Applications are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through a peer review system, ultimately leading to an overall impact score. The R03 small grant program expects discrete, well-defined projects that are feasible within two years and require limited funding. Preliminary data is not required, especially for pilot or feasibility studies.
Scored Review Criteria
Reviewers will assign separate scores for these three factors, which heavily influence the overall impact score:
*
Importance of the Research (Significance and Innovation): Assesses the project's significance to the field and its innovative aspects.
*
Rigor and Feasibility (Approach): Evaluates the scientific rigor of the proposed methods and the feasibility of the approach.
*
Expertise and Resources (Investigator(s) and Environment): Considers the qualifications and experience of the investigator(s) and the adequacy of the research environment and resources available.
Additional Review Criteria (Considered for Overall Impact, Not Scored Separately)
- Protections for Human Subjects: Assessment of proposed safeguards for human participants.
- Vertebrate Animals: Evaluation of the ethical and humane use of vertebrate animals.
- Biohazards: Review of measures to manage biohazards.
- Resubmissions/Renewals/Revisions: Appropriateness of proposed changes or expansions if applicable.
Additional Review Considerations (Not Scored, Not for Overall Impact Score)
- Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources: Plans for ensuring the validity of key resources.
- Budget and Period of Support: Assessment of whether the requested budget and duration are justified and reasonable for the proposed research.
Selection Criteria
Funding decisions are based on:
* The
scientific and technical merit of the proposed project (as determined by peer review).
*
Availability of funds.
*
Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.