NIH’s new Application Submission System & Interface for Submission Tracking (ASSIST) is available for the electronic preparation and submission of multi-project applications through Grants.gov to NIH. Applications to this FOA must be submitted electronically; paper applications will not be accepted. ASSIST replaces the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities and provides many features to enable electronic multi-project application submission and improve data quality, including: pre-population of organization and PD/PI data, pre-submission validation of many agency business rules and the generation of data summaries in the application image used for review.

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) and where instructions in the Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. 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.

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

New biologic knowledge will come from both sole investigators following their vision and from teams of scientists sharing their expertise. Some complex biomedical problems require a multidisciplinary vantage point to discover an innovative solution. This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) invites grant applications for investigator-initiated Program Projects (P01) applications. The P01 program project award supports research that has multiple distinct but synergistic projects built around a unifying central theme within the scientific mission of the NIDDK.

The P01 is one of several grant mechanisms the NIDDK uses to foster multi-disciplinary, collaborative research projects. More information on and a comparison among these collaborative grant mechanisms supported by NIDDK can be found at: http://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/about-funding-mechanisms/niddk-collaborative-grants-comparison/Pages/default.aspx.

A central theme or well-defined major objective is the foundation of a P01 program project. Compared to the more narrow thrust of a traditional R01 research project, a program project is directed toward a range of scientific questions that elucidate various aspects of the central theme. The interrelationships of research projects and collaborations among investigators will yield synergy and results beyond those achievable if each research project were to be pursued independently. In addition, one or more shared research cores are required.

The project leaders and core leaders should be established investigators with strong records of innovative research and independent funding support. The participation of experts in several disciplines or in several areas of one discipline will greatly enhance the goals of the program project. All investigators must contribute to, and share in, the responsibilities of fulfilling the program objectives.

The research of the program projects should advance the mission of the NIDDK to gain new knowledge relevant to understanding diabetes, selected endocrine and metabolic diseases, obesity, digestive diseases and nutrition, and kidney, urologic and hematologic diseases, and to develop new approaches to prevent, treat and cure these diseases.

A program project for this FOA requires: a) a minimum of three inter-related and synergistic research projects that complement and contribute to a unifying central theme; and b) at least one research core facility that provides services to at least two research projects. An administrative support core may also be proposed. The research projects and scientific and administrative cores are all under the leadership of an overall P01 leader responsible for program integration and management.

Investigators are allowed to submit each research project as an R01 application and as part of the program project for review in the same review cycle. If such a project were to receive impact scores that merit funding of both the R01 and P01 applications, funding of the project in the program project will take precedence, and the R01 application will be inactivated administratively.

Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to contact NIDDK while they are still in the process of developing conceptual plans for an application and at least 3 months and preferably 6 months before the due date to discuss a potential application. The discussion could include the choice of activity code, relevance of the topic to the NIDDK mission and the scope and approach of the project.

It is NIDDK policy that any P01 grant receiving a competing award in FY 2011 or later will be limited to one subsequent renewal.

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

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

• Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
• Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

• Hispanic-serving Institutions
• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
• Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
• Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
• Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

• Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
• Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

• Small Businesses
• For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Governments

• State Governments
• County Governments
• City or Township Governments
• Special District Governments
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)
• Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
• U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

• Independent School Districts
• Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
• Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
• Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
• Regional Organizations

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.

Applicant Organizations

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.

• Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants be issued a DUNS number. After obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin both SAM and eRA Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
• System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly CCR) Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
  • NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
• eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the eRA Commons registration. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
• Grants.gov Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

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.

The PD/PI should be an established research scientist who has the experience, ability, and time commitment to provide scientific leadership and to ensure quality control, effective administration and integration of all components of the program project. Each research project should be led by an experienced investigator with an established record of productivity and independent funding.

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:

• A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
• A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
• An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NOT-OD-11-101).

Applicants can access 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.

Most applicants will use NIH’s ASSIST system to prepare and submit applications through Grants.gov to NIH. Applications prepared and submitted using applicant systems capable of submitting electronic multi-project applications to Grants.gov will also be accepted.

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 and where instructions in the Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. 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.

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.

By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

• Descriptive title of proposed activity
• Name(s), address(es), and telephone number(s) of the PD(s)/PI(s)
• Names of other key personnel
• Participating institution(s)
• Number and title of this funding opportunity

The letter of intent, preferably electronically, should be sent to:

Michele Barnard, Ph.D.
Deputy Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 7253
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: 301-594-8898
Email: [email protected]

Component Types Available in ASSIST	Research Strategy/Program Plan Page Limits
Overall	12
Admin Core	6
Core (Use for Research Cores)	6
Project	12

Additional page limits described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, and should be used for preparing a multi-component application.

