The "rules" concerning all this seem to be scattered across the the NIH ether-net. I just took a look in a few spots. Many of the guidelines related to "changed/corrected" submissions to fix error-free applications talk about "AOR/SO rejection". From our experience, it is clear that formal rejection is NOT required in order to submit a changed/corrected application, even when the existing application is error-free and "Pending Verification" (old lingo). Nth submissions made before 2 business days have expired will automatically replace the previous one (IF the title remains the same and you use the Fed ID with previous Gg tracking number). The REAL purpose of the rejection is as a safety feature, to make sure that an application with a problem does not move on BEFORE you finish your corrections. Inasmuch as most of our errors are fixed in minutes after the original submission, we never reject and just submit again. The general principle you refer to is essentially that of fixing whatever you want before the deadline BUT only NIH-identified or NIH-caused problems after the deadline. This certainly seems fair and you will often here SROs and program officers stating this as the basic procedure. However, I'm not sure that NIH has ever said that they welcome multiple repeat submissions AT ANY TIME because this activity will slow down the system. If you look at current FAQs, you'll see: "Only the AOR/SO has the ability to “reject” the application within the two weekdays viewing window: -- to address warnings or -- if the assembled application in eRA Commons does not correctly reflect the submitted application package due to system issues with eRA Commons or Grants.gov (i.e. some part of the application was lost during the submission process or did not transfer correctly)." This sure seems to say that rejecting an error-free application and resubmitting is only to be done for the reasons above. Of course, NIH is a very common sense place and I'm sure they realize that if the title of your project included the word "cat" accidentally spelled D-O-G, then you should fix that. But yes...IF the feline-canine transformation mistake is discovered after the deadline, then you CAN submit a correction but THIS TIME it requires a cover letter and will fall under the late policy. And carnivore confusion is not likely to get you a waiver. I THINK THE BIG QUESTION is how often do people need to respond to warnings or discovered system-based garblings AFTER THE DEADLINE? If the answer is VERY SELDOM, then why can't NIH just adjust things so that error-free applications CANNOT be replaced after the deadline using the same Changed/Corrected procedure. This would eliminate the temptation to fine-tune, as Peter described. CH > Charlie, indeed NIH is allowing a 5 day window to make corrections during this time of transition from A forms to B forms, but is that not time to make corrections to applications that did NOT get into the Commons due to errors. I thought the question from Peter concerned the time for PI's to make corrections AFTER the application gets into the Commons. The time that the SO has to reject the accepted > application and the PI does a new submission. > > So I there are two issues. How much change can a PI make while fixing errors that prevented the application from getting into the Commons in the first place, during the 5 day grace period and what changes can a PI make to an accepted application that is rejected before the 2 day window when the application would go to Review? > > Bob > ------------------------------ > Robert Beattie > > > On Mar 2, 2010, at 12:18 PM, Charlie Hathaway wrote: > > Actually, they are allowing 5 days now. > > As to your question: I will take the 5th and remind you that you want proposals to be funded and in the absence of any (?) evidence that NIH is > taking the considerable time necessary to compare versions of submitted proposals to check for corrections in spelling, grammar, and YES, inconsistencies, I'd imagine that a lot of people will submit > changed/corrected applications that are possible not responding entirely to errors identified by the govt. I'd like to think that institutions are > NOT allowing PIs to plan on abusing the deadline, and use the correction window for major edits or additions. But fixing small mistakes that might > otherwise prevent a reviewer from realizing the genius and potential in a > project? Aren't those corrctions in everyone's best interest? > > CH > > > >> The NIH eRA Commons allows PIs 2 days to fix missing or garbled information. How firmly are you applying these criteria when >> investigators make such changes. For example, one of our PIs says that he's altered a specific aim to be consistent with the research >> strategy. >> Would you submit this? >> PJD >> Peter J. Dolce, Ph.D. >> Associate Vice President for Research >> Meharry Medical College >> West Basic Sciences Center >> 1023 21st Avenue North >> Nashville, TN 37208 >> Phone 615 327 6237 >> Fax 615 327 6144 >> DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it may be privileged, confidential, and contain health information that is legally >> protected. This information is intended only for the use of the individual >> or entity named above. The authorized recipient of this information is prohibited from disclosing this information to any other party unless permitted to do so by law or regulation. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, disclosure, >> copying, or >> distribution, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately and >> arrange for >> the return or destruction of these documents. >> ====================================================================== 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") ====================================================================== > > > ====================================================================== > 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") ======================================================================
