Allowed with limits. The funder lets applicants use AI for some tasks and restricts how much of an application it may write.
What applicants may do
What the funder asks of applicants
- NIH's May 2026 reminders ask researchers to clearly describe in applications how AI tools were used. They also ask researchers to cite references appropriately and to check that information is accurate. [3]
What is off limits
- Do not submit an application, or sections of one, that AI substantially developed. NIH does not treat such work as the applicant's original ideas and will not consider it. [1][2][3]
- Do not present AI-generated or non-existent references as real, and do not copy substantial text with AI without disclosure. NIH says these could be fabrication or plagiarism. [1][2][3]
- Do not submit more than six new, renewal, resubmission or revision applications per PI per calendar year. This limit began with the September 25, 2025 receipt date and has exceptions for some activity codes. [1][2][3]
If an applicant breaks the rule
- If AI use is detected after award, NIH may refer the matter to the Office of Research Integrity. NIH may also disallow costs, withhold future awards, suspend the grant in whole or part, and possibly terminate it. [1]
- If NIH finds evidence of plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, it will refer the matter to the HHS Office of Research Integrity. [2][3]
Rules for reviewers
- NIH prohibits peer reviewers from using natural language processors, large language models or other generative AI to analyze and write critiques of grant applications and R&D contract proposals. [3][4]
- Reviewers must not upload or share content or original concepts from an application, proposal or critique to online generative AI tools. NIH says this violates peer review confidentiality. [4]
- Reviewers must sign a modified Security, Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement certifying they will follow this prohibition. NIH extends this to National Advisory Council and Board members. [4]
- Computer technologies used for accessibility needs may get an exception. The reviewer must tell the Designated Federal Officer which technology they use before using it. [4]
Where this comes from
The funder's own words, from its own pages.
Supporting Fairness and Originality in NIH Research Applications (opens in a new tab)
NIH will not consider applications that are either substantially developed by AI, or contain sections substantially developed by AI, to be original ideas of applicants.
AI tools may be appropriate to assist in application preparation for limited aspects or in specific circumstances, but researchers should be aware that using AI comes with its own risks.
AI use may result in plagiarism, fabricated citations, or other kinds of research misconduct.
NIH will only accept six new, renewal, resubmission, or revision applications from an individual Principal Investigator/Program Director or Multiple Principal Investigator for all council rounds in a calendar year.
2.3.7 Policies Affecting Applications (opens in a new tab)
While NIH recognizes that AI tools may be appropriate to assist in limited aspects of application preparation , researchers should be aware that using AI comes with its own risks: AI use may result in plagiarism or possibly other kinds of research misconduct
If NIH identifies evidence of plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification, NIH will refer the matter to the HHS Office of Research Integrity for review.
NIH will only accept six new, renewal, resubmission, or revision applications from an individual Principal Investigator/Program Director or Multiple Principal Investigator for all council rounds in a calendar year beginning with applications submitted for the September 25, 2025 due date.
Prohibits peer reviewers from using generative AI for their study section critiques (see these FAQs for more)
Applications that are either substantially developed by AI or contain sections substantially developed by AI are not considered the original ideas of applicants and will not be considered by NIH.
Clearly describe in applications, manuscripts, and presentations the use of the AI tools and how they may have been used during the development of an application, research itself, and/or data analysis and subsequent results, including a section on described methods for reproducibility
Appropriately cite references and carefully review and confirm information is accurate
Use the tools to edit or polish text in alignment with institutional, journal, or funders policies
Presenting AI-generated, non-existent references overtly as real, which could constitute data fabrication (see this 2026 paper )
Copying substantial portions of text using AI tools without disclosure, which could be plagiarism
Reviewers should be aware that uploading or sharing content or original concepts from an NIH grant application, contract proposal, or critique to online generative AI tools violates the NIH peer review confidentiality and integrity requirements.
Computer technologies that are used for accessibility needs may be granted an exception to this policy.
NIH Peer Reviewers must communicate the technology being used with their Designated Federal Officer in charge of the review meeting or other designated NIH official prior to use.
See National Institutes of Health's programs
This is a reading of what the funder has published, and it is not legal advice. A solicitation can set its own rule, so read the funding announcement before a PI applies.