TOOLS FOR COLLABORATIONS THAT INVOLVE DATA SHARING
RELEASE DATE: June 4, 2003
PA NUMBER: PAR-03-134 (see addendum NOT-RR-04-007)
LETTER OF INTENT RECEIPT DATE: August 15 2003, and June 15, 2004
APPLICATION RECEIPT DATES: September 15, 2003 and July 15, 2004
EXPIRATION DATE: August 1, 2004, unless reissued.
National Center for Research Resources (NCRR)
(http://www.ncrr.nih.gov)
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB)
(http://www.nibib.nih.gov)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
(http://www.nida.nih.gov)
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
(http://www.niehs.nih.gov)
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
(http://www.nimh.nih.gov)
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)
(http://www.ninds.nih.gov)
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
(http://www.nlm.nih.gov)
Division of Chemistry, Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences,
National Science Foundation (CHEM)
(http://www.nsf.gov/mps/divisions/che/start.htm)
Division of Biological Infrastructure, Directorate for Biological Sciences,
National Science Foundation (DBI)
(http://www.nsf.gov/bio/dbi/start.htm)
CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBER(S): 93.389 (NCRR), 93.286
(NIBIB), 93.287 (NIBIB), 93.279 (NIDA), 93.113 (NIEHS), 93.114 (NIEHS),
93.115 (NIEHS), 93.242 (NIMH), 93.853 (NINDS), 93.879 (NLM), 47.049 (CHEM),
47.074 (DBI).
THIS PA CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
o Purpose of the PA
o Research Objectives
o Mechanism(s) of Support
o Eligible Institutions
o Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators
o Special Requirements
o Where to Send Inquiries
o Letter of Intent
o Submitting an Application
o Peer Review Process
o Review Criteria
o Award Criteria
o Required Federal Citations
PURPOSE OF THIS PA
Over the past nine years the NSF, the NIH, and other federal agencies, have
supported the development of network-based virtual laboratories, following
the recommendations of the 1993 National Research Council (NRC) report
National Collaboratories: Applying Information Technology for Scientific
Research. As described in the NRC report, collaboratories are expected to
improve the speed and output of scientific research through Internet access
to instruments, data, and colleagues – independent of time and place. Many
of the early collaboratory projects focused on remote control of distant
equipment with less emphasis on data. Changes since 1993 in both the
character of biomedical and chemical research, and in underlying computer and
network technologies suggest a re-examination of the collaboratory concept
with increased attention to data flow from acquisition to deposition in a
data repository, data reuse after deposition, and integration of data across
various repositories and databases. The purpose of this program announcement
(PA) is to invite proposals to develop tools and techniques to harness the
unprecedented volume of data generated by collaborations among researchers.
Proposals dealing with data from either research laboratories or from the
clinical laboratories are welcome. Using these new tools and techniques, it
is expected that two or more laboratories will be able to productively
collaborate in ways that are not currently possible.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Great opportunities are possible as researchers combine rapidly improving
information technology and the new availability of data with team and
collaborative approaches that enable handling larger scale problems.
Understanding these trends, the National Center for Research Resources
convened a workshop in September 2002
(http://www.ncrr.nih.gov/biotech/collabmtg2002.asp). Members of that
workshop were charged to review the state and future directions of
collaboratories and associated technologies. They were asked to focus on
opportunities created by the newly data rich environment of biomedical
research.
Workshop participants concluded that collaboratories focused on data can
enable cross-disciplinary work, allow scientific activities to scale to a
natural level (not being limited by physical constraints), promote greater
data integration and access, build stronger research communities, and broaden
the engagement in science beyond the traditional community. Collectively,
these advances will drive the digitally enabled translational medicine of the
future. Furthermore, the tools and techniques that are developed may help in
addressing some of the management issues common to many large NIH or NSF
supported projects.
This PA invites proposals to develop collaborative tools and techniques that
creatively manage and analyze large amounts of data that are generated during
research and need to be shared among several (or many) groups. Until
recently, data were generated in a single laboratory and served as the basis
for publications in the peer-reviewed literature. While that pathway still
exists, in the developing data rich environment a second pathway is emerging
that is likely to become important. In this second pathway, the raw data
generated by the initial laboratory are used by a second laboratory to make
new discoveries that, in all likelihood, would not have otherwise been made.
Access to this raw data raises a number of issues. How will access actually
occur in the absence of a centralized database? How will the essential
annotations (metadata) that are required to understand and use the data be
attached? What new tools and techniques are necessary to make use of the
existing and next generation cyber-infrastructure in order to transfer and
process this data? What sort of incentives can be created to encourage
sharing among researchers who have traditionally kept raw data in their own
laboratory? These are examples of the types of questions that proposals
submitted in response to this PA should address.
The topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
(1) tools and techniques for collaborative analysis, access, and
visualization of data,
(2) tools and techniques that ensure that new collaboration technologies are
compatible with emerging middleware standards, including security and
authentication controls,
(3) tools that facilitate communication among collaborators, and
(4) tools and techniques that facilitate the creation and curation of data
repositories used in a collaborative fashion.
Preference will be given to tools that operate on multiple desktop platforms
and, if appropriate to tools that operate on larger systems. These tools
should have applications beyond one isolated problem. These tools and
techniques must allow two or more collaborators to accomplish science that
otherwise would or could not be done working independently.
It is important that these proposed tools and techniques have a formal,
systematic evaluation component. The goal of this evaluation is to assess
the impact of the newly developed technologies on the organization and
conduct of science, as well as on the evolution of collaboratory-based
communities. This requirement can be satisfied in one of two ways.
Milestones can be presented in the text of the proposal. These milestones
should provide quantitative targets for both the middle and end of the
project period. Alternatively, an external evaluation of the tools and
techniques can be proposed. This external evaluation should use tools and
techniques from sociology or other appropriate social sciences. If this
evaluation method is chosen, plans to present the results of the evaluation
to the research community must be presented in the Research Plan.
MECHANISM(S) OF SUPPORT
This PA will use the NIH R01 award mechanism. As an applicant, you will be
solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed
project.
This PA uses just-in-time concepts. It also uses the modular as well as the
non-modular budgeting formats (see
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm). Specifically, if
you are submitting an application with direct costs in each year of $250,000
or less, use the modular format. Otherwise follow the instructions for non-
modular research grant applications. This program does not require cost
sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2001/part_i_1.htm.
ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS
You may submit (an) application(s) if your institution has any of the
following characteristics:
o For-profit or non-profit organizations
o Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals,
and laboratories
o Units of state and local governments
o Eligible agencies of the Federal government
o Domestic or foreign
INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS
Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry
out the proposed research is invited to work with their institution 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 and NSF programs.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
This proposal must contain a method to evaluate the use of the proposed tools
and techniques. The applicant can choose from two methods to conduct this
evaluation, "milestones" or "external evaluation". In either case, a
specific section labeled Evaluation must be included following the Research
Design and Methods. The goal of this evaluation is to assess the impact of
the newly developed technologies on the organization and conduct of science,
as well as on the evolution of collaboratory-based communities.
If the milestones method is chosen, the milestones presented should be well
described and scientifically justified. Milestones should not be simply a
restatement of the specific aims. The milestones should be written so that a
scientifically literate, non-expert individual will be able to compare the
proposed milestones to the work presented in a progress report and decide
whether the milestones have been achieved. In the application, milestones
should be presented for the period half way through the grant and for the end
of the grant. It is expected that progress toward achieving the milestones
will be addressed in the annual progress report. It is also expected that
the milestones will be used to evaluate any application for a competitive
renewal.
If the external evaluation method is chosen, the proposer must identify who
the evaluators are, the techniques they will use, and how the results of the
evaluation will be presented to the community.
The evaluation section should be presented at the end of the Research Design
and Methods section (D) of the Research Plan. This section should have a
separate heading and must be included in the 25 page limit of the Research
Plan. Applications lacking this information, as determined by NIH staff, may
be returned to the applicant without review.
In addition to the evaluation component, investigators must specify their
plans to distribute the tools and techniques that they are going to develop.
This information should have a separate heading, should follow the evaluation
section in the Research Plan, and must also be included in the 25 page limit.
Applications lacking this information, as determined by NIH staff, may be
returned to the applicant without review.
WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES
We encourage your inquiries concerning this PA 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:
o Direct your questions about scientific/research issues to:
Dr. Gregory K. Farber
Division of Biomedical Technology
National Center for Research Resources
6701 Democracy Boulevard, MSC 4874
Bethesda, MD 20892-4874
Telephone: (301) 435-0778
FAX: (301) 480-3659
Email: gf48a@nih.gov
Dr. Grace Peng
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
6707 Democracy Boulevard, MSC 5469
Bethesda, MD 20892-5469
Telephone: (301) 496-9178
Fax: (301) 480-4973
Email: gp119w@nih.gov
Dr. Karen Skinner
National Institute on Drug Abuse
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 4271
Rockville, MD 20852
Telephone: (301) 443-1887
Fax: (301) 594-6043
Email: ks79x@nih.gov
Dr. Claudia Thompson
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
MD EC-27
P.O. BOX 12233
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Telephone: (919) 541-4638
Fax: (919) 541-4937
Email: ct68w@nih.gov
Dr. Michael F. Huerta
Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 7202, MSC 9645
Bethesda, MD 20892-9645
Telephone: 301-443-3563
FAX: 301-443-1731
Email: mhuerta@helix.nih.gov
Dr. Yuan Liu
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 2110
Rockville, MD 20852
Telephone: (301) 496-1917
Fax: (301) 480-2424
Email: yl5o@nih.gov
Dr. Carol Bean
National Library of Medicine
6705 Rockledge Drive, Room 301
Bethesda, MD 20892-7968
Telephone: (301) 594-4882
FAX: (301) 402-2952
Email: cb389x@nih.gov
Dr. Janice Hicks
Division of Chemistry
Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences
National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Telephone: (703) 292-4956
FAX: (703) 292-9037
Email: jhicks@nsf.gov
Dr. Gerald F. Guala
Division of Biological Infrastructure
Directorate for Biological Sciences
National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Telephone: (703) 292-8470
FAX: (703) 292-9063
Email: gguala@nsf.gov
o Direct your questions about peer review issues to:
Dr. Donald Schneider
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive,
Bethesda, MD 20892
Telephone: (301) 435-1727
FAX: (301)480-1988
Email: schneidd@csr.nih.gov
o Direct your questions about financial or grants management matters to:
Judith Musgrave
Office of Grants Management
National Center for Research Resources
6701 Democracy Boulevard, MSC 4874
Bethesda, MD 20892-4874
Telephone: (301) 435-0841
FAX: (301) 480-3777
Email: jm133b@nih.gov
Nancy Curling
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 900
Bethesda, MD 20892-5469
Telephone: (301) 451-4782
Fax: (301) 480-4974
Email: curlingn@mail.nih.gov
Gary Fleming
Grants Management Branch
National Institute on Drug Abuse/NIH/DHHS
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3131, MSC 9541
Bethesda, MD 20892-9541
Telephone: (301) 443-6710
FAX: (301) 594-6847
Email: gf6s@nih.gov
Carol Robison
Grants Management Branch
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6118
Bethesda, MD 20892
Telephone: 301-443-3858
FAX: 301-443-6885
Email: crobinso@mail.nih.gov
Chris Zimmerman
Grants Management Specialist
NINDS
NSC, Rm 3290
6001 Executive Blvd.
Rockville, MD 20852 (Express Mail)
Bethesda, MD 20892-9537 (Regular Mail)
Phone (301) 496-3107
Fax (301) 402-0219
zimmermc@ninds.nih.gov
Laurence Dash
Extramural Programs
National Library of Medicine
Rockledge 1, Suite 301
6705 Rockledge Drive
Bethesda, MD 20892
Telephone: (301) 496-4221
FAX: (301) 402-0421
Email: ld72i@nih.gov
LETTER OF INTENT
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes
the following information:
o Descriptive title of the proposed research
o Name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator
o Names of other key personnel
o Participating institutions
o Number and title of PAR
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 IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan
the review.
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed at the beginning of
this document. The letter of intent should be sent to:
Gregory Farber, Ph.D.
Division of Biomedical Technology
National Center for Research Resources
6701 Democracy Boulevard, MSC 4874
Bethesda, MD 20892-4874
Telephone: (301) 435-0778
FAX: (301) 480-3659
Email: gf48a@nih.gov
Applicants are strongly encouraged to send the letter of intent by e-mail.
JOINT NIH/NSF SUBMISSION
A recent NIH/NSF Memorandum of Understanding permits both agencies to
participate in this program announcement. The Division of Chemistry and the
Division of Biological Infrastructure at NSF are participating. Proposals
intended for NSF consideration should be submitted to NIH for review at the
deadlines announced above. After the review has occurred, NSF may choose to
fully fund certain applications or co-fund the application. For chosen
applications, the principal investigator will be required to re-submit the
application as a proposal through the NSF FastLane system in accordance with
the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). (Additional information is available at:
http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpg and
http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm.) Applicants contemplating joint
NIH-NSF submission are strongly urged to contact appropriate staff at both
the National Science Foundation (Dr. Janice Hicks at NSF Division of
Chemistry, 703-292-4956; jhicks@nsf.gov or Dr. Gerald Guala at NSF Division
of Biological Infrastructure, 703-292-8470; gguala@nsf.gov) and NCRR (Dr.
Gregory K. Farber, 301-435-0778; gf48a@nih.gov) for information concerning
eligibility and required documentation.
SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION
Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application
instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001). The PHS 398 is available at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive
format. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 435-0714,
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MODULAR GRANT APPLICATIONS: Applications requesting
up to $250,000 per year in direct costs must be submitted in a modular grant
format. The modular grant format simplifies the preparation of the budget in
these applications by limiting the level of budgetary detail. Applicants
request direct costs in $25,000 modules. Section C of the research grant
application instructions for the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html includes step-by-step
guidance for preparing modular grants. Additional information on modular
grants is available at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm.
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATIONS REQUESTING $500,000 OR MORE PER YEAR:
Applications requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs for any year must
include a cover letter identifying the NIH staff member within one of NIH
institutes or centers who has agreed to accept assignment of the application.
Applicants requesting more than $500,000 must carry out the following steps:
1) Contact the 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) Identify, in a cover letter sent with the application, the staff member
and IC who agreed to accept assignment of the application.
This policy applies to all investigator-initiated new (type 1), competing
continuation (type 2), competing supplement, or any amended or revised
version of these grant application types. Additional information on this
policy is available in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, October 19,
2001 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-004.html.
SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH: Submit a signed, typewritten original of
the application, including the checklist, and five signed photocopies in one
package to:
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service)
APPLICATION PROCESSING: Applications must be received by the receipt dates
listed at the beginning of this document. The CSR will not accept any
application in response to this PA that is essentially the same as one
currently pending initial review unless the applicant withdraws the pending
application. The CSR will not accept any application that is essentially the
same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of a
substantial revision of an application already reviewed, but such application
must include an Introduction addressing the previous critique.
Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an
application, applicants are generally notified of the review and funding
assignment within 8 weeks.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Applications submitted for this PA will be assigned 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:
o Receive a written critique
o Undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have
the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of applications under
review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score
o Receive a second level review by the appropriate national advisory council
or board.
REVIEW CRITERIA
The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health. The
goals of NSF-supported research within the context of this PA are to advance
our fundamental understanding of biology and chemistry. In the written
comments, reviewers will be asked to discuss the following aspects of the
application in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will
have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals:
o Significance
o Approach
o Innovation
o Investigator
o Environment
The scientific review group will address and consider each of these criteria
in assigning the application's overall score, weighting them as appropriate
for each application. The 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 be advanced? What
will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive
this field?
APPROACH: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses
adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the
project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider
alternative tactics?
INNOVATION: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or methods?
Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing
paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?
INVESTIGATOR: Is the investigator 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 (if any)?
ENVIRONMENT: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done
contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed experiments take
advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful
collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA: In addition to the above criteria, the following
items will be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the
priority score:
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 criteria included in the
section on Federal Citations, below).
INCLUSION OF WOMEN, MINORITIES 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 Inclusion Criteria in the sections on
Federal Citations, below).
CARE AND USE OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS IN RESEARCH: If vertebrate animals are to
be used in the project, the five items described under Section f of the PHS
398 research grant application instructions (rev. 5/2001) will be assessed.
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
DATA SHARING: The adequacy of the proposed plan to share data.
BUDGET: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period
of support in relation to the proposed research.
OTHER REVIEW CRITERIA:
1) Are the evaluation criteria suitable to allow an assessment of the impact
of the newly developed technologies on the organization and conduct of
science, as well as on the evolution of collaboratory-based communities.
2) Will the plans for sharing the proposed tools and techniques ensure a
broad distribution of those tools and techniques?
3) Proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation are evaluated
through the use of NSF's two merit review criteria: the intellectual merit
and the broader impacts of the proposed activity. To cover the broader impact
review criteria, reviewers will be asked to evaluate whether a proposal will
enhance the infrastructure and integration of research and education. In
addition, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the proposal on whether it
upgrades the computation and computing infrastructure while broadening
participation. Description of NSF's review criteria can be found at
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf032/032_3.htm#IIIA. Examples of activities
that demonstrate broader impacts can be found at
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf032/bicexamples.pdf.
AWARD CRITERIA
Applications submitted in response to a PA will compete for available funds
with all other recommended applications. The following will be considered in
making funding decisions:
o Overall merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review
o Availability of funds
o Relevance to program priorities
REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS
HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION: Federal regulations (45CFR46) 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.
MONITORING PLAN AND DATA AND SAFETY MONITORING BOARD: Research components
involving Phase I and II clinical trials must include provisions for
assessment of patient eligibility and status, rigorous data management,
quality assurance, and auditing procedures. In addition, it is NIH policy
that all clinical trials require data and safety monitoring, with the method
and degree of monitoring being commensurate with the risks (NIH Policy for
Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, June 12,
1998: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN CLINICAL RESEARCH: It is the policy of
the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations
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 -
Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts
on October 9, 2001 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-
02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are 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 new PHS Form 398; 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 RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of
21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported
by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include
them. This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for
receipt dates after October 1, 1998.
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 that is available at
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 proposals for research involving human
subjects. You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants
and Contracts Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, 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 (see http://escr.nih.gov).
It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide 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.
PUBLIC 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 public 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 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 PA 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.
STANDARDS FOR PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION: The
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) 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 DHHS Office for
Civil Rights (OCR). Those who must comply with the Privacy Rule (classified
under the Rule as "covered entities") must do so by April 14, 2003 (with the
exception of small health plans which have an extra year to comply).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside
with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR website
(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.
Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs)
should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because
reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites. Furthermore,
we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they
directly access an Internet site.
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 PA
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 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 NIH Grants
Policy Statement can be found at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm
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, health care, 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.