Data on Implementing NIH ’s Next Generation Researchers Initiative
Discussion Rate” is, like the Funding Rate a person-based metric, and is calculated as the percent of applicants (actually people designated as PI’s on an application) who had at least one application make it to the discussion stage of peer review.
As Table 2 indicates, discussion and funding rates in FY 2020 are higher for women in the At Risk and New Not Early groups, but not for the Early Stage and Established groups. Women comprise a greater proportion of Early-Stage Investigator applicants (46%) than any of the other groups including New Investigators, At Risk Investigators and Established Investigators (e.g., women comprise only 30% of Established investigators).
Table 2: FY 2020 Demographic Type 1 R01-equivalent Data by Gender
Career Stage
Demographic Characteristic
Applicants
Discussed
Awardees
Discussion Rate
Funding Rate
ESI
Female
2241
1343
605
59.90%
27.00%
Male
2673
1650
753
61.70%
28.20%
Early, Not New
Female
2497
1341
490
53.70%
19.60%
Male
3684
1923
654
52.20%
17.80%
At Risk
Female
2354
1429
661
60.70%
28.10%
Male
5388
3092
1425
57.40%
26.40%
Established
Female
3048
2053
981
67.40%
32.20%
Male
6961
4879
2321
70.10%
33.30%
The discussion rate for the Black/African American at-risk investigator group was higher in FY 2020 than for Asians and Whites (Table 3). Black/African Americans in the New, Not Early group had a higher funding rate compared to the two other race categories. That said, the overall number of Black/African American i...
Source: NIH Extramural Nexus - Category: Research Authors: Mike Lauer Tags: blog Open Mike at risk investigators Early Stage Investigators ESI funding Funding data NGRI scientific workforce diversity Source Type: funding
More News: Academies | Blogging | Environmental Health | Funding | Grants | Orthopaedics | Pandemics | Research | Statistics | Training | Universities & Medical Training | Women