National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
R21 Exploratory/Developmental Research Grant
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity
Through this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), the National Cancer Institute (NCI) intends to support preclinical and early phase clinical research, as well as correlative studies, directly related to advancements in cancer treatment, diagnosis, prevention, comparative oncology, symptom management, or reduction of cancer disparities. This includes (but is not limited to) development and testing of the following: new molecular agents or biologics for cancer treatment; management strategies for cancer-related symptoms or treatment-related toxicity; cancer screening or diagnostic tools, such as imaging techniques; cancer preventive agents or approaches; predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patient selection or stratification; clinically relevant in vivo or in vitro tumor models (including genetically engineered mouse models, patient-derived xenograft models, organoids, and cell lines); and strategies to address therapeutic outcome disparities among underserved populations. In addition to novel agents, new treatment strategies may involve repurposed agents or novel combinations of interventions (including radiation), based on established mechanisms of action. Comparative correlative studies in cancer patients with age, gender, racial/ethnic, or health disparities are encouraged to explore mechanisms underlying their differential responses (efficacy and toxicity) and resistance to therapeutic interventions. Comparative oncology studies in dogs investigating strategies for treatment and diagnosis of human disease are supported as well.
This NOFO does not support research that focuses on basic cancer biology (such as studies of cancer-related pathways, molecular mechanisms, or mechanisms of metastasis), late-stage clinical trials, risk assessment studies, epidemiological studies, or studies of behavioral interventions. These applications will be deemed not responsive to this NOFO and will not be reviewed (see below for a more detailed description of studies that are not responsive for this NOFO).
The R21 mechanism is intended to encourage exploratory and developmental research projects by providing support for the early and conceptual stages of these projects. These studies may involve considerable risk but may lead to breakthroughs in particular areas, or to the development of novel techniques, agents, methodologies, models, or applications that could have a major impact on cancer research (preclinical or clinical).
Not Applicable
Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
February 13, 2025 | February 13, 2025 | March 01, 2025 | July 2025 | October 2025 | December 2025 |
June 12, 2025 | June 12, 2025 | July 01, 2025 | November 2025 | January 2026 | April 2026 |
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
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.
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) 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 available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
The purpose of this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is to promote innovative preclinical, early phase clinical, and correlative studies that are hypothesis-driven and based upon established basic cancer research discoveries. By using the R21 mechanism, this NOFO will support exploratory/developmental projects in the advancement of novel anti-cancer agents, diagnostic tools, correlative biomarker identification, clinical approaches in treatment, symptom management, and prevention of common or rare tumors, as well as research on cancer disparities. These studies may involve considerable risk, but they would have the potential to lead to breakthroughs in particular areas, and/or to the development of novel techniques, agents, methodologies, models, or applications that could have a major impact on cancer research (preclinical or clinical).
This NOFO accepts only applications proposing research directly related to the development of novel approaches for cancer treatment, diagnosis, prevention, symptom management, or reduction of cancer disparities. Studies that focus on basic cancer biology, such as studies of cancer-related pathways or molecular mechanisms, are not responsive to this NOFO (see below for a more detailed description of studies that are not responsive to this NOFO).
Applicants are strongly advised to contact an appropriate NCI Scientific/Research Contact (see Section VII. Agency Contacts) prior to submission of their applications with questions regarding the responsiveness of their applications.
Applications for R21 awards should describe projects distinct from those supported through the traditional R01 mechanism. For example, such projects could assess, through preclinical or early phase clinical studies, the feasibility of a novel area of investigation or a new experimental system that has the potential to enhance patient-oriented research. Another example could include the unique and innovative use of an existing methodology to explore a new scientific area. Conversely, long-term projects, or projects designed to increase knowledge incrementally in a well-established area, will not be considered for R21 awards.
Applications submitted under this mechanism should break new ground or extend previous discoveries toward new directions or applications in the areas discussed below. Projects of limited cost or scope that use widely accepted approaches and methods within well-established fields are better suited for the R03 small grant mechanism, which is presently supported by the NCI Omnibus R03 FOA, PAR-20-052.