The application should consist of the following components:

• Overall: required
• Administrative Core: optional
• Research Core: at least 1 required
• Projects: at least 3 required

When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Overall .

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

Complete entire form.

Note: Human Embryonic Stem Cell lines from other components should be repeated in cell line table in Overall component.

Follow standard instructions.

Facilities and Other Resources: Describe the features of the institutional environment that would facilitate effective implementation of the program project. As appropriate, describe available resources, such as clinical and laboratory facilities, participating and affiliated units, patient populations, geographic distribution of space and personnel, and consultative resources. If the projects are not at the same location, describe the plans for communication and sharing of biologic material.

Enter primary site only.

A summary of Project/Performance Sites in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.

Include only the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) and any multi-PDs/PIs (if applicable to this FOA) for the entire application. Include evidence that the PD/PI(s) has (have) a track record(s) of consistently producing highly significant research publications in one or more areas proposed in the program project and a track record of demonstrating the ability to effectively and productively manage a large, interdisciplinary project in the proposed research area. Describe PD/PI commitment and ability to develop a well-defined central research focus and demonstrated ability in mounting similar programs.

A summary of Senior/Key Persons followed by their Biographical Sketches in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons will be generated upon submission.

The only budget information included in the Overall component is the Estimated Project Funding section of the SF424 (R&R) Cover.

A budget summary in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from detailed budget data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is required in the Overall component.

Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims of the overall program project. Outline how the individual cores and projects will contribute to these aims.

Research Strategy: The overall research strategy should include:

A. Program Background and Statement of Objectives: Present the background, rationale and hypotheses of the central scientific theme and the strategies to address specific questions and problems related to the central theme. Explain the strategy for achieving the objectives of the overall program.

B. Organization and Synergy of the Program Project: Describe the relationships among the projects and cores and their contribution to the overall program project theme and strategy and the cohesiveness and multidisciplinary scope of the program. Describe the unique advantages that would be gained by the proposed program project, potential impact on the field, the scientific synergy among the projects and cores, and the means by which the projects collectively will achieve the stated objectives of the proposed research. The overall scientific synergy (i.e., potential for scientific impact of the proposed program project as a whole to be greater than the sum of its component research projects and cores) should be addressed. Include in this description, the role of the research cores in promoting the collaboration among the projects and how proposed approaches in cores and projects are complementary. For new (Type 1) applications, this section should indicate any prior successful collaboration among investigators in the group and include peer-reviewed publications that resulted from the collaboration. For renewal (Type 2) applications, a description of the collaboration among the projects and cores during the previous funding period must be included. A justification for adding new projects or cores or for deleting components previously supported should also be included.

C. Relation of the Program Project to the Applicant Institution: Describe the relationships between the proposed program project and other existing research units at the applicant institution. List all NIDDK-supported Centers and Program Projects at the applicant institution and the relationship, if any, with the proposed Program Project. Indicate if any of the proposed cores will expand cores already existing at the institution.

Progress Report Publication List: For renewal (Type 2) applications, include a table of publications that directly resulted from the Program Project since it was last reviewed. The table should list the publications and note which Project(s) and Core(s) were directly involved in the research for each publication.

Protection of Human Subjects: Please specify which Projects and Cores will utilize human subjects.

Vertebrate Animals: Please specify which Projects and Cores will utilize vertebrate animals.

Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the program project as a whole e.g., letters of institutional support. Letters of support relevant to specific projects or cores should be attached in their respective Research Plan forms.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:

All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan for the entire Program Project. The individual projects and cores can refer to this Data Sharing Plan.

Other Resource Sharing Plans (Sharing Model Organisms and Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Plan) should be addressed in the Research Plan forms for the individual projects and cores, as needed.

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 preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Admin Core.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions. The Administrative Core should not involve Human Subjects Research.

Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question. The Administrative Core should not involve vertebrate animal Research.

Project Narrative: Do not complete. It is not required for the Administrative Core Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components..

List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of Other with Category of Core Lead and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Minimum expected levels of effort for management of the overall P01 application are three person months, either for a single PD/PI or an aggregate of three months with multiple PDs/PIs. This includes level of effort requested for all components of the P01 for which the PDs/PIs participate.

The Administrative Core may include limited funds for program enrichment activities such as seminars and research workshops, if they are directly related to the goals of the program project. The funds cannot be used for general departmental activities.

Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims of the Administrative Core.

Research Strategy: The research strategy should provide a strong justification for the inclusion of an administrative core and its benefit to the program project. If an administrative core is included, it could provide a support structure for activities such as: coordinate the research mission, monitor timeline for achieving research milestones, coordinate and integrate program project activities, implement a plan for regular evaluation of scientific progress.

Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the Administrative Core..

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:

The application can note that the Data Sharing Plan for the whole Program Project applies to the Administrative Core. Other resource sharing plans are not relevant to the Administrative Core.

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 preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Core .

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424 (R&R) Cover (Research Core)

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Research Core)

Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Research Core)

Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.

Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.

Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Research Core)

List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.

Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Research Core)

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section, use Project Role of Other with Category of Core Lead and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.

Budget (Research Core)

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.

PHS 398 Research Plan (Research Core)

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims of the Research Core

Research Strategy: Describe the core and the various services it would provide, as well as core management and any special arrangements such as cooperation with other cores. The research strategy should also include a clear delineation of procedures, techniques, and quality control, and how core usage would be prioritized. If applicable, describe in detail statistical analyses and data management. Describe the role of the leaders of the Research Cores in developing the research directions of the Program Project. The research strategy could also include plans for the development of new methods and innovative procedures essential to advancing the research goals of the Program Project.

Research Core resources should not simply duplicate resources already available at the institution. The Research Core could be available to investigators outside the Program Project, but procedures for prioritization and funding for the outside users should be described.

For renewal (Type 2) applications, discuss progress in the Research Core during the prior funding period and the rationale for any changes.

Progress Report Publication List: Do not complete

Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the Research Core.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modifications:

The application can note that the Data Sharing Plan for the whole Program Project applies to the Research Core.

Other Resource Sharing Plans (Sharing Model Organisms and Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Plan) should be addressed in this section, as needed.

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.

Planned Enrollment Report (Research Core)

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

PHS 398 Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report (Research Core)

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Project

When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Project .

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424 (R&R) Cover (Project)

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Project)

Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Project)

Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.

Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.

Project/Performance Site Location(s) (Project)

List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.

Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.

Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Project)

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section, use Project Role of Other with Category of Project Lead and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.

Budget (Project)

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Minimum expected level of effort is 1.2 person months for the project leader.

PHS 398 Research Plan (Project)

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims of the Project.

Research Strategy: Describe the research strategy of the Project in the same detail and format as required for an investigator-initiated R01 grant application. Even though all the Projects in the application need to be synergistic, this section should focus on the specific Project and not the potential synergy between this Project and the other Projects and Cores. The description of each Project should be explicit enough to enable peer reviewers to understand and evaluate the Project independently. For renewal (Type 2) applications, discuss progress in the Project during the prior funding period.

Progress Report Publication List: Do not complete

Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the Project.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modifications:

The application can note that the Data Sharing Plan for the whole Program Project applies to the Project.

Other Resource Sharing Plans (Sharing Model Organisms and Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Plan) should be addressed, as needed.

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.

Planned Enrollment Report (Project)

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

PHS 398 Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report (Project)

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov.

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. 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. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies) using ASSIST or other electronic submission systems. 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 and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.

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.

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 only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

For information on how your application will be automatically assembled for review and funding consideration after submission go to: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/files/Electronic_Multi-project_Application_Image_Assembly.pdf.

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. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Guidelines for Applicants Experiencing System Issues. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) and component Project Leads 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.

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 (SAM). 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 and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete or non-compliant will not be reviewed.

Applicants requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year (excluding consortium F&A) must submit a written request at least 6 weeks before submitting the application and follow the Policy on the Acceptance for Review of Unsolicited Applications that request $500,000 or More in Direct Costs as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Although a written, pre-approval request is due at least 6 weeks prior to the application due date, NIDDK strongly encourages investigators to submit the pre-approval request much earlier (e.g., 6 months prior to the application due date). Early discussions with program staff and submission of the pre-approval request can significantly aid the investigators in the subsequent development of the application. NIDDK reviews pre-approval requests on a rolling basis and typically will inform investigators within 4 weeks of submission of the pre-approval request whether they will be allowed to submit an application.

The following criteria will be used in the administrative staff review of these requests:

A. Relevance to the NIDDK: Importance of the unifying central theme to the NIDDK mission.

B. Programmatic priority: Will the proposed research significantly advance the mission of NIDDK?

C. Programmatic balance: How does the proposed research relate to currently funded research in the NIDDK and by the investigative team?

D. Activity Code: Is the proposed work appropriate for the P01 activity code? Are there at least three discrete projects and a core that serves at least two projects?

If the NIDDK agrees to accept an application, a cover letter must be included with the application that identifies the NIDDK program staff who agreed to accept assignment of the application to the NIDDK. The NIDDK will also notify the NIH Division of Receipt and Referral of their willingness to accept the application.

Applicants are required to follow our Post Submission Application Materials policy.

