The Standard and Small GLAS Grant programs differ in the criteria for award selection, also known as review criteria. By knowing these criteria, you can better show how your proposal measures up to these criteria as you prepare the Statement of Work.

Click the grant types below to display the review criteria.

Standard GLAS application Review Criteria:

1. Significance relevant to the GLAS mission

The mission of the (GLAS) program is to enhance scientific knowledge in laboratory animal health and welfare through research. 

  • How will your proposed study results likely impact current practices in animal research? This will require a literature search.

2. Impact on the Laboratory Animal Science field, with consideration for breadth and depth of impact on a species, procedure, or process. 

  • How will the knowledge obtained from your proposed study benefit animal health and welfare or the field of laboratory animal science?
  • Proposals that offer potential results which may be applicable to commonly-used species or across species are looked upon favorably. If your work may applicable to only a minor species, how critical is this species for biomedical research? Is this model being used at an increasing frequency? Is the knowledge you propose to obtain essential for this species’ health and welfare?
  • How novel are your ideas and the approach for the study?

3. Validity of Methods as pertains to the proposal's methodology and methods of analysis.

  • Is the experimental design relevant to the hypothesis?
  • Are the proposed methods based on the most current techniques and standards of your scientific area and the laboratory animal field in general?
  • Are the appropriate controls included in your study design?

4. Clarity and Completeness

  • Is the hypothesis clear?
  • Is the proposal section clear and logical?
  • Does the application clearly show how the hypothesis will be tested and data analyzed?
  • Does the study design allow flexibility to address unexpected outcomes?
  • Are all sections of the application complete?

5. Feasibility

  • Are the qualifications of the research team and the resources available sufficient for conducting the proposed work?
  • What is the availability of space, equipment, and outside expertise? Are these adequate to complete the work proposed?
  • Is your institution willing to commit to this proposal (space, time, type of research, IACUC/IBC/IRB)?
  • What is the capability of the Principal Investigator and collaborators (expertise, time, experience)?
  • Is the budget realistic for the proposed work?
  • Are proposed costs reasonable relative to the projected outcomes?
  • Remember that salary is discouraged. Therefore, requests for salary will have to be carefully justified and may be negotiated in a proposal the committee is inclined to award.

Small GLAS application Review Criteria:

1. Significance relevant to the GLAS mission. As above for Standard grants.

2. Innovation

  • Are you proposing new approaches or methodologies, or refinements to existing ones?
  • For example, is your study a refinement of an animal model as it pertains to the 3Rs (Russell and Burch)?

3. Potential impact on laboratory animal science

  • Will compelling scientific questions be answered?
  • Will your study address a problem or transform practices in the field?

4. Bridge to a larger scale study

  • Are funds needed to either complete a study or develop a new funding request for a larger scale study?

5. Feasibility.  As above for Standard grants.