the reply. This blog is really helpful.

  206. HSV said

    Dear writedit, I am a foreign applicant through a special NIAID mechanism. My study section gathered by December 16. I was expecting the advisory council meeting by January 27, but in my era-commons account such meeting appeared to be executed by December 19. Then, there was a change in the status of my proposal to “pending administrative review” by January 23rd; but still is before January 27th. Is it possible that there was some glitch in the system? or is it possible that the grant is under administrative review?

    • writedit said

      This is a bit unusual. You don’t mention your score, but I assume it must be low and in the funding range. Normally, I would say that your application had undergone electronic concurrence in advance of the Council meeting, but I believe they are required to approve all applications from foreign applicants at the actual meeting. It could be your application is undergoing pre-Council administrative review. Have you been asked for or submitted your JIT? You can certainly check with your Program Officer to get an update on your status, but I assume your eRA status is good news, as it usually is.

      • HSV said

        Thanks for your prompt reply. Proposal’s impact factor score was 34. But it is very difficult to know at the present moment if it is an acceptable score to get funded. When the score was published I asked to PO, but she said it still too early to tell. That was on December 17. I have received era Commons usual notification about JIT, but I have not received a personal communication. I am on the verge of submitting the JIT. What is your opinion?

      • writedit said

        Hmm. This is curious. The score is pretty high, but I am guessing it must be a special mechanism. You should ask your PO if you should submit JIT – that will tell you whether this is a genuine administrative review (if she says no, don’t bother to submit to the eRA Commons link). If you haven’t checked in with her since Dec 17, don’t worry about doing so now – you aren’t being a pest at all, and with the appropriation signed into law, she probably has a better idea where you stand (& whether you are on the pay list).

  207. HSV said

    You are right. This is a special mechanism. [Limited Competition: International Research in Infectious Diseases, including AIDS (R01)]. So all depends on how many good scores are lower than mine. On 2012, eleven grants were funded. On the dark ages of 2013, only 6 grants. I don’t know if the 1 billion increase will improve odds. I will follow your advice, and write to PO. Thanks for your wonderful blog.

  208. FunkyMonkey said

    I submitted an F30 to the NIAID and recieved a 16. The interim pay line was published today as 13. What are my chances? :(

  209. Peter said

    .Dear Writedit,

    I wonder if you would be willing to make a comment on my chance for funding of a SBIR phase I from NCI with an impact score of 24? Application was submitted in August 2013. Thanks.

    • writedit said

      That seems on the edge but certainly possible. With the appropriation passed, your PO should know soon how much $ SBIR will have for FY14 and should then be able to comment on funding likelihood. If your score is in the gray zone, you would need to wait for the next cycle of reviews to be complete before a final decision could be made – but your PO should have a reasonable idea in a week or so.

  210. Prof X said

    Dear Writedit,

    I submitted an RO1 response to an RFA from NIDDK. It was triaged. I was pondering sending it in as a regular RO1 with dual assignment to NIDDK and NIGMS. Can I do this and get 2 more attempts? If it fails 2x as an RO1, can I resubmit as an R15?

    Many thanks for your help!

    Prof. X

    • writedit said

      Yes, you can submit the R01 to the parent or other appropriate program announcement as an A0. You would want to use the RFA summary statement to revise the application, but you would not include an Introduction or refer to the prior review anywhere. However, the basic project can stay the same (with improvements based on the prior review). This is one of the limited situations in which you get 3 shots with the same proposal.

      • Prof X said

        Many thanks for your quick response, and for this very informative blog.

  211. jcdh836 said

    Dear Writedit,

    I have a R01 (A1) scored 15 percentile and my PO at NCI worked with me to rescue it for funding. I was told in last December that this grant was presented by her and discussed in a meeting with other POs, and it was among the last group of grants forwarded to leadership for approval. However, the leadership meeting was postponed from mid-December 2013 to mid-January 2014 and now further to early-February 2014… My PO never told me to prepare for a resubmission but apparently this grant is still not for sure to be funded. What do you think about my chance here? Many thanks.


    • writedit said

      Sounds like you have a good PO and that your application has a good chance of funding due to her efforts (and your excellent score). You may know after the February NCAB meeting, or you may be told that you will have to wait for a final decision after the last cycle of reviews (~April), at which point NCI will know how many good-scoring applications they need to consider for funding in FY14. With an A1, there would be no resubmission, so you could be working on a new R01 or converting the A1 to an R21 in the meantime.

      • jcdh836 said

        My PO just told me tonight that my grant was selected for funding. Good luck to all of you and thank you writedit for your kind help.

      • writedit said

        Congratulations and best wishes for success with the research! Thanks so much for sharing this update with us.

  212. Jcdh836 said

    Thanks a lot!

  213. NK said

    is it a bad sign if you do not get a JIT request before Council meets? I am probably on the borderline for an R21, which my PO said has been out forwarded for possible funding. NIDDK Council meets February 5 and I have not been asked for any additional information. In the past, the GMS at NHLBI asked for JIT information if my application was in a fundable range.

    • writedit said

      No need to worry too much. If the PO is confident about funding, he/she will ask for JIT in advance of Council (also if any administrative concerns were raised in the summary statement, since these must be addressed before funding can be considered). Applications in the gray zone aren’t decided until after Council – and you may not ultimately know until after the next cycle of reviews, if NIDDK wants to wait to see how many applications are scored in what they anticipate to be the funding range for FY14.

      • Dave said

        From my information, JITs are not being requested prior to some early council meetings for some ICs and mechs as they are running behind following the shutdown. Funding decision for some ICs and mechs are being delayed until a few weeks after council, apparently, and JITs will be requested nearer decision time.

    • said

      what do you mean you did not get request for JIT. You didn’t have a JIT link in your eRA account or you had a JIT link activated yet did not receive a direct notice from the PO?

      • NK said

        In the past, I have been asked for JIT material from the Grants Management Specialist prior to Council meeting if there was a good likelihood of funding. This time I did not get this type of request- however, the PO said my grant had been out-forwarded for possible fundinging (score of 26). NIDDK Council met on Feb 5, 2014. How long should I wait to reach out to my PO?

  214. YMKP said

    Dear Writedit,
    How far back can we charge supplies, etc to our SBIR grant prior to the grant’s start date?

    • writedit said

      I am not quite sure of the question. You have received a grant (vs a contract), and you will not need to submit itemized receipts to document how you spent the money earmarked for supplies. The NIH wants to see you achieve your aims – exactly how you spend the $ to do so is your decision. Here is the NIH policy on grant budgeting (by the recipient, post-award): and here are the sort of budgetary changes that the NIH would need to be notified of:

    • SD said

      I have been informed by my colleagues that SBIR pre-award spending is allowed up to 3 months before the start date. Our company has also successfully petitioned for a 6 month pre-award spending window.

      • writedit said

        Yes, pre-award spending can occur up to 90 days before the award (NIH policy here). Interesting that you were able to get approval to spend 180 days before the award – thanks for sharing your experience.

