Part I Overview Information

Department of Health and Human Services

Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH) (http://www.nih.gov)

Components of Participating Organizations
National Cancer Institute (NCI) (http://www.cancer.gov)
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/index.htm)
National Institute on Aging (NIA) (
http://www.nia.nih.gov)
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (
http://www.niddk.nih.gov)
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) (
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/)
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) (
http://www.ninr.nih.gov/)
Office of the Director, Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS), (
http://dietary-supplements.info.nih.gov/)

Title: Improving Diet and Physical Activity Assessment (R01)

Announcement Type
This is a reissue of PAR-06-104, which was previously released December 23, 2005.

Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:

NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

APPLICATIONS MAY NOT BE SUBMITTED IN PAPER FORMAT.

This FOA must be read in conjunction with the application guidelines included with this announcement in Grants.gov/Apply for Grants (hereafter called Grants.gov/Apply).

A registration process is necessary before submission and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least 4 weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Section IV.

Program Announcement (PA) Number: PAR-07-259

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.242, 93.361, 93.399, 93.837, 93.838, 93.848, 93.865, 93.866

Key Dates - Old Dates
Release/Posted Date: December 21, 2006
Opening Date: January 5, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s) (new applications): January 5, 2007; September 5, 2007; May 5, 2008; January 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (renewal, resubmission, and revision applications): February 5, 2007; October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (all AIDS-related applications): April 1, 2007; December 2, 2007; August 1, 2008; April 1, 2009.
NOTE: On-time submission requires that applications be successfully submitted to Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (new applications): February 5, 2007; October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (renewal, resubmission, and revision applications): March 1, 2007; November 1, 2007; July 1, 2008; March 1, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
AIDS Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): May 1, 2007; January 2, 2008; September 1, 2008; May 1, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
Peer Review Date(s): June/July 2007, February/March 2008, October/November 2008; June/July 2009.
Council Review Date(s): October 2007; May 2008; January 2009; October 2009.
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): December 2007; July 2008; April 2009; December 2009.
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration Date: May 2, 2009

Key Dates - New Dates
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s) (new applications): September 5, 2007; May 5, 2008; January 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (renewal, resubmission, and revision applications): October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (all AIDS-related applications): December 7, 2007; August 7, 2008; April 7, 2009.
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (new applications): October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009 (alternating standard R01 receipt dates).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (renewal, resubmission, and revision applications): November 5, 2007; July 5, 2008; March 5, 2009 (alternating standard R01 receipt dates).
AIDS Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): January 7, 2008; September 7, 2008; May 7, 2009 (alternating standard AIDS application receipt dates).
Peer Review Date(s): February/March 2008, October/November 2008; June/July 2009.
Council Review Date(s): May 2008; January 2009; October 2009.
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): July 2008; April 2009; December 2009.
Expiration Date: May 8, 2009


Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable

Additional Overview Content

Executive Summary

Table of Contents


Part I Overview Information

Part II Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives


Section II. Award Information

1. Mechanism of Support

2. Funds Available

Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants

    A. Eligible Institutions
    B. Eligible Individuals
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria

Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Request Application Information

2. Content and Form of Application Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
    A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
          1. Letter of Intent
    B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH
    C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements

Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
    A. Additional Review Criteria
    B. Additional Review Considerations
    C. Sharing Research Data
    D. Sharing Research Resources
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
3. Reporting

Section VII. Agency Contacts
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)

2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial Grants Management Contact(s)

Section VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations

Part II - Full Text of Announcement


Section I. Funding Opportunity Description


1. Research Objectives

Purpose

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) issued by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of the Director (OD) Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS), is aimed at advancing the quality of measurements of dietary intake and physical activity pertinent to cancer and/or other pathologies through support of research on improved instruments, technologies, and/or statistical/analytical techniques. Studies proposed in the grant applications should be aimed at optimizing the combined use of objective and self-report measures of physical activity and/or dietary intake for testing in both general and diverse populations.

Applicants responding to this FOA, which uses the R01 grant mechanism, should have already tested and validated new approaches and have obtained feasibility data in the context of cancer or other relevant diseases. Applicants without sufficiently extensive preliminary data or those who wish to explore the utility of new untested dietary or physical activity assessment methods in pilot studies are advised to consider submitting applications under the parallel FOA, PAR-06-103, which uses the Exploratory/Developmental Grant (R21) award mechanism.

Research Objectives

I. Overview

Diet and physical activity are lifestyle and behavioral factors that play a role in the etiology and prevention of many chronic diseases, such as cancer, coronary heart disease, and overweight/obesity as well as in maintaining weight loss. Accurate longitudinal data on physical activity and dietary intake patterns would be especially helpful in understanding how these factors may impact on health and functional status over the human lifespan. Therefore, diet and physical activity are assessed for both surveillance and epidemiological/clinical research purposes. The measurement of usual dietary intake or physical activity over varying intervals or in the past, by necessity, has relied on self-report instruments. Such reports are cognitively difficult for respondents, and are prone to varying degrees of measurement error depending on the time period considered, the ease of the instrument, and the characteristics of the respondents. Understanding and interpretation of instruments and the concepts they address may differ among population subgroups. The NCI, the NHLBI, the NIA, the NICHD, the NIDDK, the NIMH, the NINR, and the NIH OD ODS are interested in promoting innovative research to enhance the quality of measurements of dietary intake and physical activity. Applications under this FOA may include development of: novel assessment approaches and/or better methods to evaluate instruments; assessment tools for culturally diverse populations across various age groups including older adults; improved technologies and/or applications of existing technologies; and/or statistical methods to assess or correct for measurement errors or biases.

