I hate the Innovation criterion in NIH proposals. And I know I'm not alone. Many of my colleagues spend an undue amount of time working on that one little section. Even though we all know it's not weighted all that heavily (as opposed to Approach for example). It is however a target for the easiest of stock critiques. I understand the NIH wants to drive the creation of innovative methods/approaches/systems/bear tranquilizers, but that seemed to happen in abundance before they introduced it as a criterion. And there's a ton of stuff we need to know/do that doesn't require no stinking innovation to get at.
Or maybe I just suck at putting together the Innovation section.