Applications will be judged on their
scientific and technical merit through a peer review system, ultimately leading to an 'Overall Impact' score. This score reflects the likelihood of your project having a
sustained, powerful influence on the research field.
Scored Review Criteria:
- Importance of the Research (Significance and Innovation): How crucial and groundbreaking is the research your infrastructure will enable?
- Rigor and Feasibility (Approach): How well-designed, robust, and achievable is your plan for developing the research infrastructure?
- Expertise and Resources (Investigator(s) and Environment): Does your team have the right skills, knowledge, and access to necessary resources and environment to succeed?
Additional Review Considerations:
Reviewers will also consider these points, though they won't receive a separate score:
*
Human Subjects Protection: Adequacy of plans for protecting human participants, especially for clinical trials (which are optional).
*
Vertebrate Animals and Biohazards: If applicable, plans for ethical treatment of animals and management of hazardous materials.
*
Milestones: The clarity, feasibility, and scientific justification of your proposed
SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) milestones for both the R61 and R33 phases are crucial for a successful transition to the R33 phase.
*
Sustainability Plan: The application must clearly describe a plan for
sustaining the developed infrastructure after the grant period ends.
*
Benefit to the Research Community: Your proposed infrastructure must be designed to benefit a
larger research community, not solely your team's interests.