- Joined
- Jun 4, 2003
- Messages
- 86
- Reaction score
- 0
Is there a centralized location for getting this information or does one have to contact the schools directly?
Thanks.
Thanks.
When I asked Bert Shapiro for NIH stuff, he told me to get government authorization to release the information as public material. In other words: by the time you get it, it won't be of use to you.
Originally posted by adesua
So Cornell was the only school to have a raise in the number of MD/PhD spots. Is this quotable - or is this another piece of info that is supposed to be kept a secret?
Originally posted by Neuronix
The NIH sends out this big site review team and takes into account lots of factors for writing their reviews.
Originally posted by Neuronix
Interesting. Duke and UChicago both claimed to have the highest grant score and Cornell has an increase in amount of funding? Confusing. But then again, this is what we have to put up with as people being fed small, subjectively chosen, amounts of objective information by people trying to sell their schools.
For those who have never heard how the NIH grant review system works, here's my quick attempt to explain it. Because this is a NIH grant, programs are reviewed once every five years and given a grant score, something like research grants. The NIH sends out this big site review team and takes into account lots of factors for writing their reviews.
When everything is done, the scores are used to decide which programs get more money, which stay the same, and which get less money or probation. Like a research grant, the higher your score, the more likely it is to get funded, depending on the research budget.
I wonder if I could get grant reviews by the FOIA. I can't see why that would be "classified" somehow that the public would not be able to get to.
Originally posted by Maebea
This demonstrates that either my program is as good as Cornell's, or that the NIH is as good at cutting & pasting text in grant reviews as students are in filling out MD/PhD applications.