Letter: Grant Funding Chances

Regarding the item entitled "Eye Institute Offers Best Odds For Success" (Funding Briefs, The Scientist, Oct. 30, 1989, page 23), I would like to bring to your attention a crucial omission. The statements regarding award rates are undoubtedly correct; however, they do not note that the award rate percentages include noncompeting continuations. It concerns me that our legislators might read this article and assume that there is a 30% chance of a new grant being funded at NIH. That is particular

Judy Emery
Jan 7, 1990

Regarding the item entitled "Eye Institute Offers Best Odds For Success" (Funding Briefs, The Scientist, Oct. 30, 1989, page 23), I would like to bring to your attention a crucial omission.

The statements regarding award rates are undoubtedly correct; however, they do not note that the award rate percentages include noncompeting continuations. It concerns me that our legislators might read this article and assume that there is a 30% chance of a new grant being funded at NIH. That is particularly worrisome, given the current budget situation, but it would be worrisome even without the current situation.

One of our investigators pointed out this article to me and expressed his concern. I hope that future references to NIH award rates will clarify just what is included in the rate.

JUDY A. EMERY
Director, Sponsored Programs
Dartmouth-Hitchcock
Medical Center
Dartmouth Medical School
Hanover, N.H.

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?