Skip to Main Content

Previous Tips

2008  2009  2010 2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020 

[Dec 15, 2008] When would resubmission of unsuccessful NIH RFA applications and of applications with a changed grant activity code be considered NEW applications? Per NIH:
1.  When an application that was submitted in response to an RFA is not funded and the investigator wishes to resubmit an application on this topic as an investigator-initiated application, it is to be submitted as a NEW application, unless provisions for submission of a revised application are clearly delineated in the RFA.  In addition, if a subsequent RFA specifically solicits revisions of unfunded applications from a previous RFA, the instructions in the second RFA should be followed.  In all other cases, applications submitted in response to an RFA and then resubmitted as an investigator-initiated application must be submitted as a NEW application.
2.  When a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an investigator-initiated application is to be submitted in response to an RFA, it is to be prepared as a NEW application.
3.  When an unfunded application that was reviewed for a particular research grant mechanism (for example, R01) is to be submitted for a different grant mechanism (for example, R03), it is to be prepared as a NEW application.
For more details on NIH resubmission policies see NOT-OD-03-019 and the NIH Application Guide SF424 (R&R).

[Dec 9, 2008] What should a Rockefeller investigator submit for SR-PD review if she/he is going to be a subgrant applicant on an application going out from another institution? (This applies to ALL sponsored application)

If you are involved in an application as a subgrantee to another institution you need to submit to SR-PD the following materials:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) and the completed Checklist Form Page with all the compliance assurances (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A letter stating her/his willingness to collaborate on the proposed project
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the proposed research to be performed at Rockefeller
A detailed budget for Year 1 and a budget page for all years of the requested project period - PHS 398 Form Page 4 and 5 respectively (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A budget justification (as per NIH guidelines)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on your subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A description of the resources available to to support your subproject (lab, CBC, resource centers)
A completed internal Routing Form with original or electronic signatures must be included
Any other documentation as requested by the prime institution and the sponsor.
[Dec 9, 2008] What should a subgrantee applicant submit to the Rockefeller University if she/he is going to be an applicant on an application going out from the University? (This applies to ALL sponsored applications)
A subgrantee on your application needs to submit to SR-PD the following materials:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) with her/his Institutional Official’s original signature and the completed Checklist Form Page with all the compliance assurances (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A letter stating her/his willingness to collaborate on the proposed project
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator’s proposed research to be performed elsewhere
A detailed budget  for Year 1 and a summary budget page for all years of the requested project period, PHS 398 Form Page 4 and 5 respectively (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A budget justification of all items (as per NIH guidelines)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on the collaborator’s subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions - 11/2007 Revision)
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution
Any other documentation as requested by Rockefeller University and the sponsor

[Nov 21,2008] What is the updated information pertaining to the Transition Schedule for NIH/AHRQ/CDC/NIOSH/FDA from PureEdge to Adobe-based grant application forms? Per the NIH Notice NOT-OD-09-020 from today NIH and others are moving forward with the transition as scheduled and the Adobe-based application forms will become available after December 5, 2008. Applicants should access the FOA for which they are applying and download the new application forms after December 5. FOAs that have been published in the past few months without a forms package will have the Adobe forms added after December 5. requires a specific version of Adobe Reader in order to open, download, save, and submit an Adobe application.  Compatible versions are listed on the site and are updated as they are produced (see the Download Software page). To ensure a smooth transition, everyone who will work on an application must download Adobe Reader version 8.1.3 or later – available at no cost from – and use it to open and complete their application(s).  More>>

[Nov 06, 2008] What is the new NIH policy regarding the support of early career scientists? The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced on October 31, 2008 a new policy establishing goals to encourage funding for scientists new to NIH and those who are at an early stage in their careers. NIH expects this new policy will level the playing field, allowing new investigators to achieve success rates comparable to those of established scientists submitting new grant applications. Achievement of a comparable success rate should permit the NIH to support 1650 or more New Investigators across all Institutes and Centers in FY 2009, a number equivalent to that achieved in FY 2008 (Sent 11/20/2008). More>>

