RFA-AA-02-001: ALCOHOL-RELATED PROBLEMS AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS: EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PREVENTION

Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)

NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health^®

Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.

ALCOHOL-RELATED PROBLEMS AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS: EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PREVENTION Release Date: October 1, 2001 RFA: RFA-AA-02-001 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Letter of Intent Receipt Date: January 18, 2002 Application Receipt Date: February 19, 2002 THIS RFA USES "MODULAR GRANT" AND "JUST-IN-TIME" CONCEPTS. MODULAR INSTRUCTIONS MUST BE USED FOR RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATIONS UP TO $250,000 PER YEAR. MODULAR BUDGET INSTRUCTIONS ARE PROVIDED IN SECTION C OF THE PHS 398 (REVISION 5/2001) AVAILABLE AT http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html. PURPOSE The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) is seeking research grant applications on alcohol use by college students. Investigations are needed which focus on the epidemiology and natural history of college student drinking and related problems and on designing and/or testing interventions to prevent or reduce alcohol-related problems among college students. HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010 The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This Request for Applications (RFA), Alcohol-Related Problems Among College Students: Epidemiology and Prevention, is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople/. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS Applications may be submitted by domestic and foreign, for-profit and non- profit organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, laboratories, units of State and local governments, and eligible agencies of the Federal government. Faith-based organizations are eligible to apply for these grants. Racial/ethnic minority individuals, women, and persons with disabilities are encouraged to apply as Principal Investigators. MECHANISM OF SUPPORT This RFA will use the National Institutes of Health (NIH) research project grant (R01) and the NIAAA exploratory/developmental (R21) award mechanism. Responsibility for the planning, direction, and execution of the proposed project will be solely that of the applicant. The total project period for a research project grant (R01) application submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed 5 years. Exploratory/developmental grants (R21) are limited to 3 years for up to $100,000/year for direct costs. (See Program Announcement PA- 99-131, NIAAA Exploratory/Developmental Grant Program, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-99-131.html, for a complete description of the R21 mechanism.) This RFA is a one-time solicitation. Future unsolicited competing continuation applications will compete with all investigator-initiated applications and be reviewed according to the customary peer review procedures. The anticipated award date is July 1, 2002. Specific application instructions have been modified to reflect "MODULAR GRANT" and "JUST-IN-TIME" streamlining efforts that have been adopted by the NIH. Complete and detailed instructions and information on Modular Grant applications have been incorporated into the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001). Additional information on Modular Grants can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm FUNDS AVAILABLE The NIAAA intends to commit approximately $4,000,000 in FY 2002 to fund approximately ten new and/or competitive continuation grants in response to this RFA. Because the nature and scope of the research proposed may vary, it is anticipated that the size of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of NIAAA provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this RFA are contingent upon the availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. At this time, it is not known if this RFA will be reissued. Introduction Alcohol use on college campuses is not a new problem; it has been documented in the United States for at least 50 years. Available research indicates that approximately 80 percent of college students drink and that half of college student drinkers engage in heavy episodic drinking. Excessive drinking among college students is associated with a variety of negative consequences including fatal and nonfatal injuries; alcohol poisoning; blackouts; academic failure; violence, including rape and assault; unintended pregnancy; sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS; property damage; and vocational and criminal consequences that could jeopardize future job prospects. In recognition of the need to address the serious consequences of alcohol abuse among college students, the National Advisory Council to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) established the Subcommittee on College Drinking in 1998. The subcommittee, which is composed of college presidents and administrators as well as selected experts in alcohol research, is divided into two panels. The two panels were concerned respectively with the Contexts and Consequences of college student drinking (Panel 1) and potential interventions for Prevention and Treatment (Panel 2). Participants reviewed the relevant scientific literature and discussed how to frame the next generation of research on alcohol consumption and consequent problems among college students. In response to the seriousness of this public health problem, NIAAA is issuing this new Request for Applications which focuses on: 1) studying the epidemiology and natural history of college student drinking and related problems and 2) designing and/or testing interventions to prevent or reduce alcohol-related problems among college students. Epidemiology and Natural History of Alcohol-related Problems Among College Students Background To effectively tackle the difficult public health problem of excessive and underage drinking by students on US college campuses, a more extensive and finely tuned understanding of the problem than we currently possess is needed. Prior studies have provided important information about the problem of alcohol consumption by college students; however, much remains to be learned. Epidemiologic studies are needed to increase our understanding of the incidence, prevalence and etiology of alcohol related problems and disorders in the collegiate population and the risk and protective factors associated with them. Studies are also needed to augment our understanding of the factors (e.g. demographic, social, economic and personal) associated with different patterns of consumption by college students and to ascertain more accurately the range and extent of alcohol-related consequences both for students and for the institutions they attend. Research Objectives In recognition of this important need, NIAAA is soliciting applications for research projects which will enhance our understanding of alcohol consumption by college students. Research objectives which fall under the epidemiology and natural history portion of this announcement involve: (1) studying the incidence, prevalence and etiology of alcohol-related problems including alcohol use disorders among the collegiate population and among subgroups of that population, and (2) advancing our understanding of the natural history, causes, course, and short- and long-term outcomes of alcohol consumption by college students. More specifically these objectives include but are not limited to: (a) studying patterns of alcohol consumption and the distribution of alcohol- related problems in the collegiate population as a whole and in specific sub- populations of students, for example ethnic minorities and women; (b) studying risk and protective factors (including ethnic, cultural, family, genetic and environmental influences) for alcohol-related problems in the college population as a whole and in specific subpopulations of students; (c) elucidating differences between racial/ethnic groups in college with respect to alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems; (d) studying special populations particular to campus life such as members of Greek sororities and fraternities, members of other social or religious groups, and student athletes, (e) examining the influence of school characteristics (e.g. size, location, religious affiliation if any) in attracting students with varying drinking proclivities and habits and in affecting the drinking behavior of students on campus, (f) investigating the course of alcohol use and misuse by college students and its impact on academic progress and attainment, on physical and psychological health, on social and emotional development and on the establishment of personal and financial independence, (g) enumerating and elucidating the consequences of alcohol consumption by college students including second hand consequences (second hand consequences are those experienced not by the drinker but by those around him or her; they range from disrupted sleep and study to physical and sexual assault), (h) understanding the impact of alcohol consumption on high risk sexual behavior, sexual assault and other types of aggression among college students, and (i) comparing patterns of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems among college students and their same aged non-collegiate peers. Studying students longitudinally to elucidate the direction of influence of the many factors associated with student drinking and the development and course of alcohol-related problems, including alcohol use disorders, is desirable. Longitudinal studies are well suited to address the following kinds of questions, which are meant to be illustrative, not exhaustive: - Individual level questions about alcohol use and its consequences (e.g. the development of alcohol problems over time and the impact of alcohol use on educational attainment) - The extent to which students come to college with drinking habits/problems in place and the extent to which the problem is due to or exacerbated by the college environment - The extent to which students self-select into colleges based on the schools drinking reputations and into Greek life based on its reputation regarding drinking - Comparisons of college and same age-peers not in college Methodological Considerations Research methodology is important to consider as we seek to improve our epidemiologic information. We need reliable estimates of the magnitude and extent of the drinking problem on US campuses. Available information points to a serious problem, but the quality of this information varies. To date, a number of research methodologies have been employed with varying success. Some prior studies have used random samples; others have relied on convenience samples. Some large prior studies have been nationally representative; others have not. Prior large-scale surveys, often mail surveys, have typically achieved response rates of 60 to 70 percent; it would be desirable to improve on this. Numerous smaller studies on one or a few campuses have augmented our knowledge, but have been of uneven quality. In general, study designs should include representative, randomly selected samples of adequate size to address the proposed hypotheses. To move the field forward, NIAAA encourages comparability of measures across studies. To date the specific drinking variables collected have often varied across projects. In addition, nearly all studies of drinking by college students have relied on self-report, which may introduce bias into the results. In any proposed study, the drinking variables to be collected are of paramount importance and should reflect the state of the art in measuring alcohol consumption. Overall, applications should reflect a careful evaluation of pertinent methodological considerations in order that the information produced is accurate and reliable and advances the state of our knowledge. Preventing Alcohol-related Problems Among College Students Background Over the past 10 to 15 years, colleges and universities have addressed the problem of underage and binge drinking in a variety of ways. Preventive interventions have been implemented in response to: policy directives from the U.S. Department of Education, administrator and faculty concerns about alcohol problems on their campuses, and community reactions to nationally publicized alcohol-related deaths among college students. However, rigorous studies of the effectiveness of these naturally occurring policies and initiatives have been rare, as have studies of investigator-initiated interventions that focus on changing campus environments as a means of preventing alcohol problems. With rare exceptions, scientifically-grounded research on strategies to prevent college-based alcohol abuse has focused on so-called individual interventions, such as motivational counseling for high-risk students and