Application Review Criteria for PHS 398

Hint: Be sure to review the formatting guidelines for the PHS 398 before preparing your grant application.

An original and six collated copies of your full grant application must be submitted to your respective association by 5:00 p.m. EST on March 14, 2008.

Application Submission and Instruction Information:

Applicants applying for a research PEP must complete the PHS 398 application, following the instructions provided with the PHS 398 and on "this website." Applications should be submitted to AAMC, ASPH or APTR by March 14, 2008. Failure to complete the correct form as instructed or to submit the application by the deadline will result in an unaccepted and unreviewed proposal. For further assistance with application forms, applicants should contact their member Association.

Additional Review Criteria for PHS 398

Application Review Information: CDC will conduct peer reviews for all research applications by means of a Special Emphasis Panel (SEP). The reviews will address and consider each of the review criteria in assigning the application's overall score, and weighting them as appropriate for each application. Reviewers will evaluate applications by addressing five review criteria (see below) and assigning a single global score for each scored application.

1. Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

2. Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well-integrated, well-reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?

3. Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches or methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?

4. Investigator: Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?

5. Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?

Additional Review Criteria: In addition to the five review criteria above, the Centers at CDC may require additional review criteria for some PEPs. The additional review criteria (if required) have been stated in the PEP. These criteria will also be considered in the determination of scientific merit and priority score. Applicants should review the PEP carefully prior to preparing a grant application.

All applications responsive to a particular PEP will be reviewed by the same review panel(s) and will only compete for funding with other applications submitted for that PEP.

The following scoring system will be used for the peer review of all (AAMC, ASPH and APTR) applications:

1.0-1.4 Outstanding
1.5-1.9 Excellent
2.0-2.4 Very Good
2.5-3.4 Good
3.5-5.0 Acceptable

Non-Responsiveness: If applications submitted for review are considered incomplete or non-responsive, they will not be entered into the review process, and applicants will be notified that their applications did not meet the submission requirements. The following criteria will be used to determine responsiveness:

Applications must be received by the "Application Deadline" Date referenced herein.
Applications must not exceed either the stated "Approximate Total Project Period Funding" or the "Approximate Average Award" per budget period.
Proposed project must not exceed the "Project Period Length."
Applicants must meet the requirements defined by "Special Requirements" for each PEP, if any.

Award Notices: Successful applicants will receive a notice of award from their member association.

Each unsuccessful applicant will receive the reviewers' critiques of their application.