  215. AGST said

    Dear Writeedit,
    I re-submitted an F31 to NCI back in August ’13 and received a score of 20/9th%. The council meeting was in January and I am getting pretty anxious. Do you know how long it can take to hear anything from the council review or do you have any comments on my chances of funding? I tried to review NCI pay guidelines but there is nothing stated for F31 fellowships.

    Thank you,

    • writedit said

      You need to be patient and not anxious. First, the Council meeting date in your eRA Commons account is the general cycle, not the specific date. NCAB does not meet until Feb 26-27. Even then, Council won’t decide if your application wil be funded, just whether it can be considered for funding. Now that NCI has its appropriation, your PO can probably give you a reasonable idea of the likelihood of funding. Applicants with scores in the gray zone will need to wait until after the current review cycle is complete, at which point ICs will know how many applications have what scores and they can see how far their money can go. I think that score should be clearly in the funding range rather than in the gray zone, but I don’t know how the current crop of F31s at NCI are scoring. If you haven’t checked with your PO, you can certainly do so now.

  216. I have a Phase I SBIR A1 submission with an impact score of 29, the primary institute is NINDS. Could anyone comment on its likelihood of getting funded. Thanks

    • writedit said

      That seems a little high, but I do not know the range of scores of applications assigned to NINDS. Your PO should be able to give you an idea now of your likelihood of funding – or at least whether you should hold out some optimism (if this is in the gray zone, you might need to wait until after the current round of reviews – so late March/April).

  217. BAK said

    Does anyone have any ideas what the NCI-K22 award payline will be for FY2014?

  218. LNS said

    My first R01 should have been reviewed by an NCI study section yesterday (nothing posted yet in commons). My application also has NICHD listed as a secondary institute. Does that mean that a study section from NICHD will also review the grant? Thanks for any clarification you can provide.

    • writedit said

      Your R01 was reviewed by a study section in the CSR (Center for Scientific Review), not NCI. NCI is the primary institute assigned to consider your application for funding (based on the peer review conducted in CSR). NICHD, as the secondary assignment, could consider your application for funding if NCI declines to fund it – but almost certainly won’t (very very few secondary ICs pick up applications any more). You can see the study section (Scientific review group) that actually reviewed your application by looking under the second column (Study Section) in the Application Information box – look for a set of 3-4 initials; you can then look up the SRG at the CSR Website. Your score will be posted in a a day or two (it is not instant), and your summary statement will follow in a few weeks. When you have your score and summary statement, you can check with your PO about funding likelihood (assuming your application was discussed), resubmission strategies, and other next steps. I don’t like to promote this too much, but you sound like a candidate for our book, which will explain how both the NIH itself and the application, review, and funding process works.

      • LNS said

        Thanks so much for this quick and very helpful reply. Definitely looks like I need your book since I didn’t know the study section isn’t specific to the IC! Many thanks,

      • writedit said

        Well, it would be reviewed by the IC for an RFA and for certain funding mechanisms, but most R01 applications (and most RPGs in general) go to CSR for review.

      • LNS said

        I just found out that I received 10th percentile (impact score 30). Although the payline for NCI was 9th percentile, does it seem likely that I will get funded since I am an ESI? Or is my ESI status already factored into the percentile that I received? Thank you!

      • writedit said

        If you are referring to an R01 application, you will get additional consideration (only applies to R01 though). NCI does not automatically give a formulaic percentile break for ESI (e.g., 3 or 5 percentile points), but they do go above the stated funding threshold (9th percentile in FY13) to pick up both ESI and additional established PI applications.

  219. Pluto said

    Hi writedit:

    Thanks for such a great blog/listserve and book. One thing that does not come up much in either is the topic of what one does after having an R01 to keep things going. Specifically, what general (or specific) advice do you give to someone like me who is just starting year 2 of a first R01 in terms of: (a) planning well in advance to have the best shot at a competing renewal award, both in terms of budgeting and scientific accomplishments, and (b) tips about maintaining stability of funding and personnel through budgeting and new grants and so forth.

    (I realize this is sort of a general topic–maybe even book #2–but any advice you have would be terrific!)

    • writedit said

      Thanks so much for the kind words. Exact advice is best on a case-by-case basis, but in general, you want to be submitting other applications, both related to your R01 work (to other federal agencies, foundations, professoinal societies, internal competitions [eg, pilot studies funded by a CTSA, SPORE, or other P50], etc. and different NIH activity codes, if you can avoid overlap) and to launch a second (or third) line of funded work in a different area. At the NIH, developing projects that are of interest to more than one IC and more than one SRG is crucial to maintaining a steady cash flow for your lab. They need not all be R01s (an R03 or R21 might be more appropriate to secure preliminary data, develop an experimental model, etc.), but they need to be distinct in focus and hypothesis/impact. It could be results from your current R01 inspire an offshoot line of research, but you will also want to keep interesting new leads from the current R01 to develop into aims for the renewal. The renewal itself should have innovative aims that take the work in a new (logical) direction rather than an incremental continuation of what you did during the first project period. Your publications should lay out the story of what you accomplished, with your most recent preliminary data supporting the new direction. In terms of planning now, you will want to ensure that you have carry over funds at the end for use during a no-cost extension (i.e., don’t blow your whole wad now), and you want to be publishing something each year, if possible, though your productivity should include a few nice journals (versus a shotgun blast of low-impact titles). Easy to say, harder to do. You want to get your data in front of your likely reviewers, too, at meetings (and in journals), so they’ll be excited to keep the flow of new information flowing. Your mentors (past & present colleagues), collaborators, and PO can give good input specific to your situation (PO can advise about upcoming initiatives that match your interest/expertise), and you will see more advice here and elsewhere in the blogosphere.

  220. Ken said

    Hi, does any one know if NCI has a FY14 interim payline for R21? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      R21s tend to follow the R01 pattern. You can see how your score would have fared in FY13 in their funding patterns graph for R21s:

      • Ken said

        Thanks writedit. I received a 9th %tile. It looks promising when comparing it to the data shown in the figures. My other question is that this R21 was submitted under a special PA and not parent R21. Is there a separate payline for the unsolicited and for special R21? Thanks!

      • writedit said

        One payline for all R21s (including regular PAs), but applications submitted to PARs/RFAs get special consideration for funding out of order (competing against other applications to the same program vs all R21s).

  221. QYtang said

    Hi, Writedit, do you know any payline information about NIH SC1? QY

    • writedit said

      I have never seen a posted payline for the SCORE program, but your PO should be willing to give some estimation as to your funding likelihood based on your score.

  222. QYtang said

    Thanks a lot for your reply. I recently received a score of 22 for my R15 grant (NIAID). how do you think the possibility of getting funded? Thanks a lot. QY

    • writedit said

      Last year, the payline was 20, so you could ask your PO if it looks like it will move up a couple of percentile points for FY14.

  223. Sky said

    Is it a bad sign that I did not receive JIT request from GMO or PO before the council meeting? The status is council meeting complete, still no news….. should I be very concerned?

