The first Boards of Scientific Counselors (BSCs), constituted of scientists from outside NIH, were established in 1956 to review intramural research at NIH. The BSCs were established to assist the Scientific Directors in evaluating the quality of the intramural research programs for which they are responsible. To assure that the BSCs' evaluations will be most useful to the SDs in their decision making, the BSCs must be composed of individuals who themselves have outstanding scientific credentials and who are committed to providing rigorous, objective reviews. Although the principal purpose of these independent evaluations is to advise the SDs, the reports of the BSCs will be distributed to the Director, National Institutes of Health, the Deputy Director for Intramural Research, and the appropriate Institute or Center Director. The BSC also reports annually to the National Advisory Council or Board of the IC.

Click here for further information contained in Manual Chapter 3005.

• Significance
  
  Have the investigator's studies addressed important problems? Are the aims of the project(s) being achieved? Is scientific knowledge being advanced and are the projects affecting the concepts or methods that drive this field?
  
  
• Approach
  
  In general are the approaches well conceived? Where problem areas arose were reasonable alternative tactics employed?
  
  
• Innovation
  
  Do the projects employ novel concepts, approaches, or methods? Are the aims original and innovative? Do the projects challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?
  
  
• Environment
  
  Is the investigator taking advantage of the special features of the NIH intramural scientific environment or employing useful collaborative arrangements?
  
  
• Support
  
  Is the support the investigator received appropriate?
  
  
• Investigator training
  
  Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out the projects being pursued? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)?
  
  
• Productivity
  
  Considering the investigator's other responsibilities (e.g., service, or administrative), how would you rate his/her overall research productivity?
  
  
• Mentoring
  
  Is the investigator providing appropriate training and mentoring for more junior investigators?