1. A Reviewer’s Perspective on G20 Grants Lyndon J. Goodly DVM, MS, DACLAM May 2016–ACLAM Forum

2. = NIH REVIEW PROCESS

3. 1) What’s the process (Big Picture)? 2) Who is conducting the review? 3) Type of reviewers 4) What’s the review criteria? 5) What’s the scoring scale? 6) What are reviewers looking for? 7) Recommendations 8) Questions Things You Should Know: G20 Reviews

4. Preliminary review Critiques submitted Review committee meets Initial overall impact score presented Applications with worst scores triaged What’s the Process – Big Picture? Critiques presented by each reviewer Committee individually scores final overall impact score Written critiques finalized Best scored applications proceed to Phase II

5. First Level of Review: Peer Review (Initial Review Group) Veterinarian Architect or Engineer Scientist Second Level of Review: Council of Councils Who is Conducting the Review?

6. Experienced Thorough Last Minute Tough Types of Reviewers New Thoughtful Picky Fair

7. 1.Overall impact 2.Scientific merit & organization of total / component parts 3.Administrative and leadership capabilities of applicant 4.Anticipated effect of project on other relevant research programs and facilities in geographic area & nationwide 5.Need for the project or additional space 6.Project Design, including: What’s the Review Criteria? Design Plan Engineering Criteria Line Drawings Architectural Criteria

8. What’s the Scoring Scale?

9. Scoring scale is 1 – 9 Very best: 10 (1 X 10 = 10) Worst: 90 (9 X 10 = 90) Not Discussed: How does this happen?

10. Wow Factor: Impactful Well written Easy to read Provides requested information What Are Reviewers Looking For? Well justified “Why(s)” are well articulated Degrees of separation Mistake(s) & error(s) free

11. Read the whole RFA Know review criteria Write grant with reviewers in mind Write your grant early Recommendations! Hire architect or engineer to complete line drawings Conduct a RED team review Volunteer to serve on a review board

12. QUESTIONS?