Continuing Modified Peer Review Processes for the January 2027 Council Round

As previously shared in November 2025 and April 2026, NIH implemented emergency modifications to peer review processes following the resumption of activities after the lapse in appropriations (NOT-OD-26-012, NOT-OD-26-069). These modifications remain in effect through the January 2027 Advisory Council round (NOT-OD-26-114). 

The record number of applications NIH received for the January 2027 Council round motivated the decision to continue the emergency modified processes. 

  • The numbers continue to fluctuate but currently exceed 40,000 grant applications.
  • The highest number received in prior rounds was more than 35,000 in the May 2025 Council.

For reference, other data on NIH’s peer review activities are available on the NIH Data Book. 

What applicants and reviewers can expect:

  • In most review meetings, ~30-35% of applications will be discussed.
  • The “competitive, not discussed” designation will continue to be used for applications voted by the committee to be in the middle third. These will be considered for funding, along with the discussed applications.
  • Summary statements for discussed applications will continue to utilize a succinct format for the Resume of Discussion.
  • Written critiques from assigned reviewers will continue to be provided, consistent with standard NIH peer review practices.

NIH is considering the lessons learned from these emergency modifications and is also soliciting community input (by October 13, 2026) on other proposed changes to the reporting of peer review outcomes (see this NIH Extramural Nexus article). 

We appreciate the extraordinary efforts of peer reviewers and NIH staff throughout this period and their continued commitment to thorough, rigorous, and timely review of the tens of thousands of applications seeking NIH support. We hope scientists will serve as reviewers when asked, as your independent and expert insights are essential to ensure we have relevant information to make informed funding decisions and support innovative and meritorious research ideas within our mission. 

 

Categories: Top Stories

Related News

Serve as an NIH Peer Reviewer to Support Scientific Discovery

NIH greatly appreciates the valuable time and scholarly generosity our reviewers dedicate to scientific stewardship. Peer review is an essential service to the research community and helps shape the future of biomedical research. NIH continues to need reviewers with a broad range of scientific expertise to provide objective assessment of research ideas seeking NIH support. 

Top Stories

Help NIH Rethink the Administrative Work Behind Proposing and Conducting Research

We know the grants process takes time, effort, and resources for you, your organization, and for NIH. We have been undertaking many efforts to identify and minimize associated burdens, while not inadvertently harming the integrity of the supported research.

Top Stories

For technical issues E-mail OER Webmaster