I doubt we will have a sense of this until there have been many rounds of
review.  Remember that typical "good" priority scores in the old system
varied by type of grant.  And it was always %-ile rather than score per se
that was used for choosing awards.  Will %-iles continue to be based on
the overall scores for current plus previous 2 cycles for each IRG?

Charlie

> Good morning everyone!
>
> Under the new NIH Peer Review process (the 9 point scale) do we know what
> constitutes a good score or one that we could expect funding?  I guess,
> more importantly, what score would be the "rule of thumb" cut off to not
> expect funding?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Rob Dimmitt
> Indiana University
>
>
> ======================================================================
>  Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
>  subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
>  via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
> ======================================================================
>

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================