US National Science Foundation asks universities to pre-screen grants.
Washington
US researchers could increasingly find that their grant applications are rejected without even being seen by funding-agency reviewers. The situation has arisen because the National Science Foundation (NSF) is asking universities to pre-screen some types of proposal in a bid to cut down its workload.
The NSF is responsible for funding the majority of US university-based, non-biomedical research. It has a sterling reputation among scientists for using peer review to determine who should receive grant money. But in the face of tight budget constraints, it is trying to shift some of that responsibility onto individual universities.
In the past few years, the NSF has placed limits on the number of applications that a single institution can submit. Those limits will now become increasingly common, according to Arden Bement, the agency's director. He says the measures are needed to control the number of proposals flooding in to his staff, and to boost the success rate of applications. He stresses that the new policy will affect only large facilities and collaborative grants. “This would not be for individual applications,” he says.
But universities are starting to speak out about the proposals, warning that the changes are forcing them to become unwilling peer reviewers. Earlier this year, administrators at Princeton University, New Jersey, had to choose one of several proposals for a programme that funded international collaborations, according to Diane Jones, director of the university's office of government affairs. The proposals came from several disciplines and departments, making the choice far from straightforward. “Universities are not set up to do this kind of internal peer review,” she says.
Fawwaz Ulaby, vice-president for research at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, adds that the rules particularly limit the opportunities for researchers at large universities. “They're doing this at the expense of fairness,” he says.
But Bement says he has little choice in the face of a 2% budget cut this year. He adds that he still believes the agencies will receive the best proposals. “The universities will almost invariably put forward the ones of highest scientific merit,” he says.
Related links
Related links
Related links in Nature Research
http://www.nature.com/uidfinder/10.1038/419657b
http://www.nature.com/uidfinder/10.1038/433559a
Related external links
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brumfiel, G. Rethink on review leaves researchers out in the cold. Nature 435, 5 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/435005b
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/435005b
This article is cited by
-
What works for peer review and decision-making in research funding: a realist synthesis
Research Integrity and Peer Review (2022)