    • writedit said

      Are you expecting an award? If so, not to worry – often JIT is requested after Council meets, and right now, all ICs are backed up in terms of award processing since they just received their appropriation a few weeks ago. If you are unsure about an award, then you should check with your PO about the status of your application.

      • Sky said

        Thank you for your explanation!

  224. TLe said

    Thanks for maintaining this feed. It is very useful. I wrote an R21 May13 received 12th percentile NIBIB resubmitted Nov13 and received 55th percentile… Is there any chance the first proposal is picked up for funding? What would be the best strategy at this stage? I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks!

    • writedit said

      Talk with your PO. The A0 is still eligible for funding, if your PO is excited about the work and wants it in his/her portfolio. You’ll probably have to wait until spring no matter what, but if your PO is behind you, and the payline gets to the 12th percentile, you could still get an award.

  225. MMJay said

    I have a 26 impact score in A1 of my K22 application in Feb 2013 submission, reviewed in June 2013 and council review completed in Oct 2013. Sofar, I do not have any views about the funding situation and Program officer also could not suggest anything at this time point. Is there any opinions on my application.

    • writedit said

      You don’t mention the IC (though only a few accept K22 applications), but your PO has the best insight at this point, since he/she knows how the scores are spread and prior trends. That score is pretty high, though, so you will probably have to wait until after the current round of reviews are done and your IC has all the K22 scores in hand to make final decisions.

      • MMJay said

        Thanks for the insight. my application was for NCI K22. This application is revision one. This application was submitted in Feb 2013, reviewed in June 2013 and council review completed in Oct 2013. My PO has not given any clue except wait until June 2014, I don’t know why?

      • writedit said

        Ah – this is what I about waiting until the next round of reviews is complete. Yours will be one of the last applications to be considered for funding as the FY winds down, but it is good news that your PO thinks this is possible. At this point, there is nothing else you can do but wait – and start getting your alternative plans ready in case an award is not made.

  226. Peter said

    Does anyone know the NCI SBIR payline for last year?

  227. whatsupdoc said

    Not sure if this is the forum for this but was just wondering if anyone has ever had any experience dealing with a bad program officer (e.g. non-responsive, dismissive, minimally engaged)? I got a relatively decent score on my most recent submission but I cringe at the thought of trying to talk to my program officer to ask for help. I’m actually more than a little worried of being stuck with this person if I actually do get funded!

    • writedit said

      Although I think (hope) it is relatively rare, there are POs who are at best not helpful and at worst a negative asset. I would suggest you check the IC Website (or RePORTER, via searches for similar funded research) to identify other POs who might be appropriate for your science – and ask colleagues. If a mentor or colleague can make an introduction to an alternative program contact who might be appropriate, that would be very good. You can explain your situation and simply indicate that you have not received a response and wondered if they might have any insight or suggestions. Often, IC coworkers of underperforming POs recognize them as such and are willing to help as they are able; just bringing your science to the attention of someone else who might speak up on your behalf at meetings where decisions are made could be helpful. Making a connection with an alternative appropriate PO will be important moving forward (for subsequent applications) no matter what, so the effort is necessary. If there is no one obviously appropriate or no other choice, you can ask at the Branch or Division level (whoever oversees your PO’s group) for an update on your application status and advice moving forward. I have two friends with lousy POs. One had a change in PO assignment (original PO was both dismissive and almost punitive), and a languishing application from FY13 was resurrected by the new PO for funding in FY14. Amazingly wonderful outcome, which I believe (but do not know for sure) came about through my friend & colleagues communicating with a different PO about their predicament (this other PO was not in the appropriate Division but probably communicated with others in a position to take a look & make a change). The other has a busy Division chief assigned who is not in the PI’s area of expertise; this is a tougher situation to resolve, since the Division in question lacks, right now anyway, a good PO for actually quite a large swath of science, and there is not much to be done unfortunately.

      • SaG said

        Someone needs to setup a PO version of Rate my Professor. I am all for the naming and shaming route. The risk is that no one in the whole IC cares that the PO is doing a bad job and you are branded a whiner. Hmmm….maybe a rate my PI site would be good too.

  228. whatsupdoc said

    Thank you so much for your reply. Prior to me submitting my grant, I actually spoke with a different program officer (that was referred to me by someone at the Division level) — who was fantastic. It was to my great disappointment that when I took a peek in era commons that someone else was assigned to be my program officer. I am an absolute newbie at this, so pardon this question, but are you actually able to request a specific program officer when submitting your grants? And are you stuck with the same program officer for anything you submit to that institute? I would absolutely love to swap out my PO for the resubmission. Seriously, I was looking up alternative careers (dealing blackjack sounded fun) after my last conversation with them.

    Thank you again for your advice!

    • writedit said

      You can communicate with the fantastic PO about having your project transferred to him/her. You cannot request a PO assignment in the cover letter – only the IC and SRG – but it is possible to change POs (sometimes they change without your doing anything due to personnel changes, reshuffling application loads, etc.), especially if there is an alternative PO in whose portfolio your work can be included.

  229. Scott said

    NIDDK has posted its 2014 Award Funding Policy here:

    For R01s, 13%ile for established investigators and 18%ile for ESIs.

    • writedit said

      Excellent – thanks for the update and making my job easy. I see, too, that NIDDK does not give the payline break New Investigators – only ESI.

      • Light said

        NIDDK is a bit tight. I heard that NHLBI pays up to +10 for ESIs. I got a 23rd % (I am an ESI). My grant has a secondary assignment to NHLBI. Dunno who to contact to explore potential transfer from NIDDK to NHLBI

      • writedit said

        With the current funding situation, very very few awards are made by ICs with secondary assignments, and your percentile makes it more of a long-shot – especially if you do not already have a relationship with a PO at NHLBI. NIDDK needs to relinquish the application, and you need to have a PO at NHBLI who is interested in advocating for an award. If NHLBI might be interested in your research, it might be worth getting to know someone at NHLBI even if it doesn’t help for this application.

  230. Dave said

    Decent payline bump there (2%ile increase across the board) and, in fact, these paylines are right back at 2012 pre-sequester levels. ESI payline is 18%ile for R01s at NIDDK.

    • submarine said

      Writedit, can you comment on historically how likely NIDDK would fund R01 grants from established investigators just one point away from the payline? The NIDDK funding trends figures for FY2013 suggest 19 of 25 competing R01 grants at 12%ile were awarded even though the payline was 11%ile for established investigators. It is hard to imagine that all 19 were from NI/ESI investigators, for whom the payline was 16%ile. Thanks!

      • writedit said

        Well, probably a lot of those 19 applications were ESI (at NIDDK, new investigators do not get a payline break – not since FY12). However, there were certainly hand-picked select pay awards, and my feeling is that ICs are now devoting 5-10% of their competing award budget to select pay. The historical trend tells you less about your chances than your PO’s attitude toward your application. Hopefully he/she is excited about your proposal and will talk it up at meetings where paylist decisions are made.

