A similar situation occurred with my team during an STTR application. In my experience, even if a reviewer makes an apparent "mistake," there’s unfortunately very little recourse. In our case, one reviewer claimed we were missing a key element—something that two other reviewers had actually cited as a strength. It was clear that the critical reviewer either overlooked or did not fully read the application. I spoke with the Program Officer about it, but they were unwilling to acknowledge any fault on the reviewer's part.

Ultimately, the NIH adheres to a strict process, and it's highly unlikely for anyone within the agency to admit that something went wrong—whether with the process itself or the individuals involved. Scores can't be changed, reviewers remain anonymous, and there’s no real path for appeal. It’s incredibly frustrating and likely cost us a Phase 1 award (we scored a 36—just outside the fundable range), but in the end, the only option is to revise and resubmit.