All areas of cancer research relevant to the mission of the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (DCTD), the Division of Cancer Prevention (DCP), and the Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (CRCHD), such as preclinical and clinical studies that focus on the development and testing of anti-cancer, symptom management, and cancer prevention interventions (drugs, biologics, natural products, dietary compounds or constituents, or complementary/alternative medicine), including combinations of agents; diagnostic and treatment methodologies; validation of predictive biomarkers for clinical use; and clinical and translational studies that seek to reduce the unequal burden of cancer in our society via research from underserved populations are appropriate for projects submitted to this NOFO. Testing (in prevention, symptom management, and/or treatment studies) of new models that closely parallel the development and progression of human cancers or the development of disease and treatment-related morbidities are also appropriate for this NOFO. In addition, comparative oncology studies of prevention, symptom management, and/or treatment of pet dogs with spontaneous cancers that serve as excellent models for human malignancies are acceptable for this NOFO.
Examples of the types of studies appropriate for this NOFO include, but are not limited to:
Clinical Studies:
Correlative Studies/Biomarker Development:
Target and Agent Development:
Model Development and Analysis:
The following types of studies are not responsive to this NOFO. Applications proposing such studies will be considered non-responsive and will not be reviewed.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The maximum project period is 2 years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
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
For-Profit Organizations
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) 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
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply- 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. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information.
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 their organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. See, Reminder: Notice of NIH's Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities, NOT-OD-22-019 and Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity, NOT-OD-20-031.
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 How to Apply-Application Guide.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
Number of Applications
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, per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity 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.
All page limitations described in the How to Apply- Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply- Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply-Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply- Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply-Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply- Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply- Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
In addition, please include the following:
If the study is an ancillary project to a Parent Clinical Trial, the study record should relate to the ancillary project and not the Parent Clinical Trial.
Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics
2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan
2.7 Study Timeline
The study timeline should describe key milestones throughout the project and trial that need to be met to achieve the goals of the study. A milestone is defined as a scheduled event in the project timeline that signifies the completion of a project stage or activity. Applicants are required to provide detailed project performance and timeline objectives as outlined below. Investigators must indicate where within the Plan the clinical trial or trials are scheduled and when the required documents will be available if not included at the time of submission. Program staff will review the milestones and timelines which can be negotiated, as needed, at the time of the award.
This section should include an estimated timeline for the following general milestones, as applicable:
In addition to meeting the above recruitment and other targets, applicants should give contingency plans if they do not meet the milestones and address other implementation activities necessary such as start-up tasks to achieve trial completion. Future year support is contingent on satisfactory achievement of performance milestones. If milestones are not achieved fully, NCI may request development of a remedial plan and more frequent monitoring of progress, and/or take other remedial actions.
Section 3 - Protection and Monitoring Plans
3.3 Data and Safety Monitoring Plan
In addition to the description of safety monitoring, address plans to monitor trial performance, including plans to assure fidelity to the protocol and integrity of the data. Information about Data and Safety Monitoring Plans are available at https://humansubjects.nih.gov/data_safety.
3.5 Overall Structure of the Study Team
In addition to the standard requirements for this item, provide a description of methods to identify additional collaborators, including enrollment/participation sites, if applicable. Investigators who are new to the conduct of clinical trials should identify an appropriate mentor and establish the right composition for the clinical trial team (e.g., trial manager, statistician, data manager, study coordinator(s), research assistants, institutional review board [IRB] and ethics coordinator, etc.). In this situation, only the names and titles of key team members should be listed in a table.
Section 4 - Protocol Synopsis
4.1.a Detailed Description
It should summarize the necessary elements of the trial and supplement the Research Strategy, which includes an overview of the state-of-science and relevance of the trial and is meant to justify the need, its potential impact, and provide supporting preclinical and/or clinical evidence to justify the proposed trial, its design, and likelihood of successful completion. Applications submitted without the Clinical Protocol Synopsis are considered incomplete and will not be reviewed.
