National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
NIDDK Central Repositories Non-renewable Sample Access (X01)
X01 Resource Access Award
Reissue of PAR-11-306
The NIDDK Central Repositories house valuable samples and data from numerous major clinical studies. This FOA allows investigators to apply for access to non-renewable samples from one or more of these studies. Information about the samples available can be found at www.niddkrepository.org. Applicants must provide information from the NIDDK Central Repositories documenting sample availability.
July 30, 2014
September 30, 2014
October 30, 2014; March 3, 2015; June 30, 2015; October 30, 2015; March 3, 2016; June 30, 2016; October 31, 2016; March 3, 2017; and June 30, 2017, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on these dates.
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
February/March 2015, June/July 2015, October/November 2015, February/March 2016, June/July 2016, October/November 2016, February/March 2017, June/July 2017, October/November 2017
July 1, 2015; December 1, 2015; March 1, 2016; July 1, 2016; December 1, 2016; March 1, 2017; July 1, 2017; December 1, 2017; and March 1, 2018
July 1, 2017
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options to submit your application to the agency through Grants.gov. You can use the ASSIST system to prepare, submit and track your application online. You can download an application package from Grants.gov, complete the forms offline, submit the completed forms to Grants.gov and track your application in eRA Commons. Or, you can use other institutional system-to-system solutions to prepare and submit your application to Grants.gov and track your application in eRA Commons. Learn more.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
The NIDDK supports research on topics that encompass some of the most common, severe, and disabling conditions affecting Americans today: endocrine and metabolic diseases such as diabetes and obesity, digestive diseases such as hepatitis and inflammatory bowel disease, kidney and urologic diseases such as kidney failure and prostate enlargement, and blood diseases such as the anemias. Many of the large clinical studies funded by the NIDDK collect biospecimens from subjects for analysis and future study. The collection of these samples from many different studies in the NIDDK Central Repositories has created a valuable resource with which researchers can rapidly validate clinical hypotheses and algorithms for clinical decision-making. The collection is also advancing the development of prognostic variables, biomarkers, and therapeutics for diseases related to the mission of the NIDDK. The Repositories facilitate sharing of NIDDK-supported resources, thus encouraging work by junior investigators, investigators with novel approaches, and others not included in current collaborations, without excluding those who are established in their fields. They help to ensure that research participants make a maximal contribution, and decreases duplicative sampling efforts.
Non-renewable biosamples, such as plasma and urine, and associated data are available from many studies, including the Consortium for Radiological Imaging Studies of Polycystic Kidney Disease (CRISP) and The Study of Viral Resistance to Antiviral Therapy of Chronic Hepatitis C (ViraHep-C), as well as several diabetes studies such as the Type 1 Diabetes Prevention Trial- 1(DPT-1), Diabetes Prevention Program Type 2 Diabetes (DPP), and Diabetes Control and Complications Trial / Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC). A complete list of available samples can be found at https://www.niddkrepository.org/search/study/.
Applicants are required to contact the NIDDK Central Repositories in advance to determine whether there is sufficient quantity of the samples that will be required for the proposed study and to provide that information as part of the application. In addition, applicants must consult with the Repositories to determine whether the proposed use of samples is consistent with the limitations of the subjects’ informed consents.
This FOA is intended to facilitate equitable and appropriate distribution of biosamples from the NIDDK Central Repositories.
Other: A mechanism that is not a grant or cooperative agreement. Examples include access to research resources or pre-applications.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
The total number of projects granted access to samples is dependent on the number of meritorious applications and the availability of the requested non-renewable samples.
Not Applicable; funds are not awarded via the X01 mechanism.
The maximum project period is 5 years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) 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.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
In addition, the NIH will not accept a resubmission (A1) application that is submitted later than 37 months after submission of the new (A0) application that it follows. The NIH will accept submission:
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the “Apply for Grant Electronically” button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, including Supplemental Grant Application Instructions except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
For this specific FOA, the Research Strategy section is limited to 6 pages.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, in addition to the following:
Total Federal Funds Requested: Enter $0.
Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds: $0.