  231. YoungBuck said

    Does anyone have an idea when the interim paylines for the NIAID R15 mechanism will be posted? My grant has been reviewed and has gone to council. I spoke with my PO in mid-December (pre-council), and he was positive; however, he wanted to wait until the interim paylines were posted before discussing further. I am hesitant to contact him again until these are posted. If I just need to be patient, I will take that advice. Thanks,

    • DTJQ said

      Can I know your score?

    • writedit said

      Your PO will know before they are posted – and he may have a better idea now that the appropriation has passed (was unknown in Dec). If you haven’t contacted him since then, you should be fine doing so now. He may say that he still won’t know until the current round of reviews are done, at which point NIAID will know how many competitively scored applications are in the pool and how far their $ will go. In that case, you probably won’t know until later in March or April. However, if you are holding off on an A1 application that could otherwise be submitted in March, definitely check with him now.

      • YoungBuck said

        Thanks Writedit-
        DTJQ-It was a score of 20, 7th percentile on an A1. If you think that it is reasonable to contact him again, I will do so. I know they are busy— I do not want to be labelled a “pest”. I really appreciate the opportunity to ask questions on this forum!

      • writedit said

        Okay – with that score, you should be fine – and you should feel free to contact your PO again. He should have more definitive news for you now that the appropriation has passed and the debt ceiling did not turn into another fiscal cliff situation.If you haven’t contacted him since last Dec, you are definitely not a pest. These are folks who ask every few days (or weekly), even when they have been told that news won’t be available until a certain milestone, such as the appropriation passing or closer to Council meeting etc. Once you have an award, don’t worry about getting in touch with him if you have questions about the award or an update on the research (publication accepted etc.).

      • DTJQ said

        I agree that you will be fine. My score is 22 of an A1 application. I contacted the PO, he was not sure. I used to have a percentile of 9, it is later not in my commons page anymore. do you still have the percentile in your commons page? Good luck!

      • YoungBuck said

        Thanks Writedit.
        DTJQ: My percentile was erased….

      • DTJQ said

        YoungBuck, thank you for the information. The PO told me once that the payline might be between 20 and 24.
        Writedit, this is a really nice platform for us to discuss and get more updated information,Thanks.

      • writedit said

        You all make it useful, so thank you for sharing your intel and experiences.

      • YoungBuck said

        I agree— many thanks Writedit and all. This website has been immensely helpful… for the process… and for help deciphering what is really being conveyed between the lines. I will update my status (positive or negative) when I ultimately hear.

  232. lacquerhed said

    Any idea what the %ile is for F31′s at NINDS FY 2014?

    • writedit said

      If your PO didn’t have an idea after the appropriation passed, he/she should have a good idea by the end of the month (or whenever all the SRGs with NINDS F31 applications have met) and they know how far they have to stretch their $.

  233. newPI_2 said

    I have a question regarding % effort for K-recipients. I am an Assistant Professor in my first year with 85% effort committed to K01 (15% effort to teaching and service). My K01 is a 4-yr award, and my first year will end on 5/31/14. I have applied for another award this past grant cycle which I designated 10% of my effort to, with a condition that my K01 effort will be reduced to 75% if application would be successful. K01 requires a minimum of 75% effort, but I heard that you can lower that effort up to 50% for the last two years of my K01 (starting 6/1/15) with a consent of my PO. Is this true? If so, does this mean that I can start submitting grants to reduce my K01 effort below 75% after 6/1/15, or could I start applying now with projected start date of 6/1/15 or later?

    Also, I would like to submit multiple applications that do not overlap to take advantage of my ESI status. Since I only have total 25% effort to give (75% – 50%), what would be your recommendation? Say I want to submit 3 R01 applications, can I allocate 10%, 10%, 5% or am I allowed to allocate 25% for all three since it’s not likely that all three would be funded?

    • writedit said

      Here is the policy on lowering your K01 effort to 50% to accommodate support on other RPG activity codes: You must be the PI on the award, which means you will need more than 10% effort. You would submit each R01 application with an appropriate effort level (depending on complexity of project & other personnel involved) – independent of each other (assume none of the others are funded), but not the K01. Presumably these would not all be under review at the same time (i.e., do not plan to submit 3 R01s in the same cycle), which means you would just not submit the subsequent A0 or an A1 once you learned that one or two of your three applications were going to be funded – or you would withdraw one prior to review, which would give you the opportunity to submit it as new later in your K01 period, when it could then replace your K01 effort.

  234. BrianM said

    Just a quick update. Spoke to my GMS at NIGMS this morning. They are seriously backed up with work. I was initially told 2 months from “pending” until I would see a NoA on my Phase II SBIR, but then he reviewed the grant status and said March 7 if I completed some forms today. So guess what I’ll be doing?

    Just wanted to add there are some really good people working at NIH.

  235. MCP said

    Does anyone have any idea about funding payline (impact score range) for U01 (Basic cancer research in health disparity)? FOA says that funding will be decided on a case-by-case basis.

    • writedit said

      As described in the FOA, there will not be a payline at all. NCI will hand-pick the applications to receive awards from a wide range of scores based on programmatic interest/priority (though probably most if not all the applications will have received very competitive scores). I assume you worked with the PO before submitting the application and know his/her level of enthusiasm for your work, but you can check in again for a gauge of where you stand now that they’ve seen all the applications.

      • MCP said

        Thanks Writedit! I did interact with a PO; however, my application is assigned to a different PO. Assigned PO says he has no idea when he will be able to give any update. He did assure me previously that he will take my application to the SPL, but gave no assurance with regard to the possible funding outcome.

      • writedit said

        Sounds good – and having 2 POs familiar with your work is even better. Beyond knowing that your PO will advocate for you, there is little else you can do at this point except hurry up and wait. Good luck!

      • MCP said

        Thanks Writedit!

  236. Airmonkey84 said

    I posted here a while ago about my F32 which got routed through NIAMS. My priority score is 24, which is right on the edge according to the 2013 funding plan. Any thoughts on how this will fare in 2014? Should I plan to resubmit? Thx.

    • writedit said

      A score on the edge of FY13 paylines will likely be fundable in FY14 (i.e., most should go up 1-3 percentiles). When you have your summary statement, you can check in with your PO about whether to resubmit and what strategy to use if so.Hopefully, you’ll be on the right side of the cutoff though.

  237. tcgal said

    28 on a K07 resubmission for NCI- thoughts on my chances?

    • writedit said

      This is an unusual K, so I am not sure how that score fits with the range the receive. You should check in with your PO after the last round of Ks has been reviewed next week (Feb 26) – wait a couple of days until the scores have been posted (i.e., try next Friday or the Monday after for an update on where your application ranks in the pile, both in terms of score and programmatic interest).

  238. stellar said

    How does 18% @ NCI with New/early investigator status look this year. Study section met on 2/20/18. This is an A1 from 25%–18% which is an improvement, but i fear not quite enough to push it over.

    • stellar said

      Sorry, to clarify, this is an R01 A1 application at NCI scored at 18%. I am an ESI/new investigator.

    • writedit said

      With that score, you’ll want to be in touch with your PO as to whether he/she will advocate for funding.

