On Contracts: Digging Deeper into PCORI's Cycle II Awards

As a still-young and evolving research institution, we regularly study our funding process to see how well we’re doing in our mission to advance high-quality patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR). So I’m pleased to share the latest analysis of our most recent awards cycle, including the volume of applications received, types of research proposed, and other attributes of the projects we have added to our growing portfolio.

On May 7, we announced 51 Cycle II Awards, totaling $88.6 million, for comparative effectiveness research projects. This was our largest distribution of funding and another demonstration of our commitment to quickly and efficiently fund useful research focused on addressing issues of greatest interest to patients and other clinical decision makers. A full list of the awards is available on our website.

The bottom line: We’re pleased by the increased rate of success we see among applicants. This is largely a result of the research community’s growing understanding and application of the patient-centered principles we require in the proposals we seek to fund. A commitment to patient-centered research must be reflected at all stages—from the formulation of questions to the design of research to the composition of the research team.

Volume and Distribution

The first step for researchers submitting a proposal for PCORI funding is to submit a Letter of Intent (LOI). We received 1,102 LOIs for Cycle II funding, 40 percent under our Assessment of Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options priority area; 23 percent under Improving Healthcare Systems; just over 20 percent in Communication and Dissemination Research; and the remaining 17 percent under Addressing Disparities.

Funding under our fifth priority area, Accelerating PCOR and Methodological Research, has been on a different schedule; our initial awards in this area will be made in September. Beginning with our currently open funding cycle (applications are due August 15), methods proposals will be solicited every four months and simultaneously with proposals under the other research priority areas.

Among the research teams that submitted LOIs, 434 (39 percent) submitted full research proposals that were assessed through merit review. The distribution of proposals submitted under each priority area was nearly identical to that of the LOIs. More than 200 reviewers participated in the evaluation process. We received proposals from researcher teams based in 41 states and the District of Columbia, as well as Canada and Australia. Applications often focused on different racial and ethnic populations, but studies of the elderly, children, and patients in rural settings were also common. In this cycle, the geographic distribution of research teams and diversity of populations proposed for study were similar to what we saw in our Cycle I proposals.

Types of Research Proposed

Ensuring scientific validity in every study we fund remains our top priority, and we pay close attention to the study methods and designs proposed in the proposals we receive.

The largest number of proposals (331) used quantitative study methods, i.e., statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques. Qualitative methods, often driven by interviews or focus groups, were outlined in 306 proposals. Many proposals included both types of methods.

In terms of study design, 181 of the proposals involved prospective observational research and 169 laid out the complementary approach of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Many of the plans used a mix of design types.

Percentage of Applications Funded

Compared to our first funding cycle, we were able to fund a much higher percentage of the proposals we received. The funding rate in Cycle II was 12 percent, compared with 5 percent in Cycle I. This increase, in large part, reflects a greater understanding of our unique patient-centered requirements. The distribution of proposals among the research priority areas was similar to that of Cycle I.

Sharing this detailed information about our funding cycles demonstrates our commitment to fostering an informed and engaged healthcare community. Thank you for your interest in PCORI’s funding opportunities and we look forward to releasing data about future proposals that we receive and ultimately select for funding.

Be sure to check the Funding Opportunities section of our website for all of the resources you need to respond to our calls for proposals. And if you have any questions about out funding process, contact us at contracts@pcori.org.