Part I Overview Information

Department of Health and Human Services

Participating Organizations
Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), (http://www.cdc.gov/)

Components of Participating Organizations
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), (http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/)

Title: Research Grants for the Care of the Acutely Injured

NOTE: The CDC policies, guidelines, terms, and conditions stated in this announcement may differ from those used by the NIH.

Authority
This program is authorized under section 301 (a) [42 U.S.C. 241(a)] of the Public Health Service Act, and section 391 (a)[42 U.S.C. 280 b(a)] of the Public Service Health Act, as amended.

Announcement Type
New

Request For Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-CE-06-005

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number
93.136

Key Dates
Release Date: November 10, 2005
Letters of Intent Receipt Date: January 3, 2006
Application Receipt Dates: February 3, 2006
Peer Review Date: April, 2006
Council Review Date: June, 2006
Earliest Anticipated Start Date: September, 2006
Additional Information To Be Available Date: November 15, 2005

Technical assistance will be available for potential applicants during one conference call. The call for eligible applicants will be held on November 15, 2005 from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. (Eastern Time). The conference can be accessed by calling 1-888-381-5777 and entering access code 14954.

 Expiration Date: February 4, 2006

Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program.

Additional Overview Content

Executive Summary  

Table of Contents

Part I Overview Information

Part II Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
    1. Research Objectives

Section II. Award Information
    1. Mechanism(s) of Support
    2. Funds Available

Section III. Eligibility Information
    1. Eligible Applicants
        A. Eligible Institutions
        B. Eligible Individuals
    2.Cost Sharing or Matching
    3. Other - Special Eligibility Criteria

Section IV. Application and Submission Information
    1. Address to Request Application Information
    2. Content and Form of Application Submission
    3. Submission Dates and Times
        A. Receipt and Review and Anticipated Start Dates
            1. Letter of Intent
        B. Sending an Application
        C. Application Processing
    4. Intergovernmental Review
    5. Funding Restrictions
    6. Other Submission Requirements

Section V. Application Review Information
    1. Criteria
    2. Review and Selection Process
        A. Additional Review Criteria
        B. Additional Review Considerations
        C. Sharing Research Data
        D. Sharing Research Resources
    3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

Section VI. Award Administration Information
    1. Award Notices
    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements  
    3. Reporting

Section VII. Agency Contact(s)
    1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
    2. Peer Review Contact(s)
    3. Financial/ Grants Management Contact(s)
   
4. General Questions Contact(s)
    5. Special Guidelines for Technical Assistance

Section VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations

Part II - Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description

1.    Research Objectives

The CDC and NCIPC are committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010" and to measuring program performance as stipulated by the Government Performance and Review Act (GPRA).  This RFA addresses “Healthy People 2010” priority area of injury and violence prevention and is in alignment with NCIPC’s performance goal to conduct a targeted program of research to reduce injury-related death and disability. For more information, see http://www.health.gov/healthypeople and http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/mgmt-gpra/.

The purposes of the NCIPC extramural research program are to:

Research Objectives

NCIPC is soliciting investigator-initiated research that will help expand and advance our understanding of the care of the acutely injured. The following research objectives are the focus of this solicitation (Applications that fail to address one of these research objectives will be considered non-responsive.):

A. Evaluate strategies to translate, disseminate, implement, and adopt science-based recommendations and guidelines for the care of the acutely injured.

New treatments involving acute injury care are often not adopted uniformly. Important research may be conducted and published or guidelines developed, yet the results may not be widely used because there are no existing mechanisms or infrastructure to ensure their translation, dissemination, implementation, and adoption. For example, it has been shown that many patients with traumatic brain injury transported to acute injury care facilities are being hyperventilated, which is contrary to existing guidelines. Another example is the delay of transfer while waiting for diagnostic test results of acutely injured patients even after the necessity of transfer is recognized. The lack of mechanisms and infrastructure between large, urban academic centers; between large, urban academic centers and smaller, community hospitals; and between hospitals in different regions and locales is a major barrier for using current science-based recommendations and guidelines. As a result, a need remains, throughout the country and at all levels of care, for better translation of knowledge into patient care and for dissemination, implementation, and adoption of resulting care strategies. To achieve these goals, several steps must be undertaken. First, acute injury care researchers must examine successful models and methods used currently or previously in other arenas for dissemination, implementation, and evaluation of evidence, protocols, and guidelines to identify key principles that may be used in acute injury care. Based on these analyses, strategies should be developed for effective dissemination, including not only the use of existing and future technology and specialty journals, but also the identification of new and novel approaches to dissemination. It is critical that the efficacy, effectiveness, and impact of each strategy be determined. Second, a research approach must be developed to identify and overcome the barriers (administrative and legal) to effective translation and subsequent use. Finally, methods to validate protocols and guidelines before and after dissemination should be developed.

