NIH plans to centralize peer review process for grants

Today the National Institutes of Health is announcing plans to centralize peer review of all applications for grants, cooperative agreements and research and development contracts within the agency's Center for Scientific Review (CSR). The proposed approach is expected to save more than $65 million annually by eliminating duplicative efforts across the agency, making the review process more efficient.  

At NIH, we are working to optimize our resources to support the best science. By centralizing the peer review process, we will not only reduce costs—we will also improve the quality, consistency and integrity of review, and maximize competition of similar science across the agency."   

Matthew J. Memoli, M.D., Acting NIH Director 

More than 80% of NIH's funding overall supports research institutions across the country, largely through competitive grants that are administered by NIH Institutes and Centers (IC) or the NIH Office of the Director. Each IC has its own budget and research agenda, often focusing on specific diseases or body systems.  

Funding decisions are made through a rigorous dual-level review process. Scientific review groups or study sections, first evaluate and score research proposals for scientific and technical merit. Study sections are made up of volunteer scientists, mostly from academia, and overseen by NIH staff known as scientific review officers. Advisory councils for NIH ICs and the NIH Office of the Director then perform a second-level review for mission relevance. Ultimately, IC directors make final funding decisions, taking into consideration current research priorities and the existing funding portfolio. 

The new centralization effort will apply to the first stage of the review process. NIH's CSR, which was established in 1946 to manage the scientific review of NIH grant applications and to ensure independent, expert review free from inappropriate influence, currently manages the peer review process for more than 78% of NIH grants. The remaining 22% are reviewed in study sections within 23 ICs, each operating separately with its own administrative and support overhead. The proposed consolidation would eliminate the IC-based study sections so that CSR conducts all first-level review.  

According to an analysis of FY24 data, CSR uses 0.3% of the NIH budget to review more than 66,000 applications annually. In comparison, review costs in the ICs average about 300% of CSR's costs. 

"Centralized peer review will mitigate the potential for bias by entirely separating the peer review and funding components of NIH," said CSR Director Noni Byrnes, Ph.D. 

NIH's proposal is now under review with implementation pending external review. This includes review by HHS and the Office of Management and Budget, providing Congress with a 15-day notification period, and issuing a Federal Register notice.