National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases-Tickborne Diseases

Improve understanding of tickborne pathogens and transmission. Advance diagnostics to develop more accurate, sensitive, and early diagnostic tests. Develop better treatment with improved therapeutics and treatment strategies for persistent or severe

Support and conduct research to improve the understanding, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of tickborne diseases to reduce their impact on public health.

The following will be considered in making funding decisions: scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review, availability of funds, relevance of the proposed project to program priorities. Assessing the importance/impact of the proposed study and its goals. Evaluating the quality of the experimental design and approach. The ability of the proposed investigator or research group to successfully execute the project. Examine whether the proposed resources, infrastructure, and institutional facilities are sufficient to support the project. Budgetary considerations are reviewed to determine the necessity of the components requested. This entails examining whether the proposed expenditures align well with the activities and scale of the project. Determining whether all items requested are essential for successful execution.

Applicants submit the grant application in grants.gov following guidance provided in the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). Center for Scientific Review (CSR) then assigns the application. A peer review process by Scientific Review Group (SRG) determines an overall impact score or percentile. A second level peer review is done by NIAID's advisory council which determines if there is concurrence with the initial peer review, program relevance, and fiscal considerations. NIAID selects proposals based on several factors including scientific and technical merit, programmatic priorities/set-asides, and budget availability that fiscal year. The Council makes recommendations to NIAID leadership. After advisory council review NIAID program staff evaluates applications. NIAID officials under delegated HHS authority consider all factors and make funding decisions. The NIAID Grants Management Officer (GMO) issues a Notice of Award (NOA) and only the GMO has authority to obligate federal funds. The NOA is the legally binding document which obligates federal funds. The NOA specifies the approved budget period which is the specific time interval within the project period for which funds are provided.

Renewals compete with new applications in peer review. You must have an active or recently active NIH research project grant. The same Principal Investigator must remain in place unless there is a justifiable reason for a new PI. Renewal applications use the SF 424 format.