Scientific Reviewer

The Contractor shall provide qualified scientific and operational services to support the planning, coordination, conduct, and documentation of NIH peer review activities. Services shall be performed in accordance with applicable NIH and CSR policies, procedures, guidance, and established review schedules. The Contractor shall collaborate with SROs, CSR leadership, reviewers, and review support staff to ensure assigned review activities and deliverables are completed accurately, consistently, and within established requirements and deadlines.

• No certification needed

• General Medical and Health Services

• General Social Sciences

• Miscellaneous Psychology

• Physical Sciences

• General Engineering

• Miscellaneous Biology

• IAR

• Internet Assisted Review

• Peer Review

• eRA

• CMM (Committee Management Module)

• QVR

• Query View Report

• Peer review process for grants

• Literature and database searches

• Grants and contract mechanisms

• Administrative summaries

• Subject matter expert

• The Contractor shall provide documentation and operational support for NIH application scientific reviews, including panel formation, reviewer recruitment and training, administrative compliance screenings, critique quality control, and meeting documentation.

• Additionally, the Contractor shall prepare and finalize summary statements for all applications and deliver ad hoc support as required.

• All work must be completed timely, accurately, and professionally in accordance with NIH policies, CSR best practices, and federal regulations.

• Critique and summary deliverables must be clear, objective, and accurately reflect key evaluation factors.

• Contractor staff shall maintain effective, professional collaboration with Government leadership and reviewers while upholding strict ethics and confidentiality standards.

• Deficient deliverables shall be corrected and resubmitted at the Government’s direction. - Ad-Hoc

• Identify the administrative and the scientific issues in the grant applications or contract proposals, including the hypotheses and rationale presented in the applications/proposals. - 1
• Identify and select reviewers by matching the expertise of the reviewer with the specific science contained in the research grant applications and recommend potential reviewers. - 2
• Perform a thorough review of the content of each individual application and its relevance in terms of the scientific interests of the Institute. - 3
• Ensure that high-quality written reviews are obtained. - 4

• Performs administrative review of research grant applications.

• Work with staff to manage the scientific peer review of grant and cooperative agreement applications, and contract proposals assigned for primary merit review.

• Serve as an internal authoritative source of information on application receipt, referral and grants management policies and procedures.

• Identifies specific areas of expertise for peer review panel, searches databases and resources and prepares lists of potential reviewers.

• Make initial determinations regarding the appropriate assignment of all grants.

• Make assignment decisions and resolve conflicts in assignments based on knowledge of the scientific interests of the Institute.

• Prepares preliminary drafts of summary statements.

• Review draft documents and synthesize comments and incorporate appropriate comments from reviewers into final documents.

• Provide critical review of literature and evaluate research concepts, proposals, protocols, and reports.

• Validates and enters information into databases.

• Work with staff on entry of reviewer data into the Committee Management system in order to prepare peer review rosters.

• Assign applications to reviewers.

• Determine appropriate meeting type; face-to-face, teleconference, Internet-Assisted meeting, etc.

• Identifies involved persons who must be on a conflict-of-interest list and identifies deficiencies which must be addressed prior to review.

• Assess reviewers against applications for potential conflicts of interest.

• Consult with program staff to identify potential reviewers and ascertain conflicts of interest.

• Examine key personnel, institutional affiliations and letters of support associated with each grant application to determine potential conflicts of interest.

• Attends peer review meetings to take notes for use when preparing final summary of documentation of meeting proceedings.

• Captures the results of committee deliberations during the review meeting.

• Obtains written critiques from reviewers.

• Obtain, evaluate and coordinate written critiques from expert reviewers.

• Ensure that high-quality written reviews are obtained.

• Evaluates incoming reviews for completeness and accuracy.

• Identify the administrative and the scientific issues in the grant applications or contract proposals.

• Ensure that summary statements and technical evaluation reports are compiled and edited to produce high-quality documents.

• Analyzes scientific content of grant applications.

• Apply scientific knowledge in areas related to the mission and the NIH peer review process.

• Evaluate scientific aspects of concepts, proposals, protocols and reports for research.

• Mentors and trains staff on scientific peer review processes and procedures.

• Assesses organizational need and develops training programs to improve accuracy and performance of peer review processes and procedures.

• Develops training materials, job aids and instructions for use by peer reviewers.

• Mentors and coaches peer reviewers in the performance of reviews.