The National Institute on Aging conducted two evaluations to get insight into two funding mechanisms and identify their strengths and weaknesses.
The first evaluation focused on a mechanism used to support multidisciplinary investigation of a complex problem. Evaluators concluded that longer-term grants were more productive than short-term grants in the number of publications and patents per grant, per grant year, and per unit of funding. A comparison between the mechanism and another mechanism commonly used to support investigator-initiated research did not show significant benefits other than in the number of patents.
The second evaluation focused on a mechanism used to support innovative, potentially high impact research. Evaluators examined the grants funded under this mechanism, and compared them to grants funded under two other mechanisms. Evaluators concluded that most of the decline in the number of grants awarded under the mechanism in question was due to lower success rates, although they were not able to determine whether the lower success rate was simply a temporary change, or due to a weaker application pool or tougher standards applied by peer reviewers.
Report Title: Evaluation of the P01 Portfolio at the National Institute on Aging; Evaluation of the R21 Portfolio at the National Institute on Aging
Agency Sponsor: NIH, National Institutes of Health
Federal Contact: Rosanna Ng, 301-496-5367
Performer: Abt Associates Inc.
Record ID: 9941 (September 5, 2012)