  239. Light said

    Does anybody know the payline for NIDDK Small Grants for New Investigators to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (R03)?

  240. MCP said

    I know PIs, who got funded with 22% and 24% rankings (A1 application, NCI). Of course with a significant budget cuts and decisions were not made until August/September. So, you need to remain touch with your PO. My A0 was not funded at 17%, but luckily I received a 2% in A1 and it was funded in the first pool of FY14.

  241. Stellar said

    Thanks for the reply. It is going to be a long dark summer I guess. Only a question if the fall lightens up….

  242. Pre-award question said

    If the grantee institution allows the 90-day pre-award expenditure, does that mean only AFTER the Notice of Award is issued? I now email confirmation from my PO that the grant is approved, but the NoA has not come yet, and I want to make purchases using the grant. Does anyone have experience with this? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      With this email confirmation in hand, yshould be able to set up an account with your grants administrator (at your university/institution) – and yes, it is 90 days before the NoA/NGA. PIs often do this to get jobs posted, purchase orders placed, etc. in advance of the award being received so they can actually start the work on the start date. The risk is that if some utterly unforeseen disaster occurs and the award is not issued, you are on the hook for whatever you spend, not the NIH.

  243. Michael Kearse said

    Great forum and thank you for excellent source of info regarding paylines. I just received my score for F32 (submitted in Dec 2013 to the NINDS), priority score of 26 and 8th percentile. Any idea what the NINDS F32 payline was this most recent cycle? Any insight on my chances for funding? I did see a recent note from NINDS stating a 14th percentile payline, but it did not specify to which grants.

    With much gratitude,
    Mike K.

    • writedit said

      I do not think I have seen NINDS post a F series payline, but I expect with that percentile, you should be fine. When you get your summary statement, you can check with the PO (best to wait in case the score is on the bubble & the PO needs to consider the reviewer comments).

      • Michael Kearse said

        Thank you for the reply! I talked to my PO. “NINDS doesn’t have a “pay line” for F32s, but more of a set of zones. You are in a zone that is highly likely to be funding. The final decisions will be made after (late) May council, but I am very optimistic that your fellowship will be funded.”

        Best of luck to all!

      • writedit said

        Great – – thanks for posting what you learned from your PO. Congratulations and best wishes for success with your training and your career in academic research!

  244. Light said

    If NIH is not going to fund a grant, when does the status on eRA commons changes to “not funded/paid” after the council meeting?

    • writedit said

      No, your status will stay Council review completed for the next few years, at which point the application will be Administratively withdrawn by IC. You receive no notification that you will not receive funding unless your PO specifically tells you (some do as a general practice, some only do if the PI has inquired about the application status).

  245. MKG said

    I have submitted K99. My grant review is on March, 18th. I am bit confused about how the impact scores are done. If 3 reviewers give score for 5 sections and 1 is the best, then 15 should be the best score if you get 1 in all. Why everywhere its mentioned that 10 is the best impact score?

    • writedit said

      The individual criterion scores (Significance, Innovation, Investigators, Approach, Environment) are not used to calculate the overall impact score. Completely separate animals. Applications are scored on a scale of 1-9 for each of the 5 review criteria and overall impact. For applications that are discussed, the final overall impact score is averaged by the SRO from scores assigned by each section member who can submit a score (1-9, but usually within the range set by the assigned reviewers) and then multiplied by 10 (and rounded down to the lower whole number).

      • MKG said

        Thanks a lot. I was totally confused. Now its much more clearer to me.

  246. SoftMoneyProf said

    I’m an ESI and have an R01 proposal that will soon be reviewed at NIMHD. This institute doesn’t participate in the parent R01 PA, instead offering a sparse handful of RFAs (≈2) each year. Do any of the usual ESI bennies (10-day summary statement, payline bump) apply here?

    Thanks for maintaining this great resource!

    • writedit said

      NIMHD will take ESI status into account when making awards to be sure a proportional number of awards go to ESI applicants (per NIH policy, which applies to R01 as an activity code, not just the parent announcement). NIMHD won’t use a hard payline to make decisions, so there won’t be a specific percentile bump, but it will be a factor in selecting awardees. Because this is an RFA, I doubt the summary statement will be generated any faster, since this is done to allow eligible PIs to resubmit during the same cycle in which they are reviewed (if an RFA has a second receipt date, it is usually far enough out not to require rapid SS generation), but your SRO might do the ESI first in any case.

      • SoftMoneyProf said

        Great – thank you! There’s only one receipt date each year, but with any luck the SRO will take pity on the ESIs and do those first rather than going in order by score.

      • writedit said

        Well, the earliest you could submit would be for June 5th, so hopefully receiving your SS by the end of March (probably sooner) should give you enough time to turn the application around. Good luck with NIMHD and your future submissions.

  247. m809 said

    Anyone one what the FY14 R15 payline is for NCI?

  248. Young Buck said

    Fortunately I heard from my PO that my R15 will be funded (NIAID). Score 20. Current application status listed as “pending”

    Here is the timeline for others.
    12/19/2013 Council review completed. (though Council was listed as 01/27/2014 )
    11/06/2013 Scientific Review Group review completed: Council review pending. Refer any questions to Program Official.
    07/03/2013 Scientific Review Group review pending. Refer any questions to the Scientific Review Administrator.
    06/25/2013 Application entered into system

    Thanks to all that participate on this website (especially Writedit). It is extremely helpful.

    • Wondering said


    • writedit said

      Congratulations and thanks for sharing this follow-up and detailed timeline. Best wishes for success with the research!

  249. Wondering said

    We submitted an R15 and received an impact score of 41, which won’t be funded. We just completed a resubmission. The payline is at 24 as far as I know. What are the chances that our score will go down that much?

    • writedit said

      Sometimes, it is easier to get a score in the 40s down to a fundable level, since that usually means there is an identifiable weakness to be fixed … whereas a score in the upper 20s or low-mid 30s with no clear clue as to what you could do to improve the score is more of a challenge. If your PO was happy with your response to the prior review (since he/she would have attended the meeting and known what was discussed but not necessarily written in the SS), and you substantively addressed the prior concerns, you have a reasonable chance of dropping into funding range.

      • Wondering said

        Thank you, that is very helpful. The comments were received were mostly very addressable, such as increased description of sample handling, student involvement, increased description of human subject protections. There were very few comments that could not be addressed; mostly they required more detail describing what we had already planned. We have our fingers crossed. Thanks for your Blog! I have not found anything comparable for getting information on grants.

      • writedit said

        Sounds good. Best wishes for success with the A1 – and please do post an update.

      • Wondering said

        I will post an update. We just sent in the revision, so it’s still going to be a long haul. I expect we will have our score June-July. Thanks!

    • Psyance said

      Wondering – Just an FYI. I had an R21 with an impact score of 35 on the A0. I resubmitted, and was able to get it down to 20 (roughly the same spread you’re aiming for), so it certainly is possible. I suppose this depends a lot on the addressability of the identified issues. All reviewers noted that my A1 was extremely responsive to the issues raised in the first review (and my responses were tailored based on conversations with my [excellent] PO). Of course my application has yet to be funded.

