- Academic Affairs
- Accountability and Compliance
- Administration and Finance
- Center for Health and Homeland Security
- Center for Information Technology Services
- Communications and Public Affairs
- Community Engagement
- Government Affairs
- Human Resource Services
- Office of Philanthropy
- Operations and Planning
- UMB Police Department
- President's Office
- Research and Development
- University Counsel
Sponsor Review of Grant Proposals
National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants process and review:
- NIH Continuous Submission eligibility and information
- Grants process overview
- Peer Review Process
- Center for Scientific Review Applicant Resources
- Insider's Guide to Peer Review for Applicants
- NIH advice: Are You On the Fence About Whether to Resubmit?
NEW: NOT-OD-19-017, "New NIH Peer Review Videos for Applicants" - the notice contains links to two informative new (2018) videos released by the NIH Center for Scientific Review
National Science Foundation (NSF) merit review process:
Review sponsor's instructions and website to learn about the review, evaluation, and funding process for proposals. Time frames and processes vary widely.
Reviewers have limited time and energy to devote to your proposal. If you make them work too hard to understand what you are trying to say, they will have little energy left to assess your ideas. Good ideas can be overlooked if the reviewer becomes distracted by typos, poor grammar, or other errors in construction. Clear, concise language is key to a good proposal.
Reviewer comments can be used to strengthen the application for the next round of funding. If the sponsor does not routinely return comments to the investigator as part of its process, consider requesting them.