groups, or approaches that challenge positive expectancies (beliefs) about the benefits of alcohol use. These types of interventions seek to change individuals knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and skills regarding alcohol use, without attempting to change factors in the environment which facilitate and promote alcohol misuse. In November 1998, NIAAA (in collaboration with the Department of Education and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) issued a Request for Applications that encouraged research that would ultimately lead to the reduction of alcohol-related problems among college students. The RFA emphasized the need for research on environmental interventions, but studies of strategies focused on individuals were not excluded. As a result of the RFA, the number of college-based prevention studies increased appreciably. While several are assessing social marketing strategies, only one of the new studies specifically focuses on environmental change. Environmental interventions seek to prevent or reduce alcohol abuse and problems by changing external contingencies that promote drinking or by changing the cost-risk- benefit matrix within which drinking decisions are made. Thus, enforcement of laws that punish drunk-driving offenders can increase the perceived risk of drinking and driving, and risk perception has proved to be a key mediating variable in reducing such problematic behavior. Because there is still a dearth of research on the efficacy and effectiveness of alcohol-focused environmental interventions for college populations, this RFA restricts prevention research to applications that develop and/or test environmental interventions as described below. Interventions To Be Tested Survey data indicate that environmental factors play a major role in promoting and supporting excessive drinking among college students. Campuses differ significantly in the amount of binge drinking that takes place, suggesting that more than selective factors are at work. For example, lower levels of binge drinking are found among students who attend commuter colleges where most students live off-campus (Chaloupka and Wechsler, 1996). Students who live at home drink less than those who live in apartments or dormitories; and students who live alone drink less than those with roommates (Gfroerer et al., 1997). This type of information can help inform the choice of target groups for interventions and aspects of their design. Environmental interventions (particularly laws and policies that target youth) have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing drinking and related problems in the underage population at large. Therefore, it has been argued that these types of interventions (constraining the availability of alcohol, enhancing enforcement of existing policies) have the potential to reduce alcohol problems among college students (Hingson et al., 1997). One study of the effects of State drunk-driving laws that target youth and young adults indicated that the restrictiveness of these laws was inversely related to measures of college-student drinking, especially for males (Chaloupka and Wechsler, 1996). That study also concluded that the number of alcohol outlets within one mile of campus and the presence of a bar on campus correlated positively with levels of drinking and "binge"drinking on campus. Generally speaking, however, the effects of existing environmental interventions and relevant environmental factors, such as campus bars, have not been tested in college communities. Furthermore, environmental interventions specific to the unique characteristics of college campuses, such as campus alcohol policies, have not been systematically evaluated. The intent of this RFA is to encourage research in this relatively neglected area, through tests of investigator-initiated interventions or through evaluations of naturally occurring interventions. For the purpose of this RFA, the concept of environment encompasses, but is not limited to: - Availability of alcohol to students and alcohol promotions on and off campus; - Campus policies, such as rules and administrative proclamations regarding alcohol use on campus, in dormitories, and at campus events; - Disciplinary procedures, such as parental notification, mandatory counseling, and other sanctions for rule violations; - Community characteristics and policies, including the proximity and density of bars, enforcement of the minimum legal drinking age and drunk driving laws, and tolerance for vandalism and public drunkenness; - Housing patterns and characteristics, including the provision of substance free housing, supervision of residents, and enforcement of housing rules; - The academic environment, including class and examination schedules and academic standards; - Campus-wide alcohol norms and cultural factors that can contribute to expectations for heavy drinking and perceived permissiveness ,or alternatively serve as protective factors that restrain drinking; - Policies and practices of campus health-care systems and providers with regard to alcohol abuse; - Policies directed toward high risk groups, such as athletes or students in the Greek system; - Emergency action plans by campus administrators in response to adverse alcohol-related injuries and deaths; - Physical features of the campus and community, such as campus isolation. The interventions being tested may involve changes in campus or community policies and practices to directly address factors contributing to abusive drinking, or they may involve changes in campus systems or structures to promote non-drinking norms. Multi-component interventions may be tested that combine environmental strategies or link them with interventions that focus on individuals. For example, the institution of new policies or changes in policy enforcement might be combined with interventions that target high-risk students. The selection of interventions for study should be justified in terms of their potential impact on specific alcohol problems, adverse drinking practices, high-risk populations, and/or permissive social norms. In addition, the feasibility of implementing the intervention should be discussed, as well as its generalizability, even where the choice of interventions is beyond the investigator’s control (i.e., natural experiments). A host of questions of concern to college administrators merit research under this RFA. Illustratively: To what extent should campuses be alcohol free? If alcohol is served on campus, what control