II. Background and Rationale

A. Dietary Assessment

Dietary assessment instruments are used in a variety of research settings to estimate the consumption of individual foods or nutrients as well as overall energy intake. Such instruments run the gamut from food records in which respondents record all foods as they are consumed, to detailed and standardized 24-hour recalls of all food or drink ingested in the past day, to food frequency questionnaires in which individuals are asked to report usual frequency of intake of a long list of foods over a specified time, to food frequency questionnaires (sometimes called screeners) which ask about usual frequency of intake of a group of foods targeting a specific food group or nutrient. Each of these self-report dietary assessment instruments is successfully used in various research or public health settings. However, each has flaws and limitations as to the amount of information obtained, the quality of the data, and the analytic techniques used to provide nutrient or food group estimates.

Food records are used in a number of nutrition research settings to measure dietary intake over a single time period, usually 3 to 7 days. For such records to be reasonably accurate, respondents need to be motivated, trained, and literate. The strength of the food record approach is that it provides specific details on the amount and kind of food consumed. Methods for food recording have improved over time and include such innovations as electronic scales or computer entry programs. However, records have important limitations. First, there is consistent research showing that when individuals are asked to record what they eat, they modify their eating habits to make the task easier and/or to represent their diet in a more positive way. In addition, the quality of diet recording is known to decline with increasing numbers of days. Moreover, energy estimates based on self-report records for some respondents tend to be lower than those required for energy balance. This pattern indicates that such respondents are either undereating and/or underreporting their intake. Even with accurate reporting, a diet record is not thought to represent usual intake, unless it is consistently observed over different time intervals and seasons.

Twenty-four-hour dietary recalls, in which a trained interviewer asks and probes respondents to report the kind and amount of all food and drink consumed the previous day, are currently used to monitor group mean intakes in the population. It is generally accepted that a single 24-hour recall does not represent usual individual intake and cannot be used to estimate population intake distributions of nutrients or food groups. Multiple recalls are required to represent usual intake of all nutrients and foods, and for nutrients and food groups that are infrequently consumed, many days are required. Methods to collect recalls vary from paper-and-pencil to computerized systems. The more highly sophisticated systems have standardized probes, multiple passes of intake over the day to prompt recall, and "forgotten foods lists." Such innovations in the recall methods have led to improvements in prompting recall and, therefore, improved estimates of nutrient intake among respondents. However, recalls, like records, are prone to underreporting, although the extent of underreporting may vary by quality of the recall. Underreporting is likely due to problems involving memory, difficulty in reporting portion size, and biases of the respondents.

Food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) are self-administered instruments in which respondents are presented with a long list of items and asked to report usual frequency of consumption over a specific time period (usually 1 year). The strengths of the FFQ method are that it is designed to obtain data regarding usual intake and is much less costly to administer and code than recalls or records. Therefore, the FFQ has been the method of choice for large-scale epidemiological studies. However, FFQs lack the detail and specificity of records or recalls. The food list found on FFQs is, by design, largely composed of frequently consumed foods. The nutrient database lacks specificity and relies on nutrient content of the most common form in which foods are consumed rather than on specific forms. Usual portion sizes are either assumed or queried in a general fashion. In addition, completing FFQs is cognitively difficult, requiring good memory and estimation skills. There are many well-developed FFQs available for use by investigators; therefore, development from scratch is not generally necessary for most research efforts. Many FFQs available today can be adapted to meet particular research needs. There have been limited efforts to adapt FFQs for culturally specific populations and there is a continuing need to adapt instruments as research in diverse and distinct sociocultural populations expands.

Extensive research has led to the general acceptance that FFQs are prone to more and/or different kinds of error than records or recalls. FFQs have commonly been calibrated with recalls or records, which are considered to be more precise. However, given that there is measurement error in all dietary assessment methods, various methods employing measurement error models and energy adjustment are used to assess validity or to adjust relative risks for disease outcomes. More recently, intake biomarkers such as doubly labeled water for energy expenditure or urinary nitrogen for protein intake have been used to better understand the structure of measurement error and to devise methods to correct for this error in epidemiological studies.

The limitations of self-administered dietary assessment instruments also pose significant challenges for dietary intervention and/or metabolic studies, especially in situations when stringent monitoring of overall dietary composition and energy intake is required. Such studies have often been designed to provide meals to the study subjects or include doubly labeled water assessments in addition to the self-report dietary measures. However, these approaches are not always feasible (e.g., limited availability of doubly labeled water), often entail substantial time commitment on part of the study subjects and study personnel (e.g., preparation and distribution of meals from the metabolic kitchen, travel time of the study participants to collect or eat their meals at the metabolic kitchen), and may run the risk of increasing study subject burden, thereby affecting retention and future recruitment of study subjects. In this regard, there is a critical need for objective and accurate dietary assessment instruments and methodologies (e.g., new nutrient biomarkers, improved doubly labeled water protocols, and alternatives to doubly labeled water) for dietary intervention and/or metabolic studies.