4.1.c Interventions
Please include the dose and intensity of the intervention in the description, if applicable.
4.3 Statistical Design and Power
The sample size and statistical power calculations should contain enough detail, including sufficient information on the assumptions made, so that a reviewer can readily duplicate the projected sample size for primary and secondary endpoints. The power analysis should include a discussion of non-compliance, potential cross-over (if applicable), account for rates of follow-up (i.e., drop out/lost to follow up) during key outcome collection contacts. A discussion of how missing data will be handled should be included. Planned interim analyses for safety, efficacy, and/or futility should be described, if applicable. For single-case design and other small-N study designs where traditional power analyses may not be applicable, provide a detailed description of the approach to sample size and analysis being used.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
Foreign (non-U.S.) organizations must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign organizations described throughout the How to Apply- Application Guide.
See Part 2. 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. 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). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIHs 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 Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.
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 How to Apply-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 Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply 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 How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile form. 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 NOFO for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organizations profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the How to Apply 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 and responsiveness by NCI, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.
Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at [email protected].
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission 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 project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following scored review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed). An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact.
Reviewers will evaluate Factors 1, 2 and 3 in the determination of scientific merit, and in providing an overall impact score. In addition, Factors 1 and 2 will each receive a separate criterion score.
Significance
Innovation
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Approach
Rigor:
Feasibility:
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
Investigator(s)
Evaluate whether the investigator(s) have demonstrated background, training, and expertise, as appropriate for their career stage, to conduct the proposed work. For Multiple Principal Investigator (MPI) applications, assess the quality of the leadership plan to facilitate coordination and collaboration.
Environment
Evaluate whether the institutional resources are appropriate to ensure the successful execution of the proposed work.
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, but will not give criterion scores for these items, and should consider them in providing an overall impact score.
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, 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 categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, 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 research includes Vertebrate Animals, evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals 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. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
When the proposed research includes Biohazards, evaluate whether specific materials or procedures that will be used are significantly hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and whether adequate protection is proposed.
As applicable, evaluate the full application as now presented.
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, evaluate the progress made in the last funding period.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Specific to applications involving clinical trials:
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate? Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
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 individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) 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
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.
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, evaluate the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Evaluate 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 the NCI, 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 will receive a written critique.
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.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate national Advisory Council or Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
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 Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
Prior to making an award, NIH reviews an applicants federal award history in SAM.gov to ensure sound business practices. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the Responsibility/Qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant in the Responsibility/Qualification records in SAM.gov to ascertain the applicants integrity, business ethics, and performance record of managing Federal awards per 2 CFR Part 200.206 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
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 Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.
A Notice of Award (NoA) is the official authorizing document notifying the applicant that an award has been made and that funds may be requested from the designated HHS payment system or office. The NoA is signed by the Grants Management Officer and emailed to the recipients business official.
In accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk. For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
The following Federal wide and HHS-specific policy requirements apply to awards funded through NIH:
All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. NIH may terminate awards under certain circumstances. See 2 CFR Part 200.340 Termination and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.5.2 Remedies for Noncompliance or Enforcement Actions: Suspension, Termination, and Withholding of Support.
Not Applicable
Consistent with the 2023 NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.4.1 Reporting. To learn more about post-award monitoring and reporting, see the NIH Grants & Funding website, see Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting.
A final RPPR, 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 Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.
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, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
Applications Related to Cancer Treatment/Diagnosis (Preclinical Studies):
Morgan O'Hayre, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-7482
Email: [email protected]
Applications Related to Cancer Treatment/Diagnosis (Clinical Studies):
Anita Undale, MD, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-5251
Email: [email protected]
Applications Related to Cancer Prevention/Symptom Management:
Marjorie Perloff, MD
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-7097
Email: [email protected]
Applications Related to Cancer Health Disparities:
Tiffany Wallace, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-5114
Email: [email protected]
Referral Officer
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-6390
Email: [email protected]
Crystal Wolfrey
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-6277
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 2 CFR Part 200.