measures are most effective in preventing drinking by minors and alcohol misuse among students of any age? Does reducing alcohol availability on and near campuses increase drinking and driving? What disciplinary procedures are most effective? Is parental notification of policy violations an effective deterrent? How might such a procedure be implemented? Does reducing alcohol availability in the community reduce drinking by underage students? Do promotions by the alcohol industry contribute to campus alcohol problems? What preventive role could the media play? Methodological Considerations Tests of interventions must employ sound experimental designs or, where necessary and appropriate, quasi-experimental designs. Both within-campus and multi-campus designs will be considered. Even under conditions of a natural experiment, appropriate control or comparison groups are necessary. Efforts should be made to ensure equivalency of intervention and comparison groups, which may require matching. In selecting intervention and control sites, alcohol-related problems must be evident; and outcome measures must involve alcohol-related behaviors or events. Examples include incidence or prevalence of drinking, high-risk drinking, alcohol-related public disturbances, destruction of property, vandalism, violence, date rape, emergency room admissions, arrests, and car crashes. Cognitive or attitudinal changes may be of interest as indicators of mediation processes, but they are not sufficient indicators of outcome. Careful attention must be paid to the identification of outcome measures that are valid, reliable, and sensitive to change. This may be problematic for campus- wide or community indicators of alcohol problems that have a low baseline frequency and/or may not be reported consistently (e.g., assaults, car crashes; overdoses). Measurement of outcome variables may be especially challenging in studies of policy changes or new campus-wide initiatives when investigators are not in control of the timing of "natural experiments. There may not be sufficient lead time to collect adequate baseline data. Archival data may be used, but unless their scientific quality can be assured, additional outcome measures will be needed. Pre-existing survey databases may be helpful, provided appropriate sampling techniques have been used. Measurement of the intervention itself (the independent variable) can also be problematic when naturally-occurring or program-driven interventions are being evaluated, primarily because of the investigator’s lack of control over implementation. However, similar problems arise when researchers themselves design and implement interventions in real-world environments. In both cases process evaluations and the collection of retrospective data may be helpful. Where possible, sample sizes should be sufficiently large to permit subgroup analyses in terms of such factors as gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, involvement in campus activities, and pre-intervention risk. INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported biomedical and behavioral research projects involving human subjects, unless a clear and compelling rationale and justification are provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the UPDATED "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts on August 2, 2000 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-048.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_update.htm: The revisions relate to NIH defined Phase III clinical trials and require: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols to provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) all investigators to report accrual, and to conduct and report analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences. INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS It is the policy of NIH that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them. This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for receipt dates after October 1, 1998. All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines on the Inclusion of Children as Participants in Research Involving Human Subjects" that was published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, March 6, 1998, and is available at the following URL address: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-024.html. Investigators also may obtain copies of these policies from the program staff listed under INQUIRIES. Program staff may also provide additional relevant information concerning the policy. REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human subjects. This policy announcement is found in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts Announcement dated June 5, 2000, at the following website: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html. URLS IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites. Reviewers are cautioned that their anonymity may be compromised when they directly access an Internet site. PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm Applicants may wish to place data collected under this RFA in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award. LETTER OF INTENT Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes a descriptive title of the proposed research, the name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator, the identities of other key personnel and participating institutions, and the number and title of the RFA in response to which the application may be submitted. 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 NIAAA staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review. The letter of intent is to be sent January 18, 2002. APPLICATION PROCEDURES The PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001) at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html must be used in applying for these. This version of the PHS 398 is available in an interactive, searchable PDF format. