Continuing Resolutions all the way to the next round.

Apr 04 2011 Published by under NIH Budgets and Economics, NIH funding

December is one thing. It has to be expected value at this point that we in the NIH funded extramural research community are going to have to weather some weirdness for the December 1 funding date. To recap, grant applications submitted for the Feb-March receipt deadlines are reviewed in Jun-July, move on to Advisory Council (for a given IC) review in Aug-Sep and are generally proposed for Dec 1 for the first *possible* funding date. Whenever there is a failure of Congress to pass a budget authorizing the NIH to spend money for the new Fiscal Year, things get funky.

Typically, however, a budget has been passed with the NIH appropriation by the next "first possible funding date", i.e., for grant applications submitted Jun-Jul, reviewed Oct-Nov for possible award as early as April 1.

You will have noted, Dear Reader, that we are past this date.

So I cruised over to RePORTER and found some 283 new R01s funded since 4/1/2011. This is in contrast with the 66 I found a few days into December 2010.

ICs seem to have resigned themselves to operating under this new reality. Either that or Newt Gingrich's support has stiffened their spines.

The one thing we can't tell from RePORTER is when these proposals were submitted. Could b leftovers from the prior round or could be from the new round. I'm betting they are mostly from the new round and the limbo-zone holdovers from December are still waiting. I'm sure the comments over at writedit's place will clue us in on that.

Now, while I was a-RePORTERing, I happened to notice the pile of new grants funded by one of my ICs of greatest interest. One-third funded as A0, two-thirds as A1. Hmm. So I check another IC of interest - 50% on A1; another- 60%; another- only 7.5% on A1 (wowza)...and then just roughly looking at a bunch of other ones, I'd say the trend continues to improve for those grants funded on the first submission. We'll want to keep our eyes on ones that continue to stink fund a lot of A1 proposals, of course. I think I may have mentioned before that I think two-thirds funded on the first submission and one-third on the A1 would be my initial target. If an IC wants to be serious about revision churning, that is.

2 responses so far

  • A number of ICs have explicitly different paylines for A0s and A1s, with the A0 payline more generous. Whenever Benezra and his followers get around to focusing on that--given that it took them about two years from the announcement of the "no A2s" policy to get riled, it could be a while--I'm sure there'll be a nice shitstorm: "My A1 missed the payline by only two percentage points, but it was SCORED OBJECTIVELY BETTER than many of the A0s that got paid in that unfairly more-generous A0 payline!!!!!"

  • BikeMonkey says:

    Perhaps the chance of a lengthy shutdown of the Gov seems more likely and the ICs realize they can't drag this out or it could be a several month gap.

Leave a Reply