Mock Study Section

The Mock Study Section is for investigators who want their full proposal reviewed for an upcoming grant submission. Mock Study Section is ideally completed about 6-8 weeks ahead of the grant due date (at a minimum 4 weeks ahead of the deadline).

The Mock Study Section is for those that have an entire grant prepared (e.g., specific aim, research approach including background, innovation, methods, etc.) that are ready for internal review. Additional materials such as scienCVs and other documents recommended but not required. For career development awards, training plans and mentor letters or mentoring agreements should be included.

The Mock Study Section is completed like an NIH study section with written and verbal reviews, scores, and discussion amongst reviewers, however, the difference is that the latter half of the meeting is used for the requester to discuss the reviews with the experts and ask any questions.

Meeting Structure

The Mock Study Section is a synchronous 60 minute virtual or in-person meeting including the requester, 2-3 reviewers, and a member of the Grant Development Subcommittee.

For the first half of the Mock Study Section, the reviewers will review an entire grant, provide scoring, and written and verbal reviews similar to an NIH study section.

For the second half, the investigator will have the opportunity to ask questions, seek clarification, and respond to the reviewers scores and feedback. The Grant Development Subcommittee member will facilitate the meeting.

Request

For the Mock Study Section, in the request form you can either indicate that you are prepared to submit documents for internal review OR that you are still working on the documents and indicate intent to submit for review at a later date.

If you are still working on the documents, please indicate this on the request form, and a Grant Development Subcommittee member will be in touch with you regarding when the documents need to be completed in order to still meet your external grant deadline and give enough time for the internal review. Once your documents are ready for internal review, you may be asked to complete the request form again with your documents.

If you are ready to submit documents for internal review, prior to your request, please ensure that you have the following prepared:

  • Single PDF document of entire grant submission
  • Biosketches/CVs of Collaborators
  • Grant Request for Proposal or Link, if any
  • If resubmission, previous critique
  • Name(s) of internal individual(s) that you would like as reviewers or ideas of areas of expertise needed for reviews

Once you have the above complete, please submit this request form to request a Mock Study Section. If this is less than 4 weeks before your submission deadline, please contact ofaa@georgetown.edu.

Once your request is submitted, you will receive a response from a Grant Development Subcommittee member within 3 business days. The Grant Development Subcommittee will coordinate the meeting date, time, and location with you and the reviewers.

Responsibilities and Expectations of Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to serve as a reviewer. As a reviewer, you are expected to provide both a written and verbal review of the grant. The Grant Development Subcommittee member facilitating your meeting will assign you a role as primary, secondary, or tertiary reviewer.

Resources for Reviewers

We recommend that all reviewers review the following before completing their review:

Written Review

Please have your written review (MS Word) prepared ahead of the synchronous meeting with the investigator:

Once your written review is complete, please register as a reviewer, and upload the written review to this reviewer registration form. We request this be completed at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting if possible.

If you upload your written review, and would like to make any edits or changes to the submission before or after the synchronous review, please email ofaa@georgetown.edu for access to edit your submission.

Verbal Review

For the verbal review, please keep in mind the considerations for reviewers.

Ahead of the meeting, the Grant Development Subcommittee member facilitating the meeting will assign a primary, secondary, and tertiary reviewer role. In the first half of the meeting, the primary reviewer will be responsible for providing a summary of the grant submission, highlighting key strengths and weaknesses, and presenting the application’s overall impact. The secondary and tertiary reviewers will be asked to review any strengths and weaknesses that were not already reviewed by the previous reviewer(s), and to also provide their scores for overall impact. During the first half, the requester/PI will not say anything or respond to the reviewers; they will be a silent observer.

In the second half of the meeting, the requester/PI will have the opportunity to ask questions and respond to the feedback provided by all the reviewers. Reviewers are expected to respond to any questions or provide further clarification on reasoning for any criticisms or comments. Please remember to be constructive and respectful in feedback, value listening to other’s thoughts and views, and stay focused on the specific grant and questions discussed. The Grant Development Subcommittee member attending will help facilitate the question.

Evaluation

After the meeting, the Grant Development Subcommittee is very interested in continuing to improve this experience and resource for all participants, and will send you an evaluation form. Please complete this form so that we can make valuable improvements to our services.

Preparation for and During the Review

Ahead of the review, please have all materials for grant accessible for your reference. Please also note any trouble spots, challenges, and specific questions and concerns that you would like to review during the second half o the discussion.

During the review, for the first half of the meeting, you, as the requester, will be a silent observer. You are not to respond to any of the reviewers feedback or critiques. You are welcome to take notes of questions/responses as the reviewers are completing their reviews, but please do not interrupt the reviewers.

In the second half of the review, this is your opportunity to ask any questions for clarification/guidance or respond to any of the feedback. Please be respectful in your responses, value listening to other’s thoughts and feedback, and stay focused on your specific questions and grant. The Grant Development Subcommittee member attending will help facilitate the discussion.

After the Review

After the review, the Grant Development Subcommittee will send you a copy of the written reviews from all of the reviewers. If you have any follow up questions about the reviews following the meeting, please follow up directly with each reviewer.

In addition, the Grant Development Subcommittee is very interested in continuing to improve this experience and resource for all participants, and would appreciate your feedback in the evaluations that we send to you afterwards.

Questions

If you have any further questions about the Mock Study Section review process, please contact ofaa@georgetown.edu.