[Oct 28, 2008]
How is NIH going to monitor Public Access Policy compliance? Excerpts from NIH Notice NOT-OD-08-119: Grantees are reminded to demonstrate compliance with the Public Access Policy when submitting an application, proposal, or progress report to the NIH. Grantees should include the PubMed Central (PMC) reference number for each paper that was authored or co-authored by the applicant or arose from their NIH award, and that falls under the Policy. In FY2009 (10/1/08- 9/30/09), Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs) will be notified via an email from the Program Official if citations of papers included in applications, proposals or progress reports appear to fall under the Policy but lack a demonstration of compliance.  The citations of concern will be explicitly listed. The Institutional Business Official will be copied on the email. The PD/PI will be asked to respond via email to both the Program Official and the Institutional Business Official with confirmation that papers listed in the email are in compliance.  Confirmation should include the citation for the paper plus the appropriate identifier as described below under Demonstrating Compliance. If the paper is not covered by the Policy, the PD/PI should provide an appropriate explanation (e.g., manuscript was accepted for publication prior to April 7, 2008; the paper was not peer-reviewed).  Grantees are reminded that compliance with the Policy is a Term and Condition of the award. More>>

[Oct 24, 2008] What is SR-PD policy regarding detailed budget for NIH modular grant applications at submission time? Effective Oct. 24, 2008 and until further notice, when you submit an NIH modular grant application to our office, a detailed budget - beyond what the NIH requires - is optional.  If you are submitting your application through InfoEd, the same policy applies -- detailed budget information is optional. More>> [sent Oct 24, 2008]

[Oct 23, 2008] Where in my grant application may the description of available and un-budgeted infrastructure be included? In addition to the details you provide on the sponsor's forms (as the NIH Resource Form), whenever a budget justification is required, opening that section with a brief introduction describing the resources available to you to carry out your proposed research (such as core instrumentation, technical expertise in your lab, campus services, other resources) is advised. This information would demonstrate the infrastructure available to facilitate your research and the institutional commitment to enable such work. As important, it  would also offer you a simple way to highlight resources that, while essential and beneficial, cannot be on your requested budget [Sent 11/20/2008].

[Oct 23, 2008] Can I place a graduate student on the budget of my research grant? Graduate students at the University cannot be placed on the budget of research grants. For questions contact Finance or the Dean's office; for submission questions contact your GMS. [sent Oct 23, 2008]

[Oct 22, 2008] What's the relationship between effort and salary requests? Overall the percentage of salary charged should be consistent with committed effort. There may be exceptions to this general rule as the NIH and certain other sponsors limit the salary that can be charged to an award (salary cap cost share) and certain proposal effort committed but not paid for such as HHMI employees and tenured HOLs.  Effort reporting on campus is overseen by the Finance Department. SR-PD works closely with Finance  to verify effort reports received from investigators, before signing off and submitting to sponsors.  Issues such as investigator's effort exceeding 90%, unreported efforts, overlooked changes in efforts, conflicting efforts, etc., must be brought up with your supervisor right away and with Dion Brown (x. 7976) in Finance Accounting Services.  For additional guidance on this topic see Finance Compliance.

[Oct 15, 2008] What is the University's new postdoctoral classification policy?
In response to recent IRS rulings, Postdoctoral Fellows receiving competitive fellowships may not be treated as employees at the institutions where they work. Consequently, postdoctoral appointments are now reclassified in the following manner; Postdoctoral Fellows are defined as those who receive funds that are awarded competitively or are directed by the donor specifically for support of postdocs. Postdoctoral Associates are those who have not been selected competitively for fellowships. For clarifications re the policy contact HR; for grant implementation questions contact you GMS. [sent Oct  23, 2008]

[Oct 15, 2008]
Will compliance with the NIH Public Access Policy affect the outcome of the application review? Compliance with the NIH Public Access Policy is not a factor in the scientific and technical merit evaluation of grant applications. Non-compliance will be addressed administratively, and may delay or prevent awarding of funds.

[Oct 15, 2008] To what papers does the NIH Public Access Policy apply?
The policy applies to accepted manuscripts authored by the PI and/or arose from their NIH funds (within the time frame defined by the policy). More>>>
(If the PI uses some bibliography management software to pull the PMCIDs straight from PubMed, it is ok to leave all available PMCIDs in.)

[Oct 6 2008] Who may be listed as Key Personnel on grant applications (NIH and others)? Per NIH, Key Personnel are participants in a grant or application who contribute substantively to the scientific development or execution of a project. Key Personnel contribute a specified level of effort, paid or unpaid.  Key Personnel include the principal investigator and consultants who meet the definition above." (NIAID Glossary of Funding and Policy Terms and Acronyms). Both non-Key Personnel and Key Personnel may be charged on a grant if they contribute towards its goals. Weighing carefully who to classify as Key personnel on your project would simplify the submission process and the post-award management of your project.

[September 2008]
Who should I contact if I have questions about the upcoming review of my NIH application?
All questions should be directed to the Scientific Review Officer (SRO) that is assigned to your proposal (contact information is usually available ~3 weeks after submission). Do not contact study section members about your application, since this would result in a breach of confidentiality and create a conflict-of-interest in the peer review process. See CSR website for additional information and contact SR-PD.

