High quality, originality and impact of
scientific contributions to a specific field and biomedical
research more generally
quality of studies, including scientific
rationale and methodological rigor
innovation and originality in the form
of new ideas, approaches, discoveries and paradigms that open
lines of further inquiry, including discovery and development
of technological approaches, as well as design, development and
implementation of clinical trials and population
studies
scientific, clinical and/or public
health impact of published work
upward trajectory of research
contributions expected following tenure
for members of multidisciplinary teams,
continued high quality, original research following tenure is
expected even if the multidisciplinary team disbands
Independent creative effort
independent research as evidenced by
primary and senior authorship on original research
publications
for team research, clear evidence of
distinct intellectual contribution to the outstanding research
of a multidisciplinary team, such as: independent publication
of methodological or seminal contributions to the candidate's
specific research area; where possible, explicit in-print
acknowledgement of unique creative contributions in
multi-author publications and/or selection for presentation of
team findings at national and international scientific
conferences; members of research teams should demonstrate peer
recognition of their specific contributions and some
publications should highlight their distinctive research;
creative and unique contributions to team productivity should
be documented in the reviews of advisory boards (internal,
scientific, BSC) charged with program oversight and
evaluations
Productivity relative to
resources
quality and quantity of publications
(e.g., an original paper in a high-impact journal is considered
more consequential than several papers in specialty,
lower-impact journals; for members of multidisciplinary teams,
primary or senior authorship on key publications from the team
or middle-authorship in a paradigm-shifting paper from the
team)
reputation of journals in which
peer-reviewed papers are published, including specialty
journals appropriate to the candidate's field
patents, CRADAs, bioinformatics tools
for public use or public release of widely-used software even
if not published in conventional journals, that constitute
significant contributions to science
timely deposition of data (in
particular, large data sets) in freely available, public
databases; recognition given to high-quality data made
available electronically to the research community, in some
cases not directly linked to conventional journal
publication(s)
National/international recognition and
leadership
peer recognition for developing an
important body of work with a unifying theme, evidenced in
letters of recommendation from the leaders in the field; for
team research, the letters should address the distinct
contribution of the individual within the larger context of the
multidisciplinary team effort
invited lectures and review or
commentary publications
membership on editorial boards or as
invited journal reviewer
participation in grant review panels for
NIH or other funding organizations
ability to forge multidisciplinary
partnerships, taking advantage of the breadth and depth of the
NIH scientific and clinical environment
honors and awards
election to scientific
societies
IC programmatic need that evidences
distinct and important contributions to the mission of the NIH
may be considered
Mentorship abilities and
activities
success in training and mentoring junior
colleagues at all levels as evidenced by their professional
progress, competitive funding and/or publications
High ethical standards and integrity in
directing and conducting research
NIH citizenship and
collegiality
IC or NIH-wide activity or committee
participation (e..g., Scientific Interest Group, IRB, ACUC,
WSAs, Faculties, etc.), clinical service and other activities
that promote the scientific enterprise at the NIH and more
broadly
Documentation to Assess Fulfillment of the
Criteria for Tenure
Updated and accurate C.V. and bibliography,
including all necessary information that addresses the criteria
for tenure
Letters of recommendation from the leaders
in the field (at least 6 from non-collaborators)
BSC reports, with particular emphasis on
the most recent one (must be within the past 2 years for the
Central Tenure Committee); for team research, also include
relevant sections of reports prepared by program-specific internal
oversight and scientific advisory board(s) documenting creative
and distinct contributions to team productivity
Recommending memorandum from the
Laboratory/Branch Chief, team leader or Scientific Director,
through IC Director, specifically addressing the recommendation
for tenure
Report of the IC Promotion & Tenure
Committee (only for tenure-track candidates)
Report of the DDIR-approved Search
Committee (only for outside candidates)
The 5 publications that the candidate
considers most important
Description of future research plans by the
candidate (no more than 5 pages)
Detailed description of the resources
(budget, personnel, space, other) available to the candidate from
the beginning of the tenure track to date, with a timeline of
changes during the tenure track (only for tenure-track
candidates); for team research, also include a summary of
resources made available to the candidate as part of the team
program