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone 301/710-0267, Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MODULAR GRANT APPLICATIONS The modular grant concept establishes specific modules in which direct costs may be requested as well as a maximum level for requested budgets. Only limited budgetary information is required under this approach. The just-in-time concept allows applicants to submit certain information only when there is a possibility for an award. It is anticipated that these changes will reduce the administrative burden for the applicants, reviewers and NIH staff. The research grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html is to be used in applying for these grants, with modular budget instructions provided in Section C of the application instructions. The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) application form must be affixed to the bottom of the face page of the application. Type the RFA number on the label. Failure to use this label could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee in time for review. In addition, the RFA title and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be marked. The RFA label is also available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf. Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the Checklist, and three signed, photocopies, in one package to: CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 6701 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE, ROOM 1040, MSC 7710 BETHESDA, MD 20892-7710 BETHESDA, MD 20817 (for express/courier service) At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must be sent to: Extramural Project Review Branch ATTN: RFA AA02-001 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 6000 Executive Blvd, Suite 409, MSC 7003 Bethesda, MD 20892-7003 Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier service) Applications must be received by the application receipt date listed in the heading of this RFA. If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. The CSR will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of substantial revisions of applications already reviewed, but such applications must include an introduction addressing the previous critique. REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and responsiveness by NIAAA. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will be returned to the applicant without further consideration. If the application is not responsive to the RFA, CSR staff may contact the applicant to determine whether to return the application to the applicant or submit it for review in competition with unsolicited applications at the next review cycle. Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by the NIAAA in accordance with the review criteria stated below. As part of the initial merit review, all applications will receive a written critique and undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under review, will be discussed, assigned a priority score, and receive a second level review by the NIAAA National Advisory Council. Review Criteria The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health. In the written comments reviewers will be asked to discuss the following aspects of the application in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application. Note that the application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward. (1) Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive this field? (2) Approach: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? (3) Innovation: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or method? Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies? (4) Investigator: Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)? (5) Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed experiments take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support? In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with NIH policy, all applications will also be reviewed with respect to the following: o The adequacy of plans to include both genders, minorities and their subgroups, and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. o The reasonableness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the proposed research. o The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans or the environment, to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project proposed in the application. Schedule Letter of Intent Receipt Date: January 18, 2002 Application Receipt Date: February 19, 2002 Peer Review Date: March-April 2002 Council Review: May 2002 Earliest Anticipated Start Date: July 1, 2002 AWARD CRITERIA Award criteria that will be used to make award decisions include: o scientific merit (as determined by peer review) o availability of funds o programmatic priorities. INQUIRIES Inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged. The opportunity to clarify any issues or answer questions from potential applicants is welcome. Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to: For Epidemiology and Natural History: Vivian B. Faden, Ph.D. Division of Biometry and Epidemiology National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 6000 Executive Boulevard MSC 7003, Suite 514 Bethesda, MD 20892-7003 Rockville, MD 20852 (for express mail/courier) Telephone: (301) 594-6232 FAX: (301) 443-8614 Email: vfaden@willco.niaaa.nih.gov For Prevention and Intervention: Gayle Boyd, Ph.D. Division of Clinical and Prevention Research National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 6000 Executive Boulevard MSC 7003, Suite 505 Bethesda, MD 20892-7003 Rockville, MD 20852 (for express mail/courier) Telephone: (301) 443-8766 FAX: (301) 443-8774 Email: gboyd@willco.niaaa.nih.gov Direct inquiries regarding fiscal matters to: Judy Fox Simons Grants Management Branch National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Willco Building, Suite 505 6000 executive Blvd. (MSC-7003) Bethesda, MD 20892-7003 (For express mail use: Rockville, MD 20852) Telephone: (301) 443-2434 Email: jsimons@willco.niaaa.nih.gov AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93.273. Awards are made under authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and administered under NIH grants policies and Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. This program is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people. REFERENCES Chaloupka, F.J. and Wechsler, H. (1996) Binge drinking in college: The impact of price, availability, and alcohol control policies. Contemporary Economic Policy, 14 (4), 112-124. Gfroerer, J.C., Greenblatt, J.C. & Wright, D.A. (1997) Substance use in the US college-age population: Differences according to educational status and living arrangement. AJPH, 87, 62-65. Hingson, R., Berson, J. and Dowley, K. (1997) Interventions to reduce college student drinking and related health and social problems. In Plant, M., Single, E., and Stockwell, T. (eds.) Alcohol: Minimising the Harm, What Works? New York: Free Association Books.

Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices