Review Committees
The research grants awarded in 2001 were initially reviewed and scored for scientific merit and other criteria in 6 separate peer Review Committees. The Committees consisted of distinct types of reviewers, and they reviewed grants following established practice at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The Chair leads the review process and is a senior researcher in breast cancer areas associated with the Committee's central topic or priority issue. Committee Members have broad expertise in topics associated with individual applications. Breast cancer Advocate Reviewers are women living with the disease, and they bring their personal experiences to the review process. Often,the Advocates have specialized training in grant review and have served on prior review committees. The California Advocate Observer is not assigned applications for review and does not vote, but represents the California advocacy community to gain insight and provide feedback to the Program. Ad Hoc Members participate by teleconference and bring their specialized expertise to the review of individual applications.
Over the past four years, CBCRP has developed, tested and phased in a scoring system that allows our expert reviewers to better differentiate applications that are especially innovative and that have the most potential impact on breast cancer. This has improved our ability to choose the most innovative and creative research for funding.
In the past,the majority of research funding agencies,including the CBCRP and the National Institutes of Health, rated proposals with a single score based solely on scientific merit. With this method, an application with an excellent research plan to test an idea that wasn't particularly novel could receive the same score as an application with a flawed research plan to test a novel idea. CBCRP's new scoring method can distinguish these two applications. Applications are evaluated and voted on by the Committees for the following scientific merit score components:
- Innovativeness
- Impact
- Approach
- Feasibility
- Career Development (new investigator and postdoctoral fellowships)
All applications are then reviewed by the Breast Cancer Research Council for programmatic issues. The following criteria are used:
- Responsiveness to priority issues
- Multidisciplinary approach
- Translational potential
- Focus on the underserved
- Strength of individual scientific merit component scores
- Balance of overall portfolio
- Emphasis on relatively underfunded areas
- Inclusion of advocates and sensitivity to advocacy issues/concerns
The Breast Cancer Research Council recommends the grants to be funded, based upon both the scientific merit scores and the programmatic review, to ensure both scientific excellence and relevance of the research to CBCRP's mission and goals.
The CBCRP wishes to thank the participants in our 2001 Review Committees for their service and dedication to our Program.