      • writedit said

        Thank you so much for such a great response with your experience. If your PO is on board, you should be in good shape. Best wishes for success with the application and the research.

      • nPI said

        Good for Psyance for having an excellent PO. My recent experience with POs does not really encourage me to engage POs in the future.

      • writedit said

        nPI, you should keep trying to make a good PO connection. You can check with colleagues and mentors about their POs, especially if there is overlap in the science such that their POs could help you, and also communicate with the division or branch director of the area in which you conduct research for a referral to a helpful PO (and let them know if the individual they suggest has not been responsive). You will want to find a PO with whom you will want to interact, both so this person can help you secure funding and maintain a good relationship after an award.

      • Wondering said

        Thanks Psyance. I really hope we can get the score down as well. The problems were all addressable and we had a good conversation with the PO. Good luck to you!

  250. transfer said

    I received an administrative supplement (Investigator Research Supplement) to an existing R01. We already received the NOA and monies at the home institution. If the investigator transfers to a different institution to complete the project, is the money transferable to the investigator’s new institution?

    • writedit said

      Do you mean the PI of the parent award or the person being paid through the administrative supplement? The PI can take the funds with him/her if the original institution relinquishes them, which is usually not an issue (must be coordinated months before the move – communication with PO should start well in advance of the move). The administrative supplement is awarded to the original institution in the name of the PI of the parent award, not the individual being supported. If the individual being supported moves, it depends on whether the PI of the parent award wants to continue supporting that person through a sub award to the person’s new institution or pay someone else to conduct the additional experiments proposed in the supplement (and depends on if supplement was diversity award etc.).

      • transfer said

        the person being paid through the supplement will be transferring to a different institution. it is a diversity award made specifically to the individual, in which a separate research plan and career development plan was required for the application. similar to what is required for a K application.

      • writedit said

        Okay – then the supplement is specific to the person being supported. I am not sure how this is handled, but it probably depends on whether the supported individual can work on the proposed aim(s) and be mentored at the new institution, since the supplement is still to support the parent award research. The PO will need to be involved no matter what, so that is whom you should contact next.

  251. Sami said

    I am a new and ESI and received 13 percentile on R01 A1 at NCI. I received JIT request from my PO. I was hopeful of the award and the council met on Feb 28th. The eRA commons was updated today as ‘council review completed’. Does that mean the award was not made? I do not see any notice of award under the eRA commons status. How soon after the council meeting the notice of award comes?

    • writedit said

      If you received a JIT request, your award will likely be processed in the coming weeks. At some point, the status will change from Council review completed to Pending or another status indicative of action being taken. You can check with your PO about the status of your application, if you have not yet (i.e., will an award be made and, if so, in what time frame).

      • Sami said

        I wrote to my PO but did not hear back. And eRA status did not change as well. Really worried now. Is there anyone else i can contact who can give an insight on what’s going on?

      • writedit said

        Mostly, I think you have to wait. The government is shut down due to the weather today, but NCI and all the ICs are very backlogged with applications to process for award. If you have a GMS assigned, he or she might know the general time frame for award processing, based on the current workload/backlog. Otherwise, you’ll need to wait to hear from the PO. You should not assume the worst, and there is nothing you can do to speed anything up (so no need to contact anyone else). I know it’s hard though.

  252. k99er said

    Thanks for this amazing resource!

    A question for other readers: I was wondering if anyone has heard whether their K99 will be funded from advisory councils that have met so far in 2014 (my A1 was submitted at NIGMS w/a score of 18). The council met in mid-January & my PO told me a few weeks ago they hoped to begin making awards soon; I’ve still got a “council review completed” status and my wrist is tired from clicking through eRA commons to check :).


    • BrianM said

      I wouldn’t sweat it. They are still catching up from last year. My Council meeting was last September (also NIGMS), and status didn’t change to pending until February 4th. I’d actually given up checking. I’ve spoken to my GMS, he said they are overwhelmed with grants to be processed, and figure 6-8 weeks from pending until NoA.

      • writedit said

        Yep, what BrianM said. The appropriation did not show up instantaneously, and everyone is way behind with a backlog of awards, so hold off on hitting refresh for another month or so.

    • SB said

      Hi, my k99 on NHLBI status shows pending council meeting though the NHLBI council meeting completed on Feb 12, 2014. I am also waiting to know about the decision.

      • writedit said

        If your application was reviewed last fall and still shows Pending Council review, then you might check with your PO. It should have clicked over to Council review completed by now.

  253. Bucos said

    Hello, My R21 (A0) to NIAID scored 30 (no percentile shown). What is the likelihood of getting funded this cycle? I will wait until the Summary Statement is posted to contact the PO for preparing A1. In the meantime, is there any purpose for uploading JIT info onto eCommons? No direct email from PO requesting JIT info though.

    • writedit said

      You won’t get a percentile, and your score is 7 points above the interim payline (23), so you should probably plan on an A1 (and wait to contact PO until you have the SS, as suggested – by then, a final payline may have been posted). For any grant application, you only want to submit the JIT when requested by the PO (not in response to eRA Commons-generated request) – and that will only happen close to the timing of the Council meeting (before or after), not this far in advance of Council.

      • Bucos said


  254. Morrissey said

    writedit, with appropriations passed already in Dec 13/Jan 14, what have we been hearing with respect to NCI R01 paylines. I know we’ll not know this for sure until end of year, but are the 9%/14% success rates of established/ESI in 2013… looking 2% better in 2014 at NCI ?

    like NIDDK experienced?

    not looking for hard facts here, just the rumors/impression you’ve heard. thanks for the great resource!

    • writedit said

      The appropriation took well over a month to trickle down to the ICs, which is why everything has been so delayed. However, NCI has not had a separate “hard” payline for new/ESI applicants in recent years, and before last year, the hard payline for any PI was at the 6th percentile, with some applications scoring up to the 15th and 20th percentile hand-picked for awards (based on programmatic interest rather than percentile). The 9th percentile was a big jump, so I’m not sure if Harold will raise that again or stick with the 9th percentile so he can still hand-pick a number of awards. Your PO’s enthusiasm for your application is the best gauge of funding likelihood if it has scored above the 9th percentile. If your PO does not push it, your application probably won’t be considered by the SPLs.

  255. Alex said

    This is a wonderful resource, particularly for those of us at smaller institutions with limited NIH experience. Thank you!

    I am a New (not ESI) Investigator. I took an extended (6yr) postdoc to train in a different field in anticipation of a multidisciplinary career. I know a number of other people in the same boat who went to industry after their PhDs before returning to academia.

    Here’s the question: Do New Investigators (not ESI) really receive special consideration?

    Here’s the FY2013 data that the NCI gives:
    New + ESI: 1192 applications, 146 funded = 12.2% success rate
    ESI only: 506 applications, 92 funded = 18.2% success rate

    what the NCI doesn’t tell you:
    New (not ESI): 686 applications, 54 funded = 7.9% success rate

    It is hard to see where new investigators are given “special consideration” by the NCI. Am I missing something?