B. Physical Activity Assessment

Until fairly recently, the primary focus of research and recommendations regarding physical activity was on sustained vigorous exercise. Such activity is usually obtained through purposeful, programmed behavior, such as jogging, swimming, or sports participation. With these characteristics, vigorous exercise is relatively easy for respondents to report, although validation studies generally find a bias toward overreporting. Recent physical activity guidelines have emphasized the accumulation of shorter episodes of moderate intensity physical activity. Moderate-intensity activity can occur in many routine daily activities. Interventions to increase physical activity obtained through moderate-intensity daily activities have achieved comparable physiologic outcomes to those that used more vigorous programmed activities. However, monitoring behavior to assess moderate-intensity activities is a challenge because of the need to assess many activities of short duration that may occur as part of routine daily functions in varying contexts, e.g., transportation, occupation, household chores, as well as recreation and sport. Current guidelines also note the importance of engaging in activities to promote strength and flexibility. Maintaining strength and flexibility are important for an aging population, and may have beneficial effects for disease prevention. Little attention has been given to assessment of these types of activities.

Physical activity records have been shown to be quite accurate for capturing total activity. Records can provide desired details regarding activity context, the type of activity (e.g., aerobic, strengthening, or flexibility exercise), as well as frequency, intensity, and duration. However, like diet records, they are burdensome to respondents, requiring responses each time there is a change in activity throughout the day. An advantage for physical activity, in contrast to diet, is that recent technological advances allow physical activity frequency, duration, and intensity to be objectively measured by wearable monitors that can record movement and/or heart rate. A challenge with the use of monitors is capturing total activity. This is because activity monitors selectively record movement of the part of the body to which they are attached. Activity monitors worn on the hip primarily capture locomotion, but not upper body movement; if worn on the wrist, locomotion is not accurately recorded. Without supplemental data collection, activity monitors do not capture activity context (e.g., occupation, transportation, household, recreation).

Most evaluations of physical activity in surveillance or risk factor epidemiology rely upon retrospective questionnaire assessments. Many instruments have been developed and some have been validated. A major improvement in questionnaire assessment of physical activity was the inclusion of household sources of activity, which can be the primary context for physical activity among women. Also, some types of questionnaires include sources of physical activity common among certain racial/ethnic groups. However, efforts to understand how certain constructs used in physical activity questionnaires, such as leisure time activity or moderate physical activity, are understood across various population subgroups, are limited.

C. Parallels between Diet and Physical Activity Assessment

There are many parallels between diet and physical activity assessments. For example, assessing total physical activity is analogous to assessing total energy intake, while assessing subcomponents of physical activity, such as occupational or leisure time activity, or cardiovascular or strengthening activities is analogous to assessing dietary fat or fruit and vegetable intake. Reference periods for either diet or physical activity behaviors can vary from a week to a lifetime, and may focus on recent behavior, a specific previous period, or may be recorded contemporaneously. Ideally, physical activity assessment includes type of activity and context (specified by question content or respondent), frequency of behavior, duration of behavior, and performance intensity. Estimating performance intensity or duration is similar in many ways to estimating portion size in dietary questionnaires. Respondents may not have internal reference criteria that agree with the external criteria of the investigator, and the estimates can be influenced by cultural norms or public health messages.

As with diet and other self-reported behaviors, physical activity assessment is prone to measurement error. This error is related to the same challenges of memory, estimation, and bias found in dietary assessment instruments. Many aspects of physical activity, especially those associated with low to moderate intensity, are routine and therefore not salient enough to be recalled well by a respondent. Measurement error can obscure relationships between physical activity and disease risk, and may distort data used for surveillance. Recent applications of measurement error theory to dietary assessment have shown that reporting error may mask potentially important relationships with other variables. Furthermore, the demonstration of correlated errors between FFQs and 24-hour recalls have called into question the common calibration study approach. Research pertinent to the assessment of physical activity has lagged behind the improvements in estimates of dietary intake. In particular, methods to evaluate measurement errors and algorithms to compensate for such errors through the use of statistical models and analytic procedures remain underdeveloped. It may be possible, however, to capitalize on recent advances in addressing dietary measurement errors as a basis for exploring means to characterize and handle measurement errors in estimates of physical activity as well.

III. Objectives

This FOA will support research pertinent to improving the measurements of diet and physical activity through the development of better instruments, innovative technologies, and/or applications of advanced statistical/analytic techniques. Research proposed in the applications should be aimed at exploring and optimizing innovative combinations of objective and self-report measures of physical activity or dietary intake in both the general population and its diverse subgroups.

