AAG Unplugged: Using Reviewer Feedback on SBIR/STTR Applications
We recently posted about communicating with NIH Program Officers during your National Institutes of Health grant application journey. One of the milestones we highlighted was also the topic of an All About Grants podcast from early 2023, receiving and responding to reviewer critique. Podcast participants discussed how to effectively utilize reviewer critiques and program input when applying for an NIH grant. The discussion includes what to expect in a review, the roles of various officers in the process, how to address feedback, and how to improve resubmission.
Key Speakers
Let’s meet the experts who contributed to this episode:
David Kosub, Host, NIH's Office of Extramural Research
Dr. Tracy Rankin, Program Director, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Dr. Brian Hoshaw, Review Chief, National Eye Institute
Key Takeaways
Takeaway 1: Reviewer critiques are an invaluable resource for improving grant applications.
The episode emphasized that NIH grant applicants should carefully read and consider the critiques and comments provided by reviewers. Both Dr. Tracy Rankin and Dr. Brian Hoshaw stressed that the critiques should not be taken personally but viewed as constructive feedback aimed at improving the science proposed in the application.
Dr. Rankin advised applicants to "take a few deep breaths" before reaching out to a program officer to discuss the critiques and potential next steps. She also emphasized that reviewers are not there to bring applicants down but to help improve the proposed science.
Dr. Hoshaw echoed this sentiment, stating, “Don’t take the comments personally. Reviewers are also scientists; they are not just there enjoying giving out weaknesses. Take it as feedback and use that to improve your grant.”
Takeaway 2: Developing a response strategy is crucial for resubmission.
When considering resubmission, the speakers highlighted the importance of strategically addressing the comments received in the review. Responding respectfully and effectively to the critiques can greatly improve the chances of success in the resubmission process.
Dr. Rankin advised applicants to start their response on a positive note, thanking the reviewers for their time and effort. She also emphasized addressing the "score-driving issues" and ensuring they are the focus in the resubmission.
Dr. Hoshaw similarly suggested that applicants address the major issues and those they can change in their one-page introduction for resubmission. An example was used of an applicant not having sufficient expertise in the area and that a direct and concise response would include efforts to recruit that expertise and an attached biosketch in the amended application. He also advised against overstuffing the application and reminded applicants to be respectful of the reviewers' time.
Takeaway 3: Program officers can provide helpful guidance.
The important role of program officers in guiding applicants through the review and resubmission process was a repeatedly stressed point throughout this AAG episode. Dr. Rankin urged applicants to reach out to the program officers whose contact information is provided on the first page of the review.
She further encouraged even those applicants whose proposals were not discussed to reach out to program officers. With their extensive experience in reading summary statements and listening to review meetings, program officers can help applicants understand the main issues to consider in their resubmission.
Summary
When receiving a critique, it's important to read it thoroughly and consider reaching out to the program officer to discuss next steps.
The reviewers' critiques are intended to help improve the science proposed in the application, not to attack the applicant.
When addressing feedback, start off positive, thank the reviewers for their time, and focus on the strengths and weaknesses outlined in the resume.
Even if an application is not discussed, it's still worthwhile to contact the program officer to discuss potential resubmission strategies.
Receiving feedback from reviewers is a crucial step in the grant application process. At Blue Haven Grant Consultants, we've navigated this milestone countless times throughout our extensive experience in SBIR/STTR grant writing. In this summarized episode of AAG, the experts shared valuable insights on handling reviewer feedback and responses. However, we understand that adopting this advice can be challenging, especially when receiving feedback on a grant application that you've invested your time and passion into.
What sets the Blue Haven Advantage apart is our deep integration with your team. As highlighted by the experts on the podcast, responses and resubmissions don't adhere to a one-size-fits-all approach. Our team of seasoned grant writers becomes an integral part of your team, enabling us to provide the tailored support and strategic guidance that this crucial milestone demands.
Is your project ready for the level of support and expertise that BHGC provides? Schedule a free consultation with us to take the next step on your grant application journey.