More challenge grant idiocy from NIH

One of my close colleagues got on eRA Commons and downloaded the challenge grants she was to review before eRA Commons went down for major upgrades in a majorly untimely fashion. This was a prudent move on her part since by the time eRA Commons would be accessible again, she would be traveling for multiple conferences and would have precious little time to download and review her grant assignments. So, she logged on. She was assigned 2 grants. She reviewed them while traveling and once home, with eRA Commons back up and running, went to upload her critiques the night before they were due. Since NIH would not be taking any critiques that came in after the deadline, this seemed a responsible plan.

Of course, when said colleague logged onto eRA Commons, she found that she had 3 grants to review. What's more, one of the the original two grants that she downloaded was no longer there, but she did find another that she hadn't seen before. So she had to review 2 new grants at the last minute, simply because NIH couldn't be bothered to send out emails alerting people to changes in the assignments and eRA Commons couldn't be accessed for a large chunk of time during the review period.

I'm continuously amazed at how this lumbering behemoth of an institution manages to function. Get your act together, people.

More like this

Challenge grant review assignments went out today. You know, the ones so essential to revitalizing the economy? Not surprisingly the reviews are due back soon- June 5th. To access the challenge grants you use eRA Commons. However, eRA commons is going to be offline for the next five days for a…
Most of you don't want to hear about my grant writing any more, but some of you are clearly interested in one of our innovations (at least I think it's an innovation; I've never heard of anyone doing it on this scale before): the Mock Study Section. So I'll take a break from writing (actually, re-…
So the readers have spoken: one more vote for hearing about my PI experience than the weird convo with the deans. However, I was working on the draft, and then some more work stuff got dumped on me, then SW had her popular deconstruction of one of Greg Laden's posts and I didn't want to interrupt…
Effect Measure has a good post about the NIH granting process. I'm not going to rehash what revere said, as far as the description of what happens once a grant application arrives at the NIH and how it winds its way through the Initial Review Group to one of many study sections through programmatic…

For those in the audience who are curious - what would happen if the two original grants were the only ones your colleague reviewed? Or, for that matter, what if a hypothetical person did all the work for whatever set was given, and then later, that set changed - are all the reviewers required to check the site every n days to see if something new has come in?

By anonymous (not verified) on 09 Jun 2009 #permalink

Slightly off topic, but one of the more entertaning bits on my favorite podcast (uhh yeah dude) is a recounting of the latest seemingly absurd grants coming out of the NIH. The details are a bit foggy but one was a 5 year, multi million dollar tour of brothels in China with the hopes of convincing sex workers to drink less on the job. That is going to be a tough one to explain to the wife. "It's science! You can't just always be in the lab! I'll be home in 5..."

By Jim White (not verified) on 09 Jun 2009 #permalink