Estimated Program Income:Enter $0.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Background: Provide the relevant background to justify the request. Be sure to include:
1. Importance of the project, including the significance of both the study question and of the specific project.
2. Justification for requesting these specific samples, and why other sources of similar samples are not appropriate. This section should explain how the proposed use relates to the design and outcomes of the study that produced the requested samples. The question being posed by the investigator must be appropriate to the source of the biospecimens, how they were collected, prepared, analyzed, and stored, their age, and the phenotypic and other accompanying data.
3. Relevant preliminary data demonstrating the applicant’s experience with the assay or technique that will be used with the requested samples.
Research Design and Methods (A-D below):
A. Sample Information:
1. Include detailed information about what samples are requested. If you will be combining the results from the proposed study with those obtained from other samples, be sure to explain how the requested samples will fit in with your overall study design (e.g., from which study and stage of the study the specimens are requested, whether random samples or specific selection of those with subjects with or without specified clinical events and laboratory or imaging findings are sought, etc.)
2. Include a clear justification for the amount of sample being requested. In all cases, applicants should only request the minimum volume needed for the study.
3. Include information from the NIDDK Repository documenting the availability of the samples being requested.
B. Project Details:
1. Hypothesis: There should be at least one important hypothesis that can be tested using the proposed methods and non-renewable samples provided by the repository.
2. Methodology: Describe how the requested samples will be used, including a description of the specific procedures by which the samples will be tested and analyzed. Is this a discovery, confirmatory or validation study?
3. Power and effect size: Describe the power of the project and the anticipated size of a detectable effect.
4. Data analysis: Provide a detailed plan for data analysis. Include a brief summary of the team’s expertise and experience and evidence that they can handle the analysis proposed.
5. Data management: Describe how the accompanying phenotypic data as well as the data from sample analysis will be managed. For example, who will have the main responsibility for organizing, storing, and archiving the data? Who will maintain computer data files and make needed work files available to those who will analyze the data? How will the privacy of information of beneficiaries in the files be guarded and guaranteed? Highlight experience with data management for large data sets, such as those to be produced by the proposed project.
6. Sample management: Explicitly address how the samples will be held, managed, and processed. For example, who will have the main responsibility for storing and testing the samples?
7. Plans for the next phase: Describe plans for follow up studies and, if relevant, further biomarker or assay development. If collaborations have been established for follow up, include these letters of collaboration.
C. Project Support: Describe whether there is current NIH funding to support the research project and if so, provide the grant number(s). If there is no NIH funding, briefly describe the source of funding to support the proposed project.
D. Plan to Return Data: Applicants are expected to have a plan to return data derived from analysis of samples to the NIDDK Central Repositories, along with appropriate quality measures, consistent with achieving the goals of the program. The plan should acknowledge the requirement to follow NIDDK instructions to either return or destroy the phenotypic data and unused samples to the NIDDK Central Repositories one year after the award of this project.
E. Human Subjects Considerations: Applicants must consult with their local IRB to determine whether the proposed research constitutes human subjects research or is exempt, and must provide documentation of the IRB’s determination. In any case, whether the research is exempt from IRB or not, applicants must include in this section a statement of how the proposed research fits within the limitations of the subjects’ informed consent. Information about the informed consents for each study can be obtained from the NIDDK Repository.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically.
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete will not be reviewed.
In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the NIDDK Referral Office by email at firstname.lastname@example.org when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following:
The X01 Resource Access Program invites eligible institutions to seek access to NIH research resources, which are specified in each X01 FOA. This includes programs where institutions will request access to submit to the resource (e.g., high throughput screening assays) as well as programs where access to a specific NIH research resource is needed to conduct certain research. Important factors in the peer review of X01 applications are the need for, and potential benefit of, gaining access to the resource, specifications for any assays proposed, timelines for completion and plans for follow-on studies.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field? Is the proposed use of the samples highly significant?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project? Does the Investigator have adequate funding to carry out the proposed study?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Is the Investigator familiar with the study that produced the samples being requested? Are the requested samples uniquely suited for the requested study? Does the proposed research take advantage of the data associated with the samples? Does the quantity of sample requested match the intended use? Are sufficient preliminary data presented to demonstrate accuracy and robustness of the proposed assay?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Protections for Human Subjects
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NIDDK, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. The following will be considered in making access decisions:
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 eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Any application selected or access to the resource will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
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. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system
problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Rebekah S. Rasooly, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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.
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.