Grant Application and Review Process



Preparing and submitting an NIH biomedical research grant application is a major undertaking that requires good preparation and organization​:

​Note that ​NIH implemented a new Data Management and Sharing Policy on​ January 25, 2023. You can find information specific to this policy on the NIH Scientific Data Sharing website​

Finding a NIGMS-supported Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)

NIGMS supports both unsolicited, investigator-initiated research, as well as projects / programs that have been defined as Institute high-priority areas and are solicited through NIGMS specific NOFOs and NOSIs. A list of all NOFOs a​nd NOSIs currently supported by NIGMS can be found at:

Getting advice f​rom NIGMS program staff

Before you apply, we strongly suggest that you get advice from a program officer relevant to your area of science using one of the following methods:



Peer review is the cornerstone of the NIH grants process, helping ensure that NIH grant applications are evaluated in a way that is fair, equitable, timely, and free of bias. NIH has a two-stage review, with the first level of review carried out by a Scientific Review Group composed primarily of non-federal scientists. The second level of review is performed by the Institute and Center National Advisory Councils or Boards composed of both scientific and public representatives. Overview of the peer review process.

First Level Review at NIGMS

Initial peer review meetings for applications to NIGMS-supported NOFO​s are administered by either the Center for Scientific Review (CSR) or the NIGMS Scientific Review Branch (SRB). The locus of review for individual funding opportunities is typically listed in Section V of the NOFO.

Information about individual Scientific Review Groups that review NIGMS applications can be found at:

Second Level Review at NIGMS

The National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council (NAGMS) recommends applications for funding, although the Institute makes the final funding decision. Council members also provide advice and recommendations on policy and program development, program implementation, evaluation, and other matters of significance to the mission and goals of NIGMS. Information about NIGMS Council meetings and functions, member rosters, and meeting dates can be found at Advisory Council.

Summary Statement

After the Scientific Review Group meeting, all reviewed applications receive an overall impact score and Summary Statement prepared by the SRO that is accessible from the eRA Commons.

The impact score and Summary Statement comments are some of the pieces of information NIGMS uses in making funding determinations. Read about NIGMS Funding Policies for more information on other factors NIGMS staff consider in deciding to award any application. If you have questions about your Summary Statement or want to discuss Next Steps, contact the NIGMS Program Official named on the Summary Statement.


Another major piece of information used by NIGMS to make funding decisions is the material your institution provides when completing Just-in-Time Procedures.

NIH issues Just-in-Time emails for all applications that receive an overall impact score of 30 or better. NIGMS might request this information for a broader range of applications or ask for other details in preparation for possible funding consideration. These requests are not intended to imply anything about the ultimate funding status of your application. You are encouraged to submit complete information as soon as possible via the Just-In-Time function within the eRA Commons.