    • writedit said

      The NIH originally created the New Investigator designation with ESI-type applicants in mind but then discovered that European, National Lab, former intramural, etc. senior investigators were taking advantage of the new investigator breaks when applying for their first R01, which was not the NIH’s intent. Some ICs no longer offer New Investigators any sort of break (only ESI), and that is allowable. NHLBI and NIDDK come to mind. Some, like NINDS, indicate a preference for ESI, and apparently NCI falls in that category (per your findings) without explicitly saying so. You should check to see if you are eligible for an extension of your ESI period, and you can certainly tell your PO about your circumstances – this is especially important at NCI, where PO input on individual applications allows for consideration of such situations when making award decisions above the hard payline.

    • tcgal said

      Also worth noting that New Investigators get reviewed w/ ESI- separate from established investigators in study sections. So in theory there is a benefit there being judged w/”like” investigators.

  256. bunchofqs said

    I submitted an R01 on Feb 14. But, I think that adding more data and polishing the grant will increase the chance of getting funded. Can I withdraw and submit in June? If so, what is the best way to do it?

    • Morrissey said

      it should be no problem contacting the PO once it has bee assigned to a study section.

    • writedit said

      Feb 14 is an odd day to submit an R01. Was this for an RFA or PAR? You can administratively withdraw any application without losing A0 status any time up until it is reviewed (& yes, talk with your PO or assigned SRO) – but if this Feb 14 application was for a FOA with a specific submission date, then you would submit for the June 5 parent announcement or other PA with standard submission dates instead. I ask about whether it was an RFA, because if so, you could keep the Feb 14 applicaiton and, if necessary, submit as a new A0 in October, after the RFA version is reviewed (so, 3 chances for the same project).

      • bunchofqs said

        Sorry. I meant regular Feb cycle in 2014.

  257. DTJQ said

    how long will it take from the date of submitting a JIT to getting the formal notification?

    • writedit said

      It depends on whether your PO indicated that you were in line for an award (or likely to receive an award) or whether the decision still had yet to be made. If you know an award will be processed, it will still be 6-8 weeks in all likelihood (from the time your eRA Commons status switches to Pending), due to the backlog in awards. If you remain on the bubble, it will be at least that long, possibly not until after the next Council meeting, if your IC needs to wait to see how many of the applications currently being reviewed receive fundable scores and how many applications are in the pile for consideration for select pay awards.

  258. DTJQ said

    Thanks a lot, Writedit. The PO requested a JIT by email and the eRA Commons status turned to pending now.

    • writedit said

      Congratulations – you should probably have your award in April then (depends on the IC, too). Best wishes for success with the research.

  259. ziza81 said

    I just received my A0 K99 impact score (22). I’m assigned to NINDS (primary) and NICHD. Do I have a shot?

    • writedit said

      Possibly, though you should definitely check with your PO (probably best to wait for summary statement). NINDS has a success rate of about 18% (12/67 applications funded in FY12, 13/74 funded in FY13). You should probably assume that NICHD won’t be picking up any secondary applications (especially since their success rate dropped from ~26% in FY12 to 16% in FY13). If you are potentially in the running for select pay, then a decision won’t be made until summer, so if this was an A0, you should plan to start on the A1 (which is why you might as well wait for your summary statement to contact the PO – so he/she can offer suggestions on the resubmission).

      • ziza81 said

        Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately I’m not eligible for A1 submission with the new rules… so fingers crossed.

  260. Teddy said

    I just received an impact score of 27 on a SBIR Phase 1 grant applications submitted to NIDDK. Any insight on the likelihood this grant gets funded this year?

    • writedit said

      You should check with your PO, who would now (or soon) know the spread of scores and whether yours would fall within the payline (or if yours might be of special programmatic interest).

      • Teddy said

        Thanks a lot!
        What have been the paylines in the past years for NIDDK SBIR?

      • writedit said

        I do not believe they publish these, but your PO could let you know where you stand.

  261. Feri said

    I received an impact score of 24 and 18% for my RO1 submission (A0) in Oct13 deadline that moved to Nov. I am assigned to NICHD ( primary) and NIMH and NIDA as secondary. I see JIT in my commons and got my summary statement last week ( some minor issues but overall very positive) but still after two attempts to contact my PO at NICHD, I haven’t got any response back from my PO. Is it possible to transfer grants to another institute for funding recommendation? So glad I found your excellent forum!

    • LIZR said

      A few weeks ago I talked to my PO at NICHD, and he said that they are still working on establishing final FY14 paylines. According to him, this will happen very soon. He did tell me that as a new investigator my R01 (A0) had an excellent chance of being funded (impact score 22, 9%).

      Your PO may just be waiting for official paylines to be released, so that they can provide you with better information about the chances that your A0 will get picked up for funding. It is my understanding that these days it is extremely unusual for a secondary institute to pick-up a grant (too many good grants with primary assignment waiting to be funded in their own queues).

      • writedit said

        Thanks so much for chiming in with your experience – and yes, you are correct that very very few applications are picked up by secondary ICs – needs to be a very special situation, and not one the PI has any control over.

    • tcgal said

      It is really hard to get your primary CIO changed AFTER study section-

    • writedit said

      You yourself cannot “transfer” any application. The PO of the primary IC (in your case NICHD) needs to relinquish the application, and a PO at the secondary IC needs to request this (so you would need to be in touch with your PO there). However, secondary ICs almost never pick up applications these days and only based on special programmatic interest. Your eRA Commons JIT link can be ignored until you receive a request for this from your PO or GMS (though no harm in submitting without request – just does not reflect on funding likelihood). Your PO is probably dealing with back logged applications from prior cycles, so just be patient to hear from him/her about what to do next. The 18th percentile could be considered at NICHD, especially with your PO’s backing.

      • Feri said

        Thanks so much for the great information everyone and Dear Writedit! I just heard back from my PO and she stated that they still haven’t got their new payline at NICHD. She asked me to email her on Friday to see if she has any update. I am really hoping I have a chance at this institute.Fingers crossed!

      • writedit said

        Sounds good – and good luck.

      • Feri said

        Dear Writedit,
        My PO hasn’t still responded my email about NICHD paylines since our last conversation but instead I got the JIT request from GMS last week. My council meeting is in May. I have to work with our grant specialist to fill out the JIT ( is there any due date for this? our admin people are so slow to work with). I want to send an email to my PO to see if I should be optimistic about my grant being considered in May after I get the JIT in the system. Any thoughts? Very much appreciate your feedback!

      • writedit said

        The JIT request is good news, since most ICs are not getting this information except for applications on the paylist, though it is no guarantee of an award – just that you are being considered. Council can concur electronically on some applications in advance of the Council meeting, so that is probably why you were asked now. You want to get the JIT in as quickly as possible (do not think that you have until May – they want it soon). You can ask the GMS for a rough deadline, if none was mentioned. Hopefully if you needed any IRB/IACUC or other approvals, you got that started when you received your score.