B. Develop and evaluate acute injury treatment strategies that will result in defining evidence-based management protocols for persons who sustain life-threatening injuries, injuries that could lead to significant disability, or both.

As the initial step in identifying and ensuring best practices, clinical studies have the potential to decrease mortality and to improve the outcome of serious injuries. These studies might focus on treating or reducing the effects of specific injuries (e.g., the effectiveness of specific interventions on outcomes across the spectrum of acute injury care, on outcomes from organ-specific injuries such as traumatic brain injury and long bone fractures in the multiply injured patient, and on outcomes from blast injuries after explosions); or they may investigate the management of an injury or a combination of injuries on specific populations (based on life stages, gender, genetics, and the like). Other examples may include the optimal means of airway support in the prehospital setting, optimal fluid management across the spectrum of acute injury care, and optimal management of severely injured elderly patients. It is recognized that multi-center investigations might be required to provide sufficient statistical power to support scientific recommendations.

C. Determine and evaluate the components of trauma systems that contribute to improved outcomes for the acutely injured.

Some investigators have shown that trauma systems save lives, but which components of a trauma system improve health outcomes other than mortality remain unknown. Therefore, research is needed to identify and evaluate the specific components of trauma systems across the continuum of care (from prehospital through hospital and rehabilitation) that contribute to improvements in outcomes for the injured, and to determine how specific components can be tailored to improve system performance. It is critical to evaluate clinical care provided in different aspects of the system, including prehospital, hospitals (emergency departments, trauma centers, operating theaters, intensive care units, and burn units), and rehabilitation facilities. Research is needed to evaluate data collection and use across the system; evaluate field triage and inter-hospital transfer guidelines; determine the potential for using the existing trauma care infrastructure in any disaster event, including chemical, biologic, nuclear, and conventional; compare urban and rural environments; determine the health outcome effects of dispatch, response, scene time, and other prehospital system components; and evaluate the impact of prehospital care on overall trauma care and outcomes. Determining morbidity, quality of life, functional status, and cost will help define the benefits and costs of trauma care systems and their components, including determining which patients benefit most from trauma care systems. In all aspects of trauma care, studying outcomes and costs will likely yield insights that influence policies and practices at the national, state, and local levels. These insights can be applied in ongoing efforts to monitor and improve system performance and may be useful in research conducted about specific clinical interventions.

D. Determine and evaluate how acute injury care is affected by mass casualty and disaster situations.

Mass casualty situations and disasters, related to conventional weapon terrorism (explosions), military conflicts (declared or undeclared), natural phenomena (e.g., hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis), or other events (e.g., structural collapse, plane or railway crash) remain a real and ongoing concern for acute injury care providers both in the United States and abroad. The injuries, death, disability, and emotional stress that result from such events may create both real and perceived difficulties in accessing medical care and vital services. As a result, there are multiple concerns about how best to provide acute injury care in such situations. The impact of these events upon already fragile, overburdened, and under-funded or nonexistent systems of trauma care—with regard to operations, surge capacity, staffing, and logistical concerns—remains unknown. Further examination and evaluation of these “systemic” effects of mass casualties is warranted, including learning from other nations that have experience caring for victims of terrorist acts.

