Most research projects do not move forward in a neat, linear fashion, steadily progressing until inevitably reaching a scientific breakthrough. So how should you describe scientific progress in your annual Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) to demonstrate success and merit when a project is still ramping up?
What Program Officers Look For
A good first step is to know what your program officer is evaluating in a progress report. By standard procedure, program officers ask:
- Is progress satisfactory?
- Is there a change in the scope, goals, or objectives of the project?
- Is there a change in key personnel?
- Has other support changed for any key personnel named in the Notice of Award, and is there evidence of scientific overlap?
- Are there human subject issues or concerns?
- Are there animal welfare issues or concerns?
- Are there changes in the use of biohazards or select agents?
- Are there new or additional foreign components?
- If the award requires inclusion monitoring, is the enrollment date appropriate, on target, and updated in the Human Subjects System?
- Were any Products reported, such as publications, websites, technologies, inventions, or reagents?
- Is there compliance with sharing policies?
- If the award has special reporting requirements, was the information provided and acceptable?
- Is there an unobligated balance greater than 25 percent? Is the justification acceptable?
- Are there other issues that require action or documentation that must be resolved before issuing an award?
As you can tell, most of these questions concern whether the project has pivoted since the award was made or when progress was previously reported. Therefore, detail any changes to your Research Plan in the RPPR. Keep in mind, you must have prior approval from the grants management specialist assigned to your award before making Changes to Project or Budget; do so by following the process laid out in our Prior Approvals for Post-Award Grant Actions SOP. If you requested and received approval to make a change since last submitting an RPPR, cite the previous correspondence in the current RPPR. It is not appropriate to request permission for actions that require prior approval in the RPPR.
List any adjustments in approach and reasons for the alteration. Describe any problems or delays and what actions you took or intend to take to resolve them. If there is an unobligated balance greater than 25 percent, provide a justification for why the balance remains. If authorized to carryover the balance, provide a general description of how you anticipate spending the funds. If you are not authorized to carryover an unobligated balance automatically, be prepared to submit a prior approval request for carryover.
Your program officer will assess the progress, delays, and planned next steps you describe and compare that to your budget request and justification for approval. Providing sufficient information in the progress report avoids delays to your award.
Program officers will also verify compliance with NIH Scientific Data Sharing requirements pertaining to data management and sharing, model organisms, the public access policy, and genomic data sharing; ClinicalTrials.gov registration and results reporting; and other policies for research with vertebrate animals, human subjects, biohazards, select agents, and foreign involvement.
You will also need to report any inventions made during your grant, which you should have already disclosed through iEdison following the process described at Invention Reporting.
Finally, program officers directly consider whether research progress is satisfactory.
Completing the RPPR
Recipients can demonstrate progress when completing Section B—Accomplishments of the RPPR (see section 6.2 of the NIH and Other PHS Agency RPPR Instruction Guide). A list of publications and other products belongs in Section C—Products (see section 6.3 of the NIH and Other PHS Agency RPPR Instruction Guide). Keep in mind, you will list accomplishments since the last annual RPPR was submitted, rather than for the entire project period.
To start, list the scientific goals of the project (for NIH these are your Specific Aims) and whether they have changed. Then list your accomplishments towards each goal.
For the current reporting period describe: 1) major activities, 2) specific objectives, 3) significant results, including major findings, developments, or conclusions (both positive and negative), and 4) key outcomes or other achievements. Include a discussion of stated goals not met.
When your project is in its initial stages, these sections will focus more on the activities you undertake, e.g., enrolling study participants, preparing reagents, or testing compounds in vitro before conducting animal studies. In future reports, the focus will shift to results and research findings, e.g., showing whether variance among study interventions was statistically significant. Include data, graphs, and images to support your accomplishments section rather than relying solely on bullet-point text.
Remember, too, that NIH emphasizes rigor and transparency, so you also need to describe how your research approach ensures reproducibility.
When you complete your annual RPPR, you should also address any special reporting requirements or deadlines listed in your Notice of Award. Many solicited grants include benchmarks or go/no-go criteria that must be met before NIAID will fund an award’s next budget period. Look at your latest Notice of Award in the eRA Commons to find any special reporting requirements.
In Conclusion
Take the reporting of scientific progress seriously, including any pitfalls and ways you plan to overcome them. Doing so will help keep your research on track and lay the groundwork for a future renewal application. In certain circumstances, your program officer can work with you to help overcome science-driven obstacles.
For additional instruction and resources, refer to NIAID’s Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) SOP.