National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Funding Opportunity Title
Scalable Assays for Unbiased In Vitro Analysis of Neurobiological Function (R21/R33)
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)
93.242, 93.273, 93.279, 93.853
This funding opportunity announcement (FOA) encourages research grant applications from institutions/organizations to develop novel, robust analytical platforms using in vitro assays to reveal changes in neuronal and/or glial function. The goal is to adapt state-of-the-art measures of basic cellular processes or molecular events that are key mediators of nervous system function with the intent to probe mechanisms and/or perturbations in an unbiased and efficient manner. The novel assay platforms would provide opportunities to measure neurobiological endpoints and build a pipeline to be used in the context of target identification and drug discovery.
August 24, 2011
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
September 16, 2011
Letter of Intent Due Date
Application Due Date(s)
Standard dates apply, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
AIDS Application Due Date(s)
Scientific Merit Review
Standard dates apply
Advisory Council Review
Standard dates apply
Earliest Start Date(s)
Standard dates apply
September 8, 2014
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
The broad goal of this funding opportunity is to develop innovative cellular and molecular measures of neurobiological processes for eventual use in screens to identify novel components of signaling pathways and/or potential therapeutic targets for nervous system disorders. This initiative will support the use of in vitro neurobiological assays in the development of robust, scalable analytical platforms that will be used to assess changes in neuronal function. In recent years, the development of technologies has allowed detailed analysis of genetic, biochemical, and cellular processes, greatly advancing our understanding of nervous system function at the molecular/cellular level. In addition, methods that enhance throughput in terms of the number of samples analyzed in parallel, as well as advances in detection techniques, imaging, and automation, allow for broader, high-content assay measures. In fields outside of neuroscience, this has led to breakthroughs using genetic, proteomic, or chemical manipulation in cells or cell-free preparations, but progress with neurobiological endpoints has been lagging.
This initiative seeks to fill the existing gap in early assay development with quantifiable measures relevant to neurobiological processes and pathways through support for all potential phases of development. This includes (but is not limited to) optimization, automation, standardization, and/or validation of measures of fundamental cellular/molecular events relevant to nervous system function, with sufficient throughput to allow efficient screening of small molecules, peptides or genetic perturbations. The goal is to adapt state-of-the-art measures of basic cellular processes or molecular events that are key mediators of nervous system function with the intent to probe mechanisms and/or perturbations in an unbiased and efficient manner. The use of state-of-the art technologies for manipulation, detection, and analysis is encouraged.
Proposed assays should be scalable; they should have the potential for significant enhancement in throughput (number of simultaneous measurements) and/or content (types of measurements), though the initial throughput of novel assays may be lower while analytical platforms are under development. Proposed projects may utilize any appropriate in vitro preparation including organotypic brain slices, cultured cells, or suitable cell-free preparations that adequately recapitulate important aspects of neuronal or glial function. Projects may incorporate phenotypes including, but not limited to, dendritic or axonal outgrowth; neuronal activity and plasticity; synaptic maturation or synaptic function; receptor function and trafficking; biological function of neuronal signaling molecules; protein synthesis, sorting, interactions, and turnover; cell fate specification; or chromatin remodeling. Proposed projects may carry some risk, but should have the potential for generating high impact datasets.
Specific Areas of Research Interest
Examples of suitable research topics, measures, and types of platforms to be developed include, but are not limited to:
Proposed research projects should have relevance to the basic and translational research priorities of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), or the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS).
NIMH supports neuroscience research to discover the causes of, and new and better treatments for, mental disorders. Further information on NIMH research priorities can be found in the NIMH Strategic Plan, Strategic Research Priorities, and Interventions Workgroup Report.
NIAAA and NIDA are interested in applying the approaches above for assay development to studies relevant to alcohol and drugs of abuse, respectively. For example, NIAAA and NIDA are interested in applications for assay development that seek to understand how alcohol (NIAAA) or drugs of abuse (NIDA) alter various cellular and molecular processes. In addition, NIAAA and NIDA are interested in assay development that seeks to understand how genetic variation in alcoholism (NIAAA) or drug abuse (NIDA) candidate genes affects brain function at the cellular and molecular level.
NINDS supports research on the normal and diseased nervous system, including basic cellular/molecular biology and genetics, cognitive/behavioral and systems neuroscience, neuroplasticity, neurodevelopment, neurodegeneration, and studies aimed at detection, prevention, and treatment of neurological diseases. For more information on NINDS research funding listed by Program Area (including staff contact listings), see http://www.ninds.nih.gov/funding/areas/index.htm.
Partnerships between investigators with expertise in cellular and molecular neurobiology and in micro/nano-scale engineering and/or high throughput/high content screening approaches are encouraged.
This FOA uses the R21/R33 Phased Innovation Award mechanism. The R21 phase will support the initial development of assays related to neurobiological function. The R33 phase will support assay optimization, scale-up, and execution of a pilot screen using chemical, genetic, siRNA, or peptide libraries. Transition from the R21 to the R33 phase is contingent upon the successful completion of proposed milestones. These milestones are to be included in the Research Strategy section of the application and will be evaluated as part of the scientific and technical merit of the R21/R33 application.
As part of the 12 page Research Strategy, applications are required to include a project timeline with specific yearly milestones that can be used to facilitate the evaluation of progress, including the transition from the R21 phase to the R33 phase. See Section IV, Application and Submission Information and Section V, Review and Selection Process for additional information regarding the proposed timeline and milestones.
For additional information and resources for the development of robust assays as well as the standardization of methodology and data analysis, please visit http://www.ncgc.nih.gov/guidance/manual_toc.html.
Applications proposing to use established screening methodologies may not be appropriate for this FOA unless proposing/testing high impact improvements or adaptations. Moreover, the participating institutes may assign lower priority to projects proposing to measure neurobiological endpoints for which screens are already in use unless applicants provide a compelling case that there are significant advantages to the new approach. Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact Program Staff to discuss potential research projects prior to submitting an application.
Application Types Allowed
The OER Glossary and the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations, and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The R21 phase may not exceed $275,000 in direct costs, with no more than $200,000 in direct costs in any single year. Direct costs for the R33 phase must be less than $500,000 per year. While treated as direct costs, consortium F&A does not apply toward any direct cost cap.
Award Project Period
The total project period for a combined R21/R33 application submitted in response to this FOA may not exceed four years, with no more than two years for the R21 phase and no more than two years for the R33 phase.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
All Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD/PIs) must
also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA Commons
or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA Commons
account of the applicant organization.
All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at least four (4) weeks prior to the application due date.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director/Principal
Investigator (PD/PI) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an
application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic
groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply
for NIH support.
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 SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial peer review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. Resubmission applications may be submitted, according to the NIH Policy on Resubmission Applications from the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the “Apply for Grant Electronically” button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate “optional” components.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
Budget Justification: Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. For each budget year, indicate whether the requested budget is for the R21 phase or the R33 phase.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Instructions for Preparing a Combined R21/R33 Phased Innovation Award Application
For the R21/R33 Phased Innovation Award application, the initial review group will evaluate the specific goals for each phase and the feasibility milestones that would justify expansion to the R33 phase. A single overall impact/priority score will be assigned to each discussed application.
The milestones proposed in the application should be well described, quantifiable, and scientifically justified to allow program staff to assess progress in the R21 phase. The milestones will be considered in evaluating the approach proposed by the investigator. A discussion of the milestones relative to the progress of the R21 phase and the implications of successful completion of the milestones for the R33 phase should be included. Applications lacking this information, as determined by NIH staff, will be returned to the applicant without review. The clarity and completeness of the R21/R33 application with regard to specific goals and feasibility milestones are critical.
