Reviewing grant proposals is a huge responsibility and a time sink. If you become a regular study-section member, you get new batches of proposals to review three times a year, and reviewing them can be a slog.
But it has some profound positive consequences. There's no better way to learn about grant-writing -- and what reviewers look for in a proposal -- than to review them yourself, on a regular basis. It's also a great way to keep up with what other scientists in your field are doing -- and thinking about doing. Participation in a study section comes with a travel allowance and a small honorarium, but nobody does it for the money.
Now, NIH has added another incentive. Permanent members of NIH study sections no longer have to worry about the grant-submission calendar. This is from a recent NIH Notice:
The National Institutes of Health is implementing an alternate plan for submission and review of research grant applications from appointed members of chartered NIH study sections in order to recognize their outstanding service and to minimize disincentives to study section service. The timing of Study Section meetings and most standard due dates for grant applications overlap (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm). Thus, reviewers are under pressure to review applications and prepare their own applications simultaneously.
Beginning February 5, 2008 the alternate submission and review procedures, described below, will be available for appointed members of NIH Study Sections....
This continuous submission process will enable appointed members of chartered NIH Study Sections to submit their applications as soon as they are fully developed. The applications will be reviewed no later than 120 days after receipt.
NIH plans to analyze this opportunity on an ongoing basis in order to assess feasibility and satisfaction.
