Applications for this grant will undergo a rigorous
scientific and technical merit review by a CDC/NIOSH Scientific Review Group, followed by a second-level review by the NIOSH Secondary Review Committee. The review will assess both the
Overall Center and each
individual component.
Overall Impact Score
Reviewers will provide an
overall impact/priority score for both the entire Center and for each individual component, reflecting the likelihood of the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the OSH field.
Scored Review Criteria (for Overall Center and individual components)
Each of the following criteria will receive a separate score:
- Significance: Does the ERC address important problems or critical barriers in OSH? Will it advance the OSH field? Does it have a robust history of training OSH practitioners and leaders, including regional and national collaboration? Is there evidence of the ability to track graduates to determine impact?
- Investigator(s): Does the ERC leadership team have experience in managing complex, multi-component centers in OSH? Are the Center Director and faculty highly qualified with strong records of accomplishments, support, and collaboration, contributing to OSH improvements? Is their commitment adequate?
- Innovation: Does the ERC propose innovative approaches to training, research training, continuing education, outreach, and translation of research to practice (r2p)? Does it address the changing nature of work? Are there innovative strategies for recruiting diverse individuals across all programs?
- Approach: Is there a well-described strategy for a successful, fully integrated, interdisciplinary ERC? Are recruitment plans for high-quality, diverse trainees clear? Does the ERC effectively engage key stakeholders, trainees, and an Advisory Council? Are outputs, outcomes, and impact measures clearly defined? Are challenges (e.g., collaboration, recruitment) clearly stated?
- Environment: Is there strong institutional commitment to support ERC goals? Will the ERC benefit from unique features of the academic, public health, and scientific environment or collaborative arrangements? Are facilities and equipment appropriate for the described activities?
Additional Review Criteria (Not Separately Scored)
Reviewers will also consider these aspects, but they will not contribute to a separate score:
- Protections for Human Subjects: If research involves human subjects, evaluation of risks, adequacy of protection, potential benefits, importance of knowledge, and data/safety monitoring.
- Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan: Assessment of proposed plans for inclusion (or exclusion) based on sex/gender, race, ethnicity, and age, ensuring scientific justification.
- Vertebrate Animals: Evaluation of procedures, justification for animal use, and interventions to limit discomfort (if applicable).
- Biohazards: Assessment of potential hazards and adequacy of protection.
- Dual Use Research of Concern: Identification of agents/toxins and assessment of plans for risk mitigation.
Specific Criteria for Academic Training Programs
Each academic program will be reviewed on:
*
Training Program and Environment: Does it fill a workforce need, ensure outstanding interdisciplinary OSH training, prepare for careers, promote participation, have innovative recruitment, and rigorous evaluation? Is there a formal oversight and mentoring plan? Does it have a successful retention history and critical mass of faculty/students? Is there institutional commitment?
*
Academic Training Program Director: Qualifications, expertise, administrative and training experience, commitment, and track record in mentoring diverse students.
*
Academic Training Program Faculty: Qualifications, teaching/mentoring experience, research support, and mix of junior/established faculty.
*
Trainees: Recruitment plan, competitive applicant pool, clear selection process, and progress monitoring.
*
Training Record: Success in obtaining OSH careers, timely degree completion, career advancement (grants, awards, publications) for research-track trainees. Instruction in responsible conduct of research.
Specific Criteria for Evaluation and Planning Core, Continuing Education Program, Outreach Program, Pilot Project Research Training Program, and Targeted Research Training Program
These components will be evaluated based on their specific significance, key personnel/investigator(s), innovation, approach, and environment, tailored to their respective objectives and activities.