APPENDIX D
Responses to "Dear Colleague" Letter
The committee mailed a "Dear Colleague" letter to all principal investigators of 1993/1994 and 1995 grant and contract awards (approximately 700 individuals) asking for feedback on all aspects of the grant process (see Appendix C). We received responses from 94 individuals as well as one from a person who was aware of the survey but had been denied grant funding. The characteristics of the respondents are outlined below.
|
Characteristics of Respondents |
No. of Respondents |
|
Total respondents (all grant recipients) |
94 |
|
BCRP study section members |
19 |
|
BCRP study section chairs |
3 |
|
Denied funding for at least one application |
11 |
|
Overwhelmingly positive |
48 |
|
Positive with suggestions for improvement |
39 |
|
Mostly negative, major criticisms |
7 |
|
Criticism |
No. of Letters |
|
Application Process |
|
|
Cumbersome application process (e.g., length of forms, details required of safety plans, laboratory environment) |
46 |
|
Communication with DOD staff inadequate regarding grant submission |
8 |
|
No mechanisms to resubmit or improve grants not funded |
3 |
|
Training grant applications should request and evaluate training environment, mentors, other key factors in training program |
3 |
|
Time from submission to notification about funding too long |
3 |
|
Grants Management |
|
|
Annual report requirements too long, not well reviewed, oversight too rigid |
13 |
|
Human volunteers regulations too burdensome |
8 |
|
No flexibility in spending across budget categories |
3 |
|
Peer/programmatic review |
|
|
Concerns about funding out of priority score order |
10 |
|
Lack of continuity in study section members |
3 |