Specifically, this funding opportunity is intended to support innovative research focused on assessments of dietary and physical activity patterns, not on the determinants of these behaviors. Moreover, it is not the primary intent of this FOA to make minor adjustments to existing instruments (such as simply adding specific foods or activities to the already established standardized methods and questionnaires (e.g., Nutrition Data System for Research, USDA 5 Pass Method, NCI Diet History Questionnaire, Block FFQ, 7-Day Physical Activity Recall, International Physical Assessment Questionnaire). Rather, the purpose is to promote substantive improvements in the assessment of diet and physical activity as related to cancer or other pathologies.

Potential topics include, but are not limited to:

See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations for policies related to this announcement.

Section II. Award Information


1. Mechanism of Support

This FOA will use the NIH Research Project Grant (R01) award mechanism.

The applicant will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.

This FOA uses “Just-in-Time” information concepts. It also uses the modular as well as the nonmodular budget formats (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm). Specifically, if you are a United States (U.S.) organization and are submitting an application with direct costs in each year of $250,000 or less (excluding consortium Facilities and Administrative [F&A] costs), use the PHS398 Modular Budget component provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Package and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (see specifically Section 5.4, “Modular Budget Component,” of the Application Guide).

U.S. applicants requesting more than $250,000 in annual direct costs and all Foreign applicants must complete and submit budget requests using the Research & Related (R&R) Budget component found in the application package for this FOA. See NOT-OD-06-096, August 23, 2006.

At this time, it is not known if competing renewal (formerly “competing continuation”) applications will be accepted and/or if this FOA will be reissued.

2. Funds Available

Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of the Institutes and Centers (ICs) provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.

NIH grants policies as described in the NOT-OD-05-004, November 2, 2004.

Section III. Eligibility Information


1. Eligible Applicants

1.A. Eligible Institutions

You may submit an application(s) if your institution/organization has any of the following characteristics:

1.B. Eligible Individuals

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.


More than one PD/PI, or multiple PDs/PIs, may be designated on the application for projects that require a “team science” approach that clearly does not fit the single-PD/PI model. 
Additional information on the implementation plans and policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH eRA Commons prior to the submission of the application (see http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/preparing.htm for instructions).

The decision of whether to apply for a single PD/PI or multiple PD/PI grant is the responsibility of the investigators and applicant organizations and should be determined by the scientific goals of the project. Applications for multiple PD/PI grants will require additional information, as outlined in the instructions below. The NIH review criteria for approach, investigators, and environment have been modified to accommodate applications involving either a single PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs. When considering multiple PDs/PIs, please be aware that the structure and governance of the PD/PI leadership team as well as the knowledge, skills and experience of the individual PD/PIs will be factored into the assessment of the overall scientific merit of the application.  Multiple PDs/PIs on a project share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the project, intellectually and logistically. Each PD/PI is responsible and accountable to the grantee organization, or, as appropriate, to a collaborating organization, for the proper conduct of the project or program, including the submission of required reports. For further information on multiple PDs/PIs, please see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching

This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement.

3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria

At this time, it is not known if competing renewal (formerly “competing continuation”) applications will be accepted and/or if this FOA will be reissued.

Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each application is scientifically distinct.

Section IV. Application and Submission Information


To download a SF424 (R&R) Application Package and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for completing the SF424 (R&R) forms for this FOA, link to http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp and follow the directions provided on that Web site.

A one-time registration is required for institutions/organizations at both:

PDs/PIs should work with their institutions/organizations to make sure they are registered in the eRA Commons.

Several additional separate actions are required before an applicant institution/organization can submit an electronic application, as follows:

1) Organizational/Institutional Registration in Grants.gov/Get Registered

2) Organizational/Institutional Registration in the eRA Commons

3) Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) Registration in the NIH eRA Commons: Refer to the NIH eRA Commons System (COM) Users Guide.

Both the PD/PI(s) and AOR/SO need separate accounts in the NIH eRA Commons since both are authorized to view the application image.

Note that if a PD/PI is also an NIH peer-reviewer with an Individual DUNS and CCR registration, that particular DUNS number and CCR registration are for the individual reviewer only. These are different from any DUNS number and CCR registration used by an applicant organization. Individual DUNS and CCR registration should be used only for the purposes of personal reimbursement and should not be used on any grant applications submitted to the Federal Government.

Several of the steps of the registration process could take 4 weeks or more. Therefore, applicants should immediately check with their business official to determine whether their organization/institution is already registered in both Grants.gov and the Commons. The NIH will accept electronic applications only from organizations that have completed all necessary registrations.

1. Request Application Information

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.

Note: Only the forms package directly attached to a specific FOA can be used. You will not be able to use any other SF424 (R&R) forms (e.g., sample forms, forms from another FOA), although some of the "Attachment" files may be useable for more than one FOA.

For further assistance, contact GrantsInfo – Telephone: 301-435-0714; e-mail: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.

Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY 301-451-5936.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

Prepare all applications using the SF424 (R&R) application forms and in accordance with the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.

The SF424 (R&R) Application Guide is critical to submitting a complete and accurate application to NIH. There are fields within the SF424 (R&R) application components that, although not marked as mandatory, are required by NIH (e.g., the “Credential” log-in field of the “Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile” component must contain the PD/PI’s assigned eRA Commons User ID). Agency-specific instructions for such fields are clearly identified in the Application Guide. For additional information, see “Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.”

