Overall Impact
Reviewers will assess the likelihood for the program to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, based on the following scored criteria:
- Significance:
- Identified important problems or barriers to conducting C&T research.
- How plans will strengthen C&T research at the CTR-D organization(s).
- How the organization(s) will contribute to the CTR-D program's goals.
- Investigator(s):
- Suitability of PD(s)/PI(s) to lead the CTR-D program (prior scientific/administrative leadership, ability to integrate components, cross-departmental work, mentoring experience).
- Appropriateness of leadership approach and shared responsibility for multi-PI applications.
- Innovation:
- Innovativeness of plans to build C&T research capacity within the organization(s).
- Innovativeness of approaches for engaging more investigators in C&T research.
- Ways proposed plans enhance communication, coordination, and/or collaboration within and across organizations, community clinics, and other community groups.
- Approach:
- Effectiveness of the Overall Plan in strengthening C&T research activities.
- How well community input and engagement are incorporated.
- Extent of leveraging resources from other NIH-supported programs (COBREs, INBREs).
- Feasibility of collaboration with other IDeA state organizations.
- Clarity and appropriateness of roles for Steering Committee (SC), Executive Committee (EC), and External Advisory Committee (EAC).
- Appropriateness of expertise of SC, EC, and EAC members.
- Extent to which organizational structure, governance, and communication enable synergistic collaboration.
- Soundness of rationale and plans if a phased approach for cores is proposed.
- Environment:
- Suitability of research and clinical infrastructures.
- Appropriateness of lead organization's research administration infrastructure.
- Adequacy of institutional commitments.
- Presence of C&T research investigators/workforce who can benefit.
Core-Specific Review Criteria
Each of the five required cores (Administrative, Professional Development, Community Engagement and Outreach, Research Design, Compliance, and Data Management, Health Research) will be assessed and scored based on:
-
Administrative Core (AC): Effectiveness of management, coordination, integration, communication plans; suitability of financial management; plans for assessing needs and capacity building; effectiveness of evaluation strategies and benchmarks.
-
Professional Development (PD) Core: Appropriateness of interface with other cores for topics; plans for enhancing knowledge/competency of investigators, staff, mentors, and clinical fellows.
-
Community Engagement and Outreach (CEO) Core: Strength of communication strategies for engaging communities; plans for engaging advisory boards; assistance to investigators in developing culturally appropriate community-engaged research.
-
Research Design, Compliance, and Data Management (RDCD) Core: Appropriateness of core design to assist investigators with protocol development, risk assessment, regulatory compliance; strength of plans for EHR database curation, management, and privacy protection.
-
Health Research (HR) Core: Strength of communication strategies to engage diverse investigators; well-developed plans for soliciting, reviewing, and selecting Pilot and Developmental Projects; suitability of support distribution; likelihood of increasing externally supported C&T research; integration with other CTR-D cores; plans for mentoring clinical trial leads; adequacy of resources; plans for study participant safety and regulatory compliance.
Additional Review Criteria (Not Scored Separately)
- Protections for Human Subjects (justification, protection against risks, benefits, knowledge gained, data/safety monitoring).
- Inclusion of Women, Racial and Ethnic Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan (justification for inclusion/exclusion).
- Vertebrate Animals (proposed procedures, justifications, minimization of discomfort, euthanasia).
- Biohazards (assessment of hazardous materials/procedures and proposed protections).
- Resubmissions: Evaluation considers responses to previous comments and changes.
- Select Agent Research (if applicable): Use, registration, monitoring, biosafety/biocontainment.
- Resource Sharing Plans: Reasonableness of sharing plans or rationale for not sharing.
- Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources: Plans for identifying and ensuring validity.
- Budget and Period of Support: Justification and reasonableness in relation to proposed research.
Funding Decisions
Beyond scientific/technical merit, funding decisions consider:
- Availability of funds.
- Relevance to program priorities.
- Geographic distribution of awards among IDeA states.
- Potential to serve the CTR-D population and address their most urgent health concerns.