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.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the overall Program 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 overall Program 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 overall Program Project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

Does the overall Program Project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? If the aims of the overall Program 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?

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the overall Program Project? If Early Stage Investigators or those 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? Do(es) the overall Program Project PD/PI(s) have: (a) track record(s) of consistently producing highly significant research publications in one or more of the research areas proposed for the program project; (b) track record(s) demonstrating the ability to effectively and productively manage a large, interdisciplinary project in the proposed research area?

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 overall Program Project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? 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? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the overall Program 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?

Are the approaches proposed in the individual projects and cores complementary?

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 overall Program 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.

Synergy

Likelihood for the program project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved.

The relationship and contributions of each research component and core to the overall theme of the program project will be discussed and evaluated. In assigning the impact score for the application as a whole, the assessment of scientific synergy (i.e., the extent to which the potential for scientific impact of the proposed program project as a whole is deemed likely to be greater than the sum of its component research projects and cores) should contribute significantly to the overall score. This will include the following:

Scientific merit of the program as a whole, as well as that of individual projects, and its potential impact on the field;

Scientific gain of combining the component parts into a program project (beyond that achievable if each project were to be pursued separately);

Cohesiveness and multidisciplinary scope of the program and the coordination and interrelationship of all individual research projects and cores to the common theme;

Leadership and scientific ability of the PD(s)/PI(s) and his or her commitment and ability to develop a well-defined central research focus (request of support for sufficient effort to provide effective oversight and administration of the program should be considered); and past accomplishments of the program or a demonstrated ability in mounting similar programs.

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.

When the proposed Program 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 criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. 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 Program Project.

For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period. Applicants should include:

Progress and achievements specific to this program project during the past funding period and the evidence through publications, conferences, etc., that collaboration has occurred;

Evidence that the previous specific aims have been accomplished and that the new research goals are logical extensions of ongoing work;

Previous performance and estimated use of the core(s); and

Justification for adding new projects or cores or for deleting components previously supported.

For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the overall Program Project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.

As applicable for the overall Program 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.

Not Applicable

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).

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) Genomic Data Sharing Plan .

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

It is important that each project fits and contributes to the theme of the overall program project, but this factor should be judged separately and have no bearing on a project's individual impact score. Instead, these considerations are addressed with respect to the merit of the overall program project.

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 five scored review criteria, and additional review criteria. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. The impact score for an individual project should assess its merit as a stand-alone project, and not take into consideration its relationship with other research projects and cores.

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.

Significance

Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? 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?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those 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?

Innovation

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?

Approach

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? 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? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

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?

Environment

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 individual projects proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an 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 Individual Research 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.

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the overall utility and quality of the proposed administrative core. The review criteria for the individual cores are given below (individual criterion scores are not provided):

Utility of the core to the program project;

Quality of the facilities or services provided by this core (administrative planning and leadership capability to provide for internal quality control of ongoing research, allocation of funds, enhancement of internal communication and cooperation among the investigators involved in the program, and replacement of the principal investigator/program director if required on an interim or permanent basis);

Qualifications, experience, and commitment of the personnel involved in the core; and

Appropriateness of the core in relation to the scope of the proposed administrative support.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the utility and quality of proposed services the research cores will provide to the overall program project. The review criteria for the individual cores are given below (individual criterion scores are not provided):

Utility of the core to the program project; each core must provide essential facilities or service for two or more projects

Quality of the facilities or services provided by this core (including procedures, techniques, and quality control) and criteria for prioritization of usage;

Qualifications, experience, and commitment of the personnel involved in the core; and

Appropriateness of the core in relation to the scope of the proposed research support.

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources

If human subjects, vertebrate animals, or biohazards are to be used in the core, the adequacy of these sections must be assessed and will be considered in determining the descriptor of the individual core.

Additional Review Criteria - Research Cores

As applicable for the Research Core(s) proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an 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 Research Core 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.

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), convened by the 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:

• May undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
• Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

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. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.

Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. 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.

Any application awarded in response to this FOA 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.

Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.

For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/resources/laws/revisedlep.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html; and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/office/about/rgn-hqaddresses.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Not Applicable

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement..

A final progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

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)
Finding Help Online: https://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and application packages)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]

GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573

Chris Mullins, Ph.D.
Division of Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases (KUH)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-451-4902
Email: [email protected]

Bonnie Burgess-Beusse, Ph.D.
Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition (DDN)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-4726
Email: [email protected]

Mr. Louis Martey
Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolic Diseases (DEM)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-7733
Email: [email protected]

Michele Barnard, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-8898
Email: [email protected]

Ms. Sharon T. Bourque
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-8846
Email: [email protected]

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 Part 75.