      • Feri said

        Thanks so much Writedit! I have an approved IACUC and just got an email from commons that my JIT is uploaded!

  262. BKD said

    A quick question or advice: After a couple of months of not hearing from my PO regarding an A1 R15 application, I received a email stating that the PO was putting forward his/her recommendation to support my application. It will be a non-payline driven application, but has some programmatic interest. I would consider this a step in the positive direction, but does anyone have any experience with this type of situation. How cautiously optimistic should I be?
    Kudos for your excellent forum!

    • writedit said

      This is excellent news, though not a sure thing obviously. You might ask your PO if you should prepare a brief rebuttal to the prior review, if you have not so already, and if you have any new publications, abstracts submitted, or other updates on progress made since submission, that would be important to convey as well.

      • BKD said

        Thanks for the additional suggestions. Fingers crossed.

    • DTJQ said

      BKD, what is your score? my R15 is in NIAID with a score of 22, but the interim payline is 22. I don’t have any news from the PO yet.

    • DTJQ said

      sorry for the error, the interim payline for NIAID is 20.

      • BKD said

        My score was a 29 (outside of the payline) at NIDDK. The chief complaint was lack of clinical samples. I discussed this point with the PO; I would not be able to have access to patient samples and my research line was more biochemical. I think that the current portfolio for the Division does not have many/any biochemical applications which is where the programmatic interest might lay.

        But a score of 22 is great! It would be a shame if it were not funded. Have you contacted your PO to discuss the likelihood of funding?

        Good luck

  263. DTJQ said

    Thanks for the information. I tried to call the PO, but can never catch him on line. sent him two emails, and never get an answer. In my emails, I asked if I need to write a rebuttal letter responding to the reviewers’ concerns, but I have yet received any answer.

    • writedit said

      Is this about your pending R15? That is all set and on its way to being funded, per your earlier post (PO requested JIT, eRA Commons status changed to Pending). In that case, you do not need to worry about a rebuttal or doing anything more than being patient for several weeks (will take up to 2 months due to backlog of awards to be made). If you are talking about an additional application, then there could be issues since you can only hold the one R15 award.

  264. DTJQ said

    writedit, The R15 is a different application. the one is now in pending is SC1. two grants have no overlapping. Can I hold both R15 and SC1? Thanks.

    • writedit said

      I suspect not, given the R15 prohibition to hold any other active NIH research awards (as PI), regardless of whether there is any overlap, but you can check with either PO for clarification. Since the SC1 application is pending, perhaps check with that PO to determine how this would be handled and, if you must chose one award, which would be better (SC1 is better in terms of budget though).

  265. NL said

    I currently have an ESI status with the NCI, and my R01-A1 application received a 15% in June of 2013 and the council met in September. After waiting for many months, I emailed my PO 2 weeks ago and was told that my application looked promising and asked if my JIT was updated. However, I still have yet to receive any formal email requesting this, and my commons account still has not been updated since September of 2013. Given that it’s been almost a year since the original submission (April 2013), I am getting to the point where I don’t really know whether the SPLs decided not to fund my grant. Any thoughts?

    • writedit said

      Your PO just gave you a reason to be cautiously optimistic. Don’t worry about what your eRA Commons status says, but absolutely get any changes in your JIT to him/her ASAP. This includes new awards and will need to include any required approvals (IACUC, IRB, etc.) and certifications. Your PO will want to have all this in hand so the processing of any award can go forward without a hitch. If nothing has changed and all the approvals (if relevant) are current, just let your PO know this is the case. If you have any new publications or other updates related to the research itself, now would be a good time to pass along word of these, too.

  266. grad_student said

    I am in a similar situation with an NHLBI RO1 grant. The grant scored 11% last June… council met in October and set an “interim” payline of 10%. We asked our PO about funding potential and if the payline would increase and the response we got is “we’ll see.”… not very helpful and very frustrating. We have been patiently waiting for months now.

  267. overeasy said

    Hello, I have a couple timeline questions

    If I submitted a K99 application in Feb at NIGMS, when should I expect to receive the impact score? Is there enough time between reviews and the very next due date (July) to resubmit? That would mark the end of my 4th year and thus last chance to submit.

    Thank you!

    • writedit said

      Your application will likely be reviewed in June (look for date in eRA Commons), and you might not have your summary statement before the July 12 A1 deadline (depends on when your committee meets). Only new/ESI R01 applicants are given the opportunity to resubmit in the same cycle in which they are reviewed (with rapid SS generation and extended deadline), so the earliest you could resubmit a carefully revised application would be November. EYour application will likely be reviewed in June (look for date in eRA Commons), and you might not have your summary statement before the July 12 A1 deadline (depends on when your committee meets)

      • overeasy said

        Thank you for your response writedit. However, when I search my study section number, it lists a meeting date this March instead of July. Does this mean my proposal is being reviewed early in the March meeting? Do study section names change throughout the year?

        Thank you!

      • writedit said

        What do you mean when you “search my study section number”? If you are looking at the NCI Website (or the listing of all IC review committee dates), then you are seeing the roster of the most recent meeting held, not the one to which you are assigned. The date on which your application will be reviewed is (or will be) listed on your eRA Commons page. You don’t need to go find it anywhere. The roster will be posted later, probably in April, depending on the meeting date.

  268. Morrissey said

    what is the timeline from score posting on commons –> pink sheets? I thought this had to be within 2 weeks or something.

    • writedit said

      No, it can typically take up to 6 weeks, depending on how many applications were assigned to that study section and how busy the SRO is (the pink sheets are posted as they are completed, not all at the same time). New/ESI applicant summary statements are completed first, so show up a bit faster. If it has been more than 6 weeks, you can check with the SRO.

    • SD said

      NIH’s next step guidance states the summary statement is usually released within 30 days of the review: I think it’s fair to contact the SRA after that amount of time, but be prepared to wait longer as writedit said.

      • writedit said

        Thanks so much for posting this, SD. I think most summary statements are released within a month (and nice to know OER officially says they should be, too), but I’ve known it to take a little longer. The SROs must have them posted (at least) 6-8 weeks before Council meetings (for second level review), which was part of the issue about the rescheduled review meetings last fall (whether they could all be held & SSs posted in time).

      • SG said

        It is worth noting that this only pertains to CSR reviews. Reviews done by the ICs (RFAs, PARs etc.) can take longer.

  269. MCP said

    How optimistic a PI should be when the PO says that the application (against an RFA not a regular R01) has been approved by the SPL? Is it still possible that the program may decide not to fund the application?

    • SG said


    • writedit said

      Program recommended the application to the SPLs, so this means you’ve cleared both hurdles and can, as SG says, be cautiously optimistic. You will hear from the PO if there are any remaining administrative questions, but if not, it may still take a while for your status to switch from Council review completed to Pending, so just be patient.

      • MCP said

        Thanks Writedit and SG! PO says it is currently being reviewed by the OGA (I don’t have the GMS assigned on eRA commons though) and I should plan to submit the JIT ASAP.