As you may have heard, the NIH study sections that review grant applications in the behavioral and social sciences have recently been reorganized. This change was necessitated by the integration of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) into the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Many of the grant applications assigned to these institutes are now reviewed within the peer review structure of the Center for Scientific Review (CSR, formerly Division of Research Grants). Some funding mechanisms and special programs are still reviewed within the funding institutes (e.g., center grants, some Requests for Applications, some treatment and prevention research).

The Behavioral and Social Sciences Working Group recommended creation of 16 new study sections. These have been combined with the existing Epidemiology and Nursing study sections into three Integrated Review Groups (IRGs): Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes (BBBP); Risk, Prevention and Health Behavior (RPHB); and Social Science, Nursing, Epidemiology and Methods (SNEM). A very important change is the move away from study sections defined by age groups; most of the review groups look at areas like interpersonal risk, cognition or language across the life span. Similarly, some of the BBBP study sections combine related animal and human studies.

The mission of each of these IRGs is summarized on the Center for Scientific Review Website at the following address: http://www.csr.nih.gov/review/bss.htm. You will also find a more detailed description of each of the study section and preliminary rosters there. Most of the infancy research that was reviewed in Human Development and Aging-1, Human Development and Aging-3, NIDA-H, Child and Adolescent Risk and Prevention, and Perception, Emotion and Cognition are now reviewed in the BBBP and RPHB study sections. Social science applications are reviewed in the SNEM IRG.

Keep in mind that all of the new study sections are functioning as Special Emphasis Panels so the meeting codes are actually ZRG1 BBBP-6 01 (S) or ZRG1 RPHB-1 01 (S) (as examples). These will change when the new IRGs are chartered and membership slates are approved. Right now, the reviewers include members of former study sections whose terms are still current and addition individuals chosen for their expertise and accomplishments in the field.

Address questions pertaining to the substance of the application and/or its interest to NIH to Program staff at the appropriate funding institute (e.g., NICHD, NIMH, NINDS, NIDCD).

Address questions pertaining to review of grant applications to review staff. These include the format of a revision, deadlines, submission of corrective or supplemental material, etc.

Summary statements are sent by the potential funding institute if the application is scored and by CSR if it is unscored. If you do not have the summary six to eight weeks after the review, contact staff.

Submit IRB or IUCAC approval with the application or, at the latest, 60 days after the deadline. This may require advance planning on your part.

Do not squeeze in more text than reasonable by narrowing margins, leaving no space between paragraphs, and using a borderline type size or font. This may be technically acceptable but it is a big strain on the reviewers, their patience and eyesight.

Do not assume that the study section knows why your application and ideas are important. Because the application will be seen by experts across the life-span, it is important to keep in mind that the range of their experience and perspective is broad. It is often a good idea to have the application read over by a colleague in a slightly different area who can comment on whether the significance is clear and the language is sufficiently devoid of jargon.

Remember that R01 applications will be judged for Significance, Innovation, Approach, Investigators and Environment/Resources. The research plan is best organized around the Specific Aims, with the hypotheses, methods and statistical analyses flowing from the aims. A strong theoretical frame is also crucial.

Present NIH policy allows consideration of revised applications for only two additional review cycles (A1s and A2s). Because of the reorganization of the review of the Behavioral and Social Sciences applications at NIH, there is concern that amended applications would receive their last or penultimate review in a new study section. Hence, NIH has decided to allow A3 applications for investigators whose applications were reviewed in disbanded study sections and whose A1 or A2 applications are reviewed in the newly created behavioral study sections. This will allow all amended applications to have at least one opportunity to respond to the review of the new Behavioral and Social Science review committees.