Reconfigure the NIH!

Although I have no time now to meditate on NIH policies (I must take care of my cells), but I spread this package from Tom further, as the timing seems good, especially what concerns stem cell research. 4 rules (1 abandoned by me), and 1 copy/paste.

1. Include in your post the links to the NIH RFI and the comments page.

2. Include the list of six topics the NIH wants information about.

Challenges of NIH System of Research Support
Please describe any specific challenges presented by NIH’s support of biomedical and behavioral research such as the current array of grant mechanisms, number of grants awarded per investigator, and the duration of grants.

Challenges of NIH Peer Review Process
Please describe any specific challenges presented by the current peer review process at NIH.

Solutions to Challenges
Please concisely describe specific approaches or concepts that would address any of the above challenges, even if it involves a radical change to the current approach.

Core Values of NIH Peer Review Process
Please describe the core values of NIH peer review that must be maintained or enhanced.

Peer Review Criteria and Scoring
Are the appropriate criteria and scoring procedures being used by NIH to evaluate applications during peer review? If not, are there changes in either that you would recommend?

Career Pathways
Is the current peer review process for investigators at specific stages in their career appropriate? If not, what changes would you recommend?

3. Comment on one or more of these issues. Reconsider the stem cell grant system completely.

4. Decide who the next seven vectors will be for this meme. Sorry, I don’t.