Prior to funding an application, the Program Officer will contact the applicant to discuss the proposed milestones and any changes suggested by the review panel as indicated in the Summary Statement. The Program Officer and the applicant will negotiate and agree on a final set of milestones. These will be the basis for judging the success of the R21 work. For funded applications, the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) will submit a progress report to the Program Officer upon completion of the R21 milestones. Receipt of this progress report will trigger an administrative program review that will determine whether or not the R33 should be awarded. The release of R33 funds will be based on successful completion of negotiated scientific milestones, on program priorities, and on the availability of funds.
The R21 and R33 cannot be funded in the same fiscal year.
Within the Specific Aims section, include headers titled R21 Phase Specific Aims and R33 Phase Specific Aims. Under each header, state the specific objectives of the research and development effort, including the technical questions you will try to answer to determine the feasibility of the proposed approach. Since the goal of the R21 phase of this FOA is the development of novel in vitro neurobiological assays, hypothesis testing, per se, may not be the driving force in developing such a proposal, and therefore, may not be applicable in the R21 phase.
Innovation: Follow the instructions in the SF424 Application Guide. Include headers titled R21 Phase Innovation and R33 Phase Innovation, and address the Innovation for the R21 and R33 phases in the appropriate sub-section.
Approach: Follow the instructions in the SF424 Application Guide. Include headers titled R21 Phase Approach and R33 Phase Approach, and address the Approach for the R21 and R33 phases in the appropriate sub-section.
Milestones and Timeline (limit, one half page): As part of the 12 page Research Strategy, provide a timeline with specific milestones for accomplishing the proposed research, including specific milestones for progression from the R21 phase to the R33 phase. Indicate when it is anticipated that essential components of the project (e.g., optimization of protocols, generation of reagents, critical experiments to verify the hypothesis, validation of novel tools or techniques) will be completed. The proposed timeline should be clearly delineated and should appear as the last element of the Research Strategy section.
Resource Sharing Plan
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies; GWAS) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Specific information in the Data and Resource Sharing section of the application should include details related to sharing reagents, tools, protocols, and data. For the latter category, applicants are expected to describe how, when, and where data can be accessed.
Do not use the appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Foreign (non-US) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit in advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications via Grants.gov, the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application 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 SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically.
All PD/PIs must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF 424(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 Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete will not be reviewed.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115,.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following:
The R21/R33 grant supports exploratory/developmental investigation of novel scientific ideas or new model systems, tools, or technologies that have the potential for significant impact on biomedical or biobehavioral research. An R21/R33 grant application need not have extensive background material or preliminary information. Accordingly, reviewers will focus their evaluation on the conceptual framework, the level of innovation, and the potential to significantly advance our knowledge or understanding. Appropriate justification for the proposed work can be provided through literature citations, data from other sources, or, when available, from investigator-generated data. Preliminary data are not required for R21/33 applications; however, they may be included if available.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field? Do the proposed measures assess key neurobiological mechanisms? What is the likelihood that the assay will have a significant impact on understanding fundamental mechanisms, disease processes, and/or identifying novel therapeutic targets?
Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the
strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Is there a sufficiently developed plan for the assessment of assay stability, reliability, and validity within the proposed grant period? Is the proposed assay scalable in terms of throughput (number of simultaneous measurements) and/or content (types of measurements)?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact/priority score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Milestones and Timeline
Are the proposed milestones and timeline feasible and appropriate for judging the success of the R21 work? Are the proposed milestones appropriate for determining whether the R33 phase should be awarded? Do the milestones and timeline establish feasibility for all aspects of the proposed R33 work?
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 Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the 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 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/priority score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical
merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the Center for Scientific Review, in accordance with NIH peer
review policy and procedures, using the stated review
criteria. Review assignments will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. 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:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH
will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as
described in the NIH Grants
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 the DUNS, CCR Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) 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.
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
eRA Commons Help Desk(Questions regarding eRA Commons
registration, tracking application status, post submission issues)
Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Deborah Lewis, Ph.D.
Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated Review Group
Center for Scientific Review
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4183, MSC 7850
Bethesda, MD 20892-7850
Telephone: (301) 408-9129
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®