The NIH recently posted several notices outlining changes to grant proposal review criteria and the timeline for their implementation. These are probably worth checking out if you are in the business of writing and/or reviewing NIH grants.

• http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-025.html

• “After careful deliberation and consideration of the recommendations resulting from this year-long effort, a number of key actions will be implemented in the NIH peer review system.  These actions include the implementation of enhanced review criteria for evaluating the scientific and technical merit of applications […]
• Side-by-side comparison of the enhanced review criteria

• http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-024.html

• The new scoring system will utilize a 9-point rating scale (1 = exceptional; 9 = poor).  Although a 7-point scale was planned initially, a 9-point scale was selected based on the desire for a scale with sufficient range.

• Implementation Timeline
  • Jan 2009 submission deadline: Early Stage Investigator (ESI) and New Investigator Policy as well as New NIH Policy on Resubmissions
  • An ESI is a New Investigator who is within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent).

• http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-013.html

There is concern […] that applications from New Investigators frequently do not fare as well in peer review as those from established investigators […]  Accordingly, the NIH will, wherever possible, cluster applications from New Investigators for discussion during initial peer review with the expectation that those applications will be more effectively evaluated when judged against other applications from individuals at the same career stage.

The NIH has found that the use of Small Grants (R03) and the NIH Exploratory/Developmental Research Grants (R21) has increased over the last few years.  However, recent analyses indicate that a smaller proportion of individuals with initial R21 or R03 grant support subsequently apply for and obtain R01-equivalent funding.  In addition, the initial success rate for R21 applications often is lower than for R01 applications.  Since R03 and R21 grants are limited in scope and period of support, they may not be the most effective way to launch an independent research career.  Accordingly, the NIH encourages New Investigators, particularly ESIs, to apply for R01 grants when seeking first-time funding from the NIH.