The SF424 (R&R) application has several components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY includes all applicable components, required and optional. A completed application in response to this FOA includes the data in the following components:

Required Components:
SF424 (R&R) (Cover component)
Research & Related Project/Performance Site Locations
Research & Related Other Project Information
Research & Related Senior/Key Person
PHS398 Cover Page Supplement
PHS398 Research Plan
PHS398 Checklist
PHS398 Modular Budget or Research & Related Budget: Select one, as appropriate. (See Section IV.6., “Special Instructions,” regarding appropriate required budget component. Research & Related Budget is required for foreign applications.)

Optional Components:
PHS398 Cover Letter File
Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form

Foreign Organizations (Non-Domestic [non-U.S.] Entity)

NIH policies concerning grants to Foreign (non-U.S.) organizations can be found in the NIH Grants Policy Statement at: http://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600260.

Applications from Foreign organizations must:

Proposed research should provide special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions in other countries that are not readily available in the U.S. or that augment existing U.S. resources.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

Applications with Multiple PDs/PIs

When multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, NIH requires one PD/PI to be designated as the "Contact” PI, who will be responsible for all communication between the PDs/PIs and the NIH, for assembling the application materials outlined below, and for coordinating progress reports for the project. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PDs/PIs, but has no other special roles or responsibilities within the project team beyond those mentioned above.

Information for the Contact PD/PI should be entered in Item 15 of the SF424(R&R) Cover component. All other PDs/PIs should be listed in the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component and assigned the project role of “PD/PI.” Please remember that all PDs/PIs must be registered in the eRA Commons prior to application submission. The Commons ID of each PD/PI must be included in the “Credential” field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component. Failure to include this data field will cause the application to be rejected.

All projects proposing Multiple PDs/PIs will be required to include a new section describing the leadership of the project.

Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, a new section of the research plan, entitled “Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan” (Section 14 of the Research Plan Component in the SF424 (R&R)), must be included. A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described.  The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators. 

If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan.  In the event of an award, the requested allocations may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Award.

Applications Involving a Single Institution

When all PDs/PIs are within a single institution, follow the instructions contained in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Applications Involving Multiple Institutions

When multiple institutions are involved, one institution must be designated as the prime institution and funding for the other institution(s) must be requested via a subcontract to be administered by the prime institution. When submitting a detailed budget, the prime institution should submit its budget using the Research & Related Budget component. All other institutions should have their individual budgets attached separately to the Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form. See Section 4.8 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the subaward budget form.

When submitting a modular budget, the prime institution completes the PHS398 Modular Budget component only. Information concerning the consortium/subcontract budget is provided in the budget justification. Separate budgets for each consortium/subcontract grantee are not required when using the Modular budget format. See Section 5.4 of the Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.

3. Submission Dates and Times

See Section IV.3.A. for details.

3.A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates

Opening Date: January 5, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (new applications): January 5, 2007; September 5, 2007; May 5, 2008; January 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (renewal, resubmission, and revised applications): February 5, 2007; October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009.
Letters of Intent Receipt Dates (all AIDS-related applications): April 1, 2007; December 2, 2007; August 1, 2008; April 1, 2009.
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (new applications): February 5, 2007; October 5, 2007; June 5, 2008; February 5, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s) (renewal, resubmission, and revision applications): March 5, 2007; November 5, 2007; July 5, 2008; March 5, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
AIDS Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): May 1, 2007; January 2, 2008; September 1, 2008; May 1, 2009 (alternating standard receipt dates).
Peer Review Date(s): June/July 2007, February/March 2008, October/November 2008; June/July 2009.
Council Review Date(s): October 2007; May 2008; January 2009; October 2009.
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): December 2007; July 2008; April 2009; December 2009.

3.A.1. Letter of Intent

Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows NIH IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed in Section IV.3.A.

The letter of intent should be sent to:

Richard Troiano, Ph.D.
Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences
National Cancer Institute
6130 Executive Plaza, EPN Room 4018, MSC 7344
Bethesda, MD 20892-7344 (for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 435-6822
Fax: (301) 435-3710
E-mail: troianor@mail.nih.gov

3.B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH

To submit an application in response to this FOA, applicants should access this FOA via http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp and follow steps 1-4. NOTE: Applications must only be submitted electronically. PAPER APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

In order to expedite the review, applicants are requested to notify the NCI Referral Office by e-mail (ncirefof@dea.nci.nih.gov) when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD(s)/PI(s) name(s), and title of the application.

3.C. Application Processing

Applications may be submitted on or after the opening date and must be successfully received by Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization) on the application submission/receipt date(s). (See Section IV.3.A. for all dates.) If an application is not submitted by the receipt date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed.

Once an application package has been successfully submitted through Grants.gov, any errors have been addressed, and the assembled application has been created in the eRA Commons, the PD/PI and the Authorized Organization Representative/Signing Official (AOR/SO) have two business days to view the application image.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Incomplete and nonresponsive applications will not be reviewed.

If the application is not responsive to the PAR, NIH staff may contact the applicant to determine whether to return the application to the applicant or submit it for review in competition with unsolicited applications at the next appropriate NIH review cycle.

