Preparing only the GRC form pages and neglecting to prepare the research proposal portion of the application; i.e., the protocol addressing specific aims, background and significance, preliminary studies, research design and methods, and literature review.
Lack of a clear hypothesis.
Discrepancies between specific aims and methodology; research design inadequate to accomplish specific aims.
Relationship of study design to data analysis not clearly expressed.
Inadequate justification of relevance of data to be collected in study.
Lack of adequate explanation of terminology and proposed procedure(s) appearing in application.
Assembling application in apparent haste such that it is poorly edited and thus contains numerous typos, errors, and inconsistencies.
Proposed work appears to have already been completed by investigator.
Project overly ambitious for a one-year, $15,000 study.
Inadequate level of progress if requesting a second or third year of support.
If submitting a second or third year application, concerns from previous year's review(s) not adequately addressed.
Not following GRC guidelines and requirements.
Not requesting items in budget which appear to be necessary to conduct study.
Inconsistencies between budget and budget justification.
Inadequate budget justification to substantiate budget request.
Inadequate justification for request for personnel support, computers, and software.
Inadequate documentation and description of required equipment, facilities, and personnel to conduct study.
In studies utilizing a questionnaire, failure to include as one of the specific aims a pretest of the questionnaire.
Inappropriately subcontracting a portion of the proposed work rather than investigator developing techniques necessary to conduct study.