Is it the same panel of reviewers scoring all 10 of the applications? Or does NIH send the applications to a pool of reviewers, who then score the applications and the applications with the highest scores win? Because it sounds like, as frustrating as it may be, Davis & Co. may have simply gotten massively unlucky with a particular reviewer -- something that could have happened to any of the applications but, unfortunately, just happened to Davis's? But I am so totally just guessin' on that one as the byzantine process of NIH grant reviewing and er,
granting is pretty murky to me.
Concur with sentiments upthread -- esp.
@AndyPR -- that the competition was so stiff here, great research IS being funded, and Ron may end up working much faster w/o NIH's cumbersome funding mechanisms.