Get System To System Client Transactions Guide - 1/7/08 - Nih - Grants Nih

Databases of NIH-Funded Research Projects RePORT - Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. ... RCDC – Research, Condition, and Disease Categorization. ... RePORTER – Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results. ... ClinicalTrials.gov.

Peer review is the cornerstone of the NIH grants process, helping ensure that NIH grant applications are evaluated in a way that is fair, equitable, timely, and free of bias. NIH has a two-stage review, with the first level of review carried out by a Scientific Review Group composed primarily of non-federal scientists.

Search for a funding opportunity specific to your area of interest or apply to one of our generic parent announcements. . (Grants.gov is the federal-wide portal for advertising funding opportunities that is used by all federal grant-making agencies.) NIH posts all funding opportunities on both sites.

Title: up to 200 Characters including spaces.

Investigator-initiated applications for NIH funding are evaluated by peer review groups composed of scientists from outside the NIH. The peer review group evaluates the scientific and technical merit of the proposed research. These evaluations are used by the individual Institutes to determine which projects to fund.

Scoring. The NIH utilizes a 9-point rating scale (1 = exceptional; 9 = poor) for all applications; the same scale is used for overall impact scores and for criterion scores (Scoring Guidance).

The Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and implementing HHS regulations (45 CFR Part 5) require NIH to release certain grant documents and records requested by members of the public, regardless of the intended use of the information. These policies and regulations apply to information in the possession of NIH.

Request for Applications (RFA). An RFA is a formal statement that solicits grant or cooperative agreement applications in a well-defined scientific area to accomplish specific program objectives.