There will be an acknowledgement of receipt of applications from Grants.gov and the Commons (https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/). The submitting AOR receives the Grants.gov acknowledgments. The AOR and the PI receive Commons acknowledgments. Information related to the assignment of an application to a Scientific Review Group is also in the Commons.

NOTE: Since e-mail can be unreliable, it is the responsibility of applicants to check periodially on their application status in the Commons.

The NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial merit review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. The NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of an application already reviewed with substantial changes, but such application must include an “Introduction” addressing the previous critique. Note such an application is considered a "resubmission" for the SF424 (R&R).

4. Intergovernmental Review

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

5. Funding Restrictions

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable. A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new or competing renewal (formerly “competing continuation”) award if such costs: are necessary to conduct the project, and would be allowable under the grant, if awarded, without NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise require prior approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval before incurring the cost. NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be incurred more than 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new or competing renewal award.

The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or noncompeting award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

6. Other Submission Requirements

PD/PI Credential (e.g., Agency Login)

The NIH requires the PD/PI(s) to fill in his/her Commons User ID in the “PROFILE – Project Director/Principal Investigator” section, “Credential” login field of the “Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile” component.

Organizational DUNS

The applicant organization must include its DUNS number in its Organization Profile in the eRA Commons. This DUNS number must match the DUNS number provided at CCR registration with Grants.gov. For additional information, see “Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.”

PHS398 Research Plan Component Sections

Items 2–5 of the PHS398 Research Plan component are limited to 25 pages. While each section of the Research Plan component needs to be uploaded separately as a PDF attachment, applicants are encouraged to construct the Research Plan component as a single document, separating sections into distinct PDF attachments just before uploading the files. This approach will enable applicants to better monitor formatting requirements such as page limits. All attachments must be provided to NIH in PDF format, filenames must be included with no spaces or special characters, and a .pdf extension must be used.

All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide are to be followed, incorporating "Just-in-Time" information concepts, and with the following additional requirements:

Special Instructions for Modular Grant applications

R01 applications from U.S. institutions/organizations requesting up to $250,000 per year in direct costs (excluding consortium F&A costs) must be submitted in a modular budget format. Additional information on modular budgets is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm. When submitting a modular budget, the applicant organization will include only the PHS398 Modular Budget component. See Section 5.4 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instructions regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.

Foreign organizations may not submit modular budgets. See NOT-OD-06-096.

Special Instructions for Applications Requesting $500,000 (direct costs) or More Per Year

Applicants requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs for any year (excluding consortium F&A costs) must carry out the following steps:

1) Contact the NIH IC program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the application, i.e., as you are developing plans for the study;

2) Obtain agreement from the IC staff that the IC will accept your application for consideration for award; and

3) Include the PHS398 Cover Letter component with the application to identify the staff member and IC that agreed to accept assignment of the application.

This policy applies to all new applications, competing renewal (formerly “competing continuation”) applications, resubmission (formerly “revised/amended”) applications, and revision (formerly “competing supplemental”) applications. See NOT-OD-02-004, October 16, 2001.

Stop SignIMPORTANT NOTE: NIH has published new limitations on grant application appendix materials to encourage applications to be as concise as possible while containing the information needed for expert scientific review.

Applicants must follow the specific instructions on Appendix materials as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/index.htm).

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the Research Plan component. An application that does not observe the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.

Note: While each section of the PHS398 Research Plan component needs to be uploaded separately as a PDF attachment, applicants are encouraged to construct the Research Plan component as a single document, separating sections into distinct PDF attachments just before uploading the files. This approach will enable applicants to monitor better formatting requirements such as page limits. All attachments must be provided to NIH in PDF format, filenames must be included with no spaces or special characters, and a .pdf extension must be used.

Foreign Applications (Non-Domestic [non-U.S.] Entity)

Plan for Sharing Research Data

The precise content of the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are planning to share data may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing, the format of the final dataset, the documentation to be provided, whether or not any analytic tools also will be provided, whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under their own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their institutional or personal Web site, through a data archive or enclave). Investigators choosing to share under their own auspices may wish to enter into a data-sharing agreement. References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of the application.

Applicants requesting more than $500,000 in direct costs in any year of the proposed research must include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).

The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data may be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.

Sharing Research Resources

NIH policy expects that grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement at http://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600131). Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing is not possible.

The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3., “Reporting.”

Section V. Application Review Information


1. Criteria (Update: Enhanced review criteria have been issued for the evaluation of research applications received for potential FY2010 funding and thereafter - see NOT-OD-09-025).

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications submitted for this funding opportunity will be assigned to the NIH ICs on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines.

Appropriate scientific review groups convened in accordance with the standard NIH peer review procedures (http://www.csr.nih.gov/refrev.htm) will evaluate applications for scientific and technical merit.

As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:

Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, to improve the control of disease, and to enhance health. In their written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application:

Note that an application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward.

Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, is the leadership approach, including the designated roles and responsibilities, governance, and organizational structure, consistent with and justified by the aims of the project and the expertise of each of the PDs/PIs?

Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?

