The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is making a special effort to stimulate research in educational institutions which provide the baccalaureate training for a significant number of our nation's research scientists but which historically have not been major participants in NIH programs. Funds have been added to the NIH budget specifically for the Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) program and for the objectives stated.
AREA grants are for the support of new or expanded health-related research projects conducted by faculty in institutions that are not research intensive. The AREA will enable qualified individual scientists to receive support for feasibility studies and other small scale research projects. These grants create a research opportunity for scientists and institutions, otherwise unlikely to participate extensively in NIH programs, to contribute to the nation's biomedical research effort. It is anticipated that principal investigators supported under the AREA Program will benefit from this unique opportunity to conduct independent, preliminary research studies preparatory to seeking more substantial funding through other traditional NIH grant mechanisms; that the awardee institution will benefit from the strengthened research environment, initiated through AREA grants and furthered by participation in the diverse extramural programs of the NIH; and that students will benefit from exposure to, and participation in, research and thus be encouraged to pursue graduate studies in the health sciences.
Peer review panels must include representation from AREA-eligible schools.
Special consideration will be given in the funding decision process to applications recommended for further consideration from those smaller, less prominent, four-year, public and private colleges and universities which provide undergraduate training for a significant number of our nation's research scientists but which have not shared adequately in the growth of the NIH extramural program.
Please use the following guidelines when preparing written comments on AREA applications assigned to you for review.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Briefly summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the application and provide a recommendation of an overall level of merit.
DESCRIPTION: Use the abstract on page 2 of the application unless inappropriate. Do not make evaluative statements in this section.
CRITIQUE: Do not include descriptive information in this section. Provide an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the research plan, which consists of Specific Aims, Background and Significance, and Experimental Design and Methods. Evaluate the project's potential as a basis for more extensive research.
MINORITY AND GENDER ISSUES: As reviewers of extramural research grant applications you will determine if human subjects and/or human tissues are involved in the project and, if so, (1) determine if the research is a Phase III clinical trials project, and (2) evaluate whether the minority and gender characteristics of the sample are scientifically acceptable and consistent with the aims of the project. You should evaluate the characteristics on a scale of "1" to "4" as follows:
| SCALE | Minority (M) | Gender (G) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | minority and non-minority | both females and males |
| 2. | only minority | females, only |
| 3. | only non-minority | males, only |
| 4. | minority representation unknown | unknown |
You should evaluate acceptability as "A" (acceptable) or "U" (unacceptable). If you rate the sample as "U", you should consider this feature a weakness or a deficiency in the design of the project reflected in the overall scoring of the project. BUDGET: Evaluate the direct costs only. For all years, determine whether all items of the budget (including future years) are appropriate and justified. Provide a rationale for each suggested modification in amount or duration of support. The amount of support requested in each application may be up to $75,000 in direct costs which may be expended over a period of up to thirty-six months; however, no more than $35,000 in direct costs may be awarded for any one year. Under the provisions of the Just-In-Time procedures, detailed justification of budgetary items and information on other support is not required.
INVESTIGATORS: Assess the competence of the principal investigator and key personnel to conduct the proposed research.
RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT: Evaluate any special attributes or deficiencies relevant to the conduct of the proposed studies. Investigators are expected to conduct the majority of their research at the applicant organization, although limited access to special facilities or equipment at another institution is permitted.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
No Exemptions Claimed: Express any comments or concerns about the appropriateness of the responses to the six required points, especially whether the risks to subjects are reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefits to the subjects, and in relation to the importance of the knowledge that may reasonably be expected to result from the research.
BIOHAZARDS: Note any materials or procedures that are potentially hazardous, and indicate whether the protection proposed will be adequate.