Here you'll find your timing-related actions for requesting assignment to an institute and study section and for initial peer review.

Several important events take place around this time. Before the review meeting, NIH posts study section rosters; after the meeting, it posts scores and summary statements in the eRA Commons.

Know your actions and when to take them. Learn about the timing of awards—awards may be issued after the advisory Council meeting or even earlier for some applications.

Timeline for Assignment and Review

The upper timeline shows major steps from application to award for a simple non-AIDS application, such as an R01, as described in full at Timeline for Planning a Grant.

Expanding the darker colored section in the top timeline, the lower timeline shows major action items and timeframes for this stage in more detail:

• You should see your application's assignments in the Commons within two weeks after you submit. If not, contact NIH’s Center for Scientific Review.
• Learn about Late Applications & Post-Submission Materials.
• 30 days before the peer review, you should see the review roster posted in the Commons. Check it and contact the scientific review officer (SRO) if you have concerns.
• You are allowed to withdraw your application any time before the review meeting without its counting toward your one resubmission limit. If you decide to withdraw, we prefer that you do so as soon as possible rather than waiting until just before the meeting.
• Your application undergoes initial peer review.
• Within three days after the review, you should see your score in the Commons. Check posted NIAID paylines.
• Within 30 days after the review, you should see your summary statement in the Commons. Thoroughly review your summary statement then contact your program officer for advice on your funding chances or for help deciding whether to resubmit.
• Our NIAID Advisory Council performs the second level of review.
  • About eight weeks before each Council meeting, a subset of members performs an electronic expedited review so we can award qualifying grants before the next full meeting. As an example, we use expedited review for investigator-initiated applications that are within our payline and have no special concerns.
  • All other applications have a regular second-level review at the full Council meeting, which is typically about seven months after the due date.

Read more:

• Application Assigned to a Review Group,
• First-Level Peer Review
• Second-Level Review: Advisory Council.

Timeline for Funding Decisions

The upper timeline shows major steps from application to award for a simple non-AIDS application, such as an R01, as described in full at Timeline for Planning a Grant.

Expanding the darker colored section in the top timeline, the lower timeline shows major action items and timeframes for this stage in more detail:

• During this time period, resolve any barriers to funding such as bars to award.
• If your application is expedited, you could be funded as early as six months after the due date.
• After Council, we continue funding applications with scores that fall within our published paylines
• Expect a Notice of Award within six to eight weeks after second-level review by our Advisory Council, earlier if your application underwent expedited second-level review. This could take longer if the study section had human subjects or vertebrate animal concerns or you have a complex grant type.
• Some must wait until near the end of the fiscal year to get a grant, which may be as long as 20 months after your original application submission date.
• Before funding, you must resolve any barriers to funding, including sending just-in-time information. Read more in Responding to Pre-Award Requests ("Just-in-Time").

Read more:

• NIAID’s Funding Decisions and Your Next Steps
• Understanding Due Dates, Preparation Time, and Review Cycles
• NIAID’s Paylines and Budget Information Changes Throughout the Year