Investigators: Are the PDs/PIs and other key personnel appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Do the PDs/PIs and investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?

Environment:  Do(es) the scientific environment(s) in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment(s), or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?

2.A. Additional Review Criteria

In addition to the above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the priority score:

Resubmission Applications (formerly “revised/amended” applications): Are the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group adequate? Are the improvements in the resubmission application appropriate?

Protection of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be assessed. See the “Human Subjects Sections” of the PHS398 Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).

Inclusion of Women, Minoritiesm and Children in Research:
The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. See the “Human Subjects Sections” of the PHS398 Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).

Care and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to be used in the project, the adequacy of the plans for their care and use will be assessed. See the “Other Research Plan Sections” of the PHS398 Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).

Biohazards: If materials or procedures are proposed that are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, determine if the proposed protection is adequate.

2.B. Additional Review Considerations

Budget and Period of Support: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the appropriateness of the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research may be assessed by the reviewers. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the budget.

Applications from Foreign Organizations: Whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions in other countries that are not readily available in the United States or that augment existing U.S. resources will be assessed.

2.C. Sharing Research Data

Data Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data may be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).

2.D. Sharing Research Resources

NIH policy expects  that grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement at http://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600131). Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing is not possible.

Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research resources.

The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3., “Reporting.”

Model Organism Sharing Plan: Reviewers are asked to assess the sharing plan in an administrative note. The sharing plan itself should be discussed after the application is scored. Whether a sharing plan is reasonable can be determined by the reviewers on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the organism, the timeline, the applicant's decision to distribute the resource or deposit it in a repository, and other relevant considerations.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

Not Applicable

Section VI. Award Administration Information


1. Award Notices

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the NIH eRA Commons.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant. For details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via e-mail notification from the awarding component to the grantee business official.

Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. See Section IV.5., “Funding Restrictions.”

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities.

3. Reporting

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Section VII. Agency Contacts


We encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management issues:

1. Scientific/Research Contact(s):

Amy Subar, Ph.D. or Richard Troiano, Ph.D.
Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences
National Cancer Institute
6130 Executive Boulevard, EPN Room 4005, MSC 7344
Bethesda, MD 20892-7344
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (
for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 594-0831 or (301) 435-6822
Fax: (301) 435-3710
E-mail:
subara@mail.nih.gov or troianor@mail.nih.gov

Catherine Loria, Ph.D.
Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 8112, MSC 7936
Bethesda, MD 20892-7936
Telephone: (301) 435-0702
Fax: (301) 480-1773
E-mail:
loriac@mail.nih.gov

Chhanda Dutta, Ph.D.
Geriatrics and Clinical Gerontology Program
National Institute on Aging
7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 3E-327, MSC 9205
Bethesda, MD 20892-9205
Telephone: (301) 435-3048
Fax: (301) 402-1784
E-mail:
mcd23z@nih.gov

Terry Huang, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Endocrinology, Nutrition, and Growth Branch
National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 4B11, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD 20892-7510
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (
for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 594-1846
Fax: (301) 480-9791
E-mail:
huangter@mail.nih.gov

Michael Spittel, Ph.D.
Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch
National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8B07, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD 20892-7510
(U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (express/courier delivery)

Telephone: (301) 496-1174
Fax: (301) 496-0962
E-mail:
spittelm@mail.nih.gov

Carolyn Miles, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes
and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
2 Democracy Plaza, Room 665, MSC
5450
Bethesda, MD 20892-5450

Telephone: (301) 451-3759
Fax: (301) 480-8300
E-mail:
milesc@mail.nih.gov

William Riley, Ph.D.
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6226, MSC 9615
Bethesda, MD 20892-9615
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (
for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 435-0301
Fax: (301) 480-2920
E-mail:
wiriley@mail.nih.gov

Martha L. Hare, Ph.D., R.N.
National Institute of Nursing Research
6701 Democracy Boulevard
, One Democracy Plaza Room 710, MSC 4870
Bethesda, MD 20892-4870
Telephone: (301) 451-3874
Fax: (301) 480-8260
E-mail:
martha.hare@nih.gov

Rebecca B. Costello, Ph.D., F.A.C.N.
Director of Grants and Extramural Activities
Office of Dietary Supplements
National Institutes of Health
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 3B01, MSC 7517
Bethesda, MD 20892-7517
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Rockville, MD 20852 (
for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 435-2920
Fax: (301) 480-1845
E-mail:
CostellB@od.nih.gov

2. Peer Review Contact(s):

Not Applicable

3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s):

Crystal Wolfrey
Office of Grants Administration
National Cancer Institute
6120 Executive Boulevard, EPS Suite 243, MSC 7150
Bethesda, MD  20892-7150
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
R
ockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 496-8634
Fax: (301) 496-8601
E-mail:
crystal.wolfrey@nih.gov

Craig E. Bagdon, M.P.A.
Grants Operations Branch
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7129, MSC 7926
Bethesda, MD 20892-7926
Telephone
: (301) 435-0480
Fax: (301) 480-3310
E-mail:
bagdonc@mail.nih.gov

