The goal of this review program is to provide SOPH faculty the opportunity to receive an in-depth review of their grant applications prior to submission.

Review Process: 2 phases

Twelve weeks prior to the deadline:
The PI submits their specific aims page to the SOPH Office of Research. The Office will have the aims reviewed by at least 2 members of the SOPH Research Advisory Committee. Written or oral feedback will be provided to the PI within 5 business days.

Six weeks prior to the deadline:
The PI has their complete grant application package reviewed. The PI may choose from the following review options and/or may discuss an additional review option with the Associate Dean for Research.

  • Option 1) The complete application package is reviewed by UAB faculty through a CCTS panel.
  • Option 2) The complete application package is reviewed by UAB faculty identified and organized by the Office of Research.
  • Option 3) The complete application package is reviewed by an expert (e.g., faculty member, former NIH project officer) external to UAB. The PI should be willing to pay the external reviewer a modest honorarium using their discretionary funds or, upon approval of their chair, departmental resources.

* We envision this program applying to all grant submissions, regardless of sponsor. We have used NIH grants as an example.

Additional Resources and Guidance

The Office of Research can help identify reviewers and will work with the PI to ensure that the reviews are scheduled well in advance. At each phase of review, the PI and their mentor (and/or other senior members of their Department) will meet to discuss feedback and next steps. The Associate Dean for Research is available to participate in these meetings.

Investigators are encouraged to discuss their aims page with an NIH project officer to ensure the responsiveness and fit of their proposal. Investigators should also request a comprehensive checklist/to-do list from their departmental grants administrator.

Investigators are welcome to meet with SOPH Office of Research personnel to review the grant submission to do list, discuss review timelines and the assistance that the Office can provide to the PI, including: Biosketch reviews, reviewing and/or drafting “non-science” sections (letters of support, human subjects sections, etc.), English language editing, scientific editing, and overall grantsmanship.

All early stage investigators at the School of Public Health are encouraged to participate in the CCTS grant writing programs.

Example timeline** for the R01 cycles

NIH Deadline
R01 New
Aims due for review Complete application due for review Feedback provided by

February 5

November 5

December 25

January 8

June 5

March 5

April 24

May 8

October 5

July 5

August 24

September 7

NIH Deadline
R01 Renewal, Resubmission, Revision
Aims due for review Complete application due for review Feedback provided by

March 5

December 5

January 23

February 6

July 5

April 5

May 24

June 7

November 5

August 5

September 24

October 8

NIH Deadline
R01 AIDS and AIDS-related
Aims due for review Complete application due for review Feedback provided by

May 7

February 7

March 26

April 9

September 7

June 7

July 27

August 10

January 7

October 7

November 26

December 10

**If deadline falls on holiday or weekend, the due date is the next business day.