[September 2008] Where/How can I submit new data after my grant proposal has been submitted to NIH?
New data should be sent to the Scientific Review Officer (SRO) assigned to your application. (This information is usually updated within 3 weeks of the deadline date.) Please refer to the NIH Policy on Submission of Additional Grant Application Materials for complete guidelines.  As of June 25, 2008, additional materials must be received 30 days prior to the peer review meeting.  A copy of the new data should also be provided to SR-PD. [sent Sep 23, 2008]

[September 2008] How does a no-cost extension (extension of budget period) on a  grant affect its compliance status? Any award under a no-cost extension must comply with all applicable assurances. These include animal and human subjects protocols, LSC/BL3OC/IBC approvals, effort commitments of key personnel whether or not salaried, and all other compliance requirements associated with the project. Contact your GMS if any adjustment is needed. Importantly, issues requiring NIH prior approval still apply during the no-cost extension period (see NIH requirements). Other sponsors may have similar requirements therefore planning early is advised. [sent Sep 23, 2008]

[September 2008]
Does NIH allow to carry forward funds from an ending grant into a new competitive cycle (Type 2)?  What should I do if I anticipate an unobligated balance (<25% or otherwise) as the renewal start date approaches and the award remains pending?
Funds are allowed to be carried over on awards given carryover authority. Any amount of funds that have not been spent should be reflected on the FSR (financial report prepared by Finance), and will be carried over into the next competitive segment. For example: you have a grant with a project period end date of 12/31/08 with $100,000 total costs. The competing continuation (proposed start date of 1/1/09) received a good score and is recommended for funding. If on 12/31/08, you estimate that there is less than $25,000 remaining on the grant then it is advisable to ask for the 1/1/09 start. These funds left over from the previous competitive segment should then be noted on the FSR  and should be automatically carried over into the next competitive segment. However, this doesn’t mean that if the balance was over $25,000, you should automatically delay the start of the next budget period. In some cases the NIH will delay the requested start date by a few months so that the grantee has spent down more of the funds. This does not apply to all situations, so please note that it will also depend on which Institute/Center you are working with and the circumstances of the grant itself. You should work closely with SR-PD and Finance if you anticipate a carryover nearing the end of a competitive cycle.

[September 2008]
Is it necessary, or even advisable, to request a no-cost extension (regardless of carryover) as the NIH project period end date approaches if the competing application remains pending?
In some cases it is appropriate to request the no-cost extension as the project period end date approaches, provided that the research is still ongoing and there are still funds remaining in the grant. However, if it is certain that the competing continuation is going to be funded by the requested start date and the remaining balance of the grant is low, then you should not request a no-cost extension. Please contact the Manager, Administrative Post-Award before the end date of your grant to determine the best course of action.

[August 2008] What's the impact of NIH scientific review officer's (SRO) comments on application scores and funding decisions? SRO comments normally are not expected to impact scores and funding decisions. Scores and funding decisions would not be influenced by administrative concerns unless they are major, such as serious human/animal work issues, required sections missing, etc.

[August 2008]How can I ensure that the study section will see my color figures in my NIH application? If the application was submitted electronically, then the reviewers will see the original application with color pictures. However, if the application was a paper submission, then it is possible that some reviewers may get black and white copies (if the number of reviewers exceeds the number of copies of the original sent to the NIH). The PI should contact the Scientific Review Officer (SRO) to explain their concern and ask if he or she may make a pdf file of original color figures available as supplementary materials prior to the review. This is allowed by NIH appendix policies and the SROs can add it to the grants folder to make sure the reviewers see it. The only restriction is that the file size cannot exceed 25 MB.

[August 2008]What are NIH guidelines regarding salary limitation on grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts? Every year since 1990 Congress has legislatively mandated a provision limiting the direct salary that an individual may receive under an NIH grant. For FY 2008, Public Law 110-161: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 restricts the amount of direct salary to Executive Level I of the Federal Executive Pay scale, and effective January 1, 2008, it increased to $191,300. For details on allowable salary changes, adjustments and rebudgeting go to the NIH site.

[August 2008]Who may submit funding applications from the University? Researchers employed by the University can submit funding applications from the University, pursuant to University's, sponsor's, and laboratory's pertinent policies and requirements. Contact SR-PD Director for all inquiries concerning possible exceptions, including submissions from researchers who are about to leave or join the University. In the Director's absence, the Associate Director will help with these inquiries.

We value your comments and rely on your feedback to improve our services.