NIH plans to centralize peer review process for grants

NIH plans to centralize peer review process for grants

Today, the National Institutes of Health announces plans to centralize peer review of all grant applications, cooperative agreements, and research and development contracts in the agency's Center for Scientific Review (CSR). The proposed approach is expected to save more than $65 million annually by eliminating duplicative efforts across the agency, making the review process more efficient.

At NIH, we work to optimize our resources to support the best science. By centralizing the peer review process, we will not only reduce costs, but also improve the quality, consistency, and integrity of review and maximize competition of similar science across the agency. “

Matthew J. Memoli, MD, NIH Acting Director

More than 80% of NIH's funding overall supports research institutions across the country, primarily through competitive grants administered by NIH Institutes and Centers (IC) or the NIH Office of the Director. Each IC has its own budget and research agenda, often focused on specific diseases or body systems.

Funding decisions are made through a rigorous two-tier review process. Scientific review groups or study sections first evaluate and evaluate research proposals for scientific and technical merit. Study sections are composed of volunteer scientists, primarily from academia and NIH staff known as scientific review officers. NIH ICS Advisory Councils and the NIH Office of the Director then conduct a second-level review for mission relevance. Ultimately, IC directors make final funding decisions, taking into account current research priorities and the existing funding portfolio.

The new centralization effort applies to the first phase of the verification process. The CSRs NIH, founded in 1946 to manage the scientific review of NIH grant applications and to provide independent, expert review of undue influence, currently manages the peer review process for more than 78% of NIH grants. The remaining 22% are reviewed in study sections within 23 ICs, each operating separately with its own administrative and support burden. The proposed consolidation would eliminate the IC-based study sections so that CSR performs all first-level reviews.

According to an analysis of FY24 data, CSR uses 0.3% of the NIH budget to review more than 66,000 applications annually. In comparison, review costs in ICS average around 300% of the cost of CSR.

“Centralized peer review will mitigate the potential for bias by completely separating the peer review and funding components of NIH,” said CSR Director Noni Byrnes, Ph.D.

NIH's proposal will now move on to implementation pending external review. This includes review by HHS and the Office of Management and Budget, giving Congress a 15-day period and issuing a Federal Register notice.

Sources: