How Do I Review Thee? Let Me Count the Ways: A Comparison of Research Grant Proposal Review Criteria Across US Federal Funding Agencies.

While Elizabeth Barrett Browning counted 25 ways in which she loves her husband in her poem, "How Do I Love Thee? Let me Count the Ways," we identified only eight ways to evaluate the potential for success of a federal research grant proposal. This may be surprising, as it seems upon initial glance of the review criteria used by various federal funding agencies that each has its own distinct set of "rules" regarding the review of grant proposals for research and scholarship. Much of the grantsmanship process is dependent upon the review criteria, which represent the funders' desired impact of the research. But since most funders that offer research grants share the overarching goals of supporting research that (1) fits within its mission and (2) will bring a strong return on its financial investment, the review criteria used to evaluate research grant proposals are based on a similar set of fundamental questions. In this article, we compare the review criteria of 10 US federal agencies that support research through grant programs, and demonstrate that there are actually only a small and finite number of ways that a grant proposal can be evaluated. Though each funding agency may use slightly different wording, we found that the majority of the agencies' criteria address eight key questions. Within the highly competitive landscape of research grant funding, new researchers must find support for their research agendas and established investigators and research development offices must consider ways to diversify their funding portfolios, yet all may be discouraged by the apparent myriad of differences in review criteria used by various funding agencies. Guided by research administrators and research development professionals, recognizing that grant proposal review criteria are similar across funding agencies may help lower the barrier to applying for federal funding for new and early career researchers, or facilitate funding portfolio diversification for experienced researchers. Grantmakers are furthermore provided valuable guidance to develop and refine their own proposal review criteria.

Generating pluripotent stem cells: differential epigenetic changes during cellular reprogramming.

Pluripotent stem cells hold enomous potential for therapuetic applications in tissue replacement therapy. Reprogramming somatic cells from a patient donor to generate pluripotent stem cells involves both ethical concerns inherent in the use of embryonic and oocyte-derived stem cells, as well as issues of histocompatibility. Among the various pluripotent stem cells, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC)--derived by ectopic expression of four reprogramming factors in donor somatic cells--are superior in terms of ethical use, histocompatibility, and derivation method. However, iPSC also show genetic and epigenetic differences that limit their differentiation potential, functionality, safety, and potential clinical utility. Here, we discuss the unique characteristics of iPSC and approaches that are being taken to overcome these limitations.