Skip to main content
v2026.11,772 entries · CC-BY 4.0

Direct comparison

Competing vs. Noncompeting Renewal (NIH)

NIH Type 2 competing renewal needs full peer review; Type 5 noncompeting continuation just needs an annual RPPR. Here is the difference.

Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board

Last updated

Ask CASRAI · included with Regulatory Radar

Ask about Competing vs. Noncompeting Renewal (NIH)

Ask CASRAI answers research-administration questions and cites the passages behind every claim — and says so when the corpus does not cover something, instead of guessing. It comes with a Regulatory Radar subscription at $29 a month, alongside the daily digest of regulatory changes and the dashboard of what changed.

150 questions a day, on this site, over the API, or inside your own tools through the CASRAI MCP server.

Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.

How do Competing Renewal (Type 2), Noncompeting Renewal / Continuation (Type 5) compare side by side?

The table below compares Competing Renewal (Type 2), Noncompeting Renewal / Continuation (Type 5) across 8 procurement-relevant dimensions, from what it is through not to be confused with.

Side-by-side comparison

DimensionCompeting Renewal (Type 2)Noncompeting Renewal / Continuation (Type 5)
What it isA new, fully competing application requesting support for a project period beyond the current oneThe routine continuation of an already-awarded project into its next budget year, within the same already-competed project period
When it appliesThe current competitive segment (project period) is ending and continued support is wantedThe current competitive segment has budget years remaining -- this is the normal annual step in most of those years
Peer reviewFull scientific/technical merit review at a study section, developed as though applying for the first timeNone -- administrative review of the progress report by program/grants management staff
Competes for fundingYes -- competes against Type 1 applications and other Type 2 renewals in the same review cycleNo -- funding for the competitive segment was already committed, subject to appropriations and satisfactory progress
What is submittedA full competing application: Specific Aims, Research Strategy (e.g. 12 pages for R01), budget justification, via the standard FOA/receipt dateA Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) via eRA Commons: progress narrative, personnel/participant updates, coming year's budget -- no Specific Aims or Research Strategy
Mechanism-dependent?Yes -- renewal eligibility is set by the activity code; e.g. available for R01, not available for R21Applies whenever a competing award has more than one budget year -- not mechanism-restricted the way Type 2 is
Grant-number digitLeading "2" (e.g. 2 R01 CA123456-06A1)Leading "5" (e.g. 5 R01 CA123456-04)
Not to be confused withA Type 5 noncompeting continuation, or a No-Cost Extension (neither involves competitive peer review)A Type 3 administrative supplement (adds funds within the current budget period without a new RPPR cycle) or a competing Type 2 renewal

Common questions

Common questions about Competing Renewal (Type 2) vs Noncompeting Renewal / Continuation (Type 5)

Does a noncompeting renewal require a new proposal?

+

No. A noncompeting continuation (Type 5) is supported by a Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) filed through eRA Commons -- a progress narrative and coming-year budget, not a new Specific Aims or Research Strategy, and not peer-reviewed.

Can NIH deny a noncompeting continuation?

+

NIH can withhold or reduce a noncompeting continuation if progress is judged insufficient or funds aren't available, but that is an administrative program decision, not a competitive peer-review decline the way a Type 2 competing renewal can be.

Which NIH activity codes have no competing renewal mechanism?

+

Renewal eligibility is set per activity code. R21 (Exploratory/Developmental Research Grant), for example, has no Type 2 competing renewal mechanism -- once its project period ends, the PI must submit a new Type 1 application rather than a renewal.

Where does the type code show up on an award?

+

As the leading digit of the NIH grant number, before the activity code -- for example the "2" in 2 R01 GM123456-06A1 (competing renewal) or the "5" in 5 R01 GM123456-04 (noncompeting continuation, fourth year).

Referenced across the research world

University of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logoUniversity of Cambridge logoColumbia University logoCrossref logoUniversity of Edinburgh logoHarvard University logoUniversity of Oxford logoPrinceton University logoStanford School of Medicine logoUniversity College London logoORCID logo
  • University of Cambridge logo
  • Columbia University logo
  • Crossref logo
  • University of Edinburgh logo
  • Harvard University logo
  • University of Oxford logo
  • Princeton University logo
  • Stanford School of Medicine logo
  • University College London logo
  • ORCID logo

View CASRAI adoption →

Regulatory Radar

Stop finding out after the fact

$29/month, cancel anytime. Daily digest updates from our analysis, a dashboard holding the same items, and a cited assistant for everything they raise.

  • Federal Register, Federal Register+, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov, NSF News, UKRI, plus CASRAI’s own published content.
  • 72,264 indexed passages, and every answer cites the ones it drew on.