Linda Whipp
Grants and Contracts Management Office
National Institute on Aging
7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2N212, MSC 9205
Bethe
sda, MD  20892-9205
Telephone:
(301) 496-1472
Fax: (301) 402-3672
E-mail: 
WhippL@nia.nih.gov

Lisa Moeller
Grants Management Team Leader
National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8A01, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
(for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
R
ockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 435-6995
Fax: (301) 451-5510
E-mail:
moellerl@mail.nih.gov

Sharon Bourque
Grants Management Specialist
National Institute of Diabetes
and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, R
oom 612, MSC 5456
Bethesda, MD 20892-5456

Telephone:
(301) 594-8846
Fax: (301) 480-3504
E-mail:
bourques@extra.niddk.nih.gov

Rita Sisco
Grants Management
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Ro
om 6120, MSC 9537
Bethesda, MD
20892-9537 (U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
R
ockville, MD 20852 (express/courier delivery)
Telephone: (301) 443-2805
Fax: (301) 443-6885
E-mail:
rr46w@nih.gov

Brian Albertini
Office of Grants and Contracts Management
National Institute of Nursing Research
6701 Democracy Boulevard, Room 710, MSC 4870
Bethesda, MD 20892-4870

Telephone: (301) 594-6869
Fax: (301) 451-5651
E-mail:
albertib2@mail.nih.gov

Section VIII. Other Information


Required Federal Citations

Use of Animals in Research:
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf) as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm), and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm), as applicable.

Human Subjects Protection:
Federal regulations (45 CFR 46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).

Data and Safety Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety monitoring is required for all types of clinical trials, including physiologic toxicity and dose-finding studies (Phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II); and efficacy, effectiveness, and comparative trials (Phase III). Monitoring should be commensurate with risk. The establishment of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) is required for multisite clinical trials involving interventions that entail potential risks to the participants (“NIH Policy for Data and Safety Monitoring,” NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).

Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).

Investigators should seek guidance from their institutions on issues related to institutional policies and local institutional review board (IRB) rules, as well as local, State, and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Rule. Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan, but will not factor the plan into the determination of the scientific merit or the priority score.

Access to Research Data through the Freedom of Information Act:
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are: (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds; and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through the FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm. Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award.

Sharing of Model Organisms:
NIH is committed to supporting efforts that encourage sharing of important research resources including the sharing of model organisms for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm). At the same time, the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors to elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement). Beginning October 1, 2004, all investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal are expected to include in the application/proposal a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organism research resources generated using NIH funding or state why such sharing is restricted or not possible. This will permit other researchers to benefit from the resources developed with public funding. The inclusion of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a cost threshold in any year and is expected to be included in all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated.

Inclusion of Women And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their subpopulations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research” (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. The amended policy incorporates: The use of an NIH definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the SF424 (R&R) application; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.

Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in research involving human subjects (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).

Required Education on the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.

Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC):
Criteria for Federal funding of research on hESCs can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html. Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov/). It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC line(s) to be used in the proposed research. Applications that do not provide this information will be returned without review.

NIH Public Access Policy:
NIH-funded investigators are requested to submit to the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov/) at PubMed Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined as the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all modifications from the publishing peer review process.

NIH is requesting that authors submit manuscripts resulting from: 1) currently funded NIH research projects; or 2) previously supported NIH research projects if they are accepted for publication on or after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies to all research grant and career development award mechanisms, cooperative agreements, contracts, Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies. The Policy applies to peer-reviewed, original research publications that have been supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not apply to book chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings. Publications resulting from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be submitted.

For more information about the Policy or the submission process, please visit the NIH Public Access Policy Web site at http://publicaccess.nih.gov// and view the Policy or other resources and tools, including the Authors' Manual.

Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information," the "Privacy Rule," on August 14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a Federal regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and enforced by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR Web site (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and research contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.

URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. For publications listed in the appendix and/or Progress report, Internet addresses (URLs) or PubMed Central (PMC) submission identification numbers must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles. Publicly accessible online journal articles or PMC articles/manuscripts accepted for publication that are directly relevant to the project may be included only as URLs or PMC submission identification numbers accompanying the full reference in either the Bibliography & References Cited section, the Progress Report Publication List section, or the Biographical Sketch section of the NIH grant application. A URL or PMC submission identification number citation may be repeated in each of these sections as appropriate. There is no limit to the number of URLs or PMC submission identification numbers that can be cited.

Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This FOA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.

Authority and Regulations:
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, healthcare, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.

Loan Repayment Programs:
NIH encourages applications for educational loan repayment from qualified health professionals who have made a commitment to pursue a research career involving clinical, pediatric, contraception, infertility, and health disparities related areas. The LRP is an important component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the next generation of researchers by providing the means for developing a research career unfettered by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is not required for eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications are encouraged. The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing the LRP recipient with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP awardees must commit at least 50 percent of their time (at least 20 hours per week based on a 40 hour week) for 2 years to the research. For further information, please see http://www.lrp.nih.gov/.


Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices


Office of Extramural Research (OER) - Home Page Office of Extramural
Research (OER)
  National Institutes of Health (NIH) - Home Page National Institutes of Health (NIH)
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
  USA.gov - Government Made Easy


Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.