Optimal data systems for use in mass casualty and disaster events remain a challenge. There is a need to identify and evaluate strategies to enhance methodologies for data collection and use, maximize the use of existing data systems, and achieve the real-time use of data during an event. Effective communication is often difficult during a mass casualty or disaster event. Strategies to maximize communication through improving systems interoperability and eliminating redundancy must be developed and evaluated. Often, trauma systems are not integrated with disaster planning which focuses more on law enforcement, fire prevention, power supply and other infrastructure issues than on the care of the acutely injured.  Strategies to integrate trauma systems with disaster planning need to be developed and evaluated. Current models of field triage, which may triage certain individuals to die at the scene, must be reexamined and evaluated in the context of current community resource availability, specialty services, and legal constraints. Despite the multiple educational programs currently available, the exact type and extent of education for various providers (prehospital and hospital) is unknown. Researchers must identify and evaluate the core competencies for those responding to or involved in a mass casualty or disaster event to ensure an appropriate level of knowledge and expertise. Many serious secondary injuries may occur after a disaster; improvements in acute injury care management of these difficult environments and situations need to be developed and evaluated.

E. Develop and evaluate protocols that provide on-site interventions in acute care settings or linkages to off-site services for patients at risk of injury or psychosocial problems following injury.

Clinical preventive services for patients treated in emergency departments, hospital trauma units, and other acute care settings can help reduce the risk of injury and mitigate the effects of injuries that do occur. Such services might include instruction in the proper use of safety restraints and screening and interventions for alcohol problems, intimate partner violence, or child maltreatment. For injured patients, emergency department visits and inpatient hospital admissions for trauma care may provide crucial opportunities for early identification of and intervention for post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychosocial problems that can follow or be exacerbated by injury. Assessing the baseline mental health status of trauma patients and determining intervention needs (e.g., for alcohol, post-traumatic stress disorder, illicit drug use) is needed.

Decision makers are often reluctant to fund clinical preventive services because they believe the investment needed to implement a single service in one clinical setting is too high. Research should demonstrate the effectiveness and value of such services and examine ways to implement multiple services simultaneously to amortize operational costs.

F. Develop and evaluate interventions for the individual, sociocultural, and community consequences of acute injury.

The emotional, financial, and psychosocial effects of an acute injury may be more debilitating than the actual physical injury. The severity of these effects is an essential determinant of long-term functionality. An acute injury has not just an immediate effect on the injured person, but also a long-term “ripple effect” on that person’s life and the lives of others in his or her family and community. For example, an injured father may face temporary or permanent loss of income, changes in the relationship with his wife, and an inability to care for his children. His wife may shift from spouse to caregiver and may take on responsibility for the family’s income. His children may experience emotional trauma not only from their father’s injury but from changes in their routine or living situation. Health care providers are also subject to psychosocial problems resulting from caring for the acutely injured and their families on a daily basis. In the event of a mass casualty or disaster event, these “ripple effects” may affect a community’s societal and functional infrastructure extensively. It is important to identify and evaluate strategies that will mitigate damage to individuals, families, and society following injury, and to assess the cost effectiveness of these strategies.

G. Identify and evaluate new or existing health measures to better assess both short-term and long-term outcomes for persons treated in a prehospital and hospital acute injury care setting.

Determining improvements in outcomes for the acutely injured may be difficult, when trauma centers, emergency care facilities, and hospitals focus on reducing mortality alone without focusing on morbidity and other health outcomes. There is, therefore, a need to develop in the acute care setting additional health measures, including health care costs, lost work days, and quality indicators related to pain management, palliative care, and stress experienced by individuals and families. Also, it is likely that different treatments received in the prehospital and hospital acute care setting can lead to different long-term outcomes for the acutely injured. Thus, there is the need to evaluate and validate both new and existing methods of reporting acute injury care and trauma system outcomes that extend beyond mortality to include long-term functional outcome, familial and social outcomes, and economic impact and outcome. New methods of measuring morbidity, quality of life, functional status, and cost will help define the benefits and costs of trauma care systems.

Rigorous evaluations are needed to determine the effectiveness of interventions, programs, and policies addressing the prevention of injury. Experimental designs are strongly encouraged. However, NCIPC will consider other evaluation designs, if justified, as required by the needs and constraints in a particular setting.

For effective interventions, it is possible to do cost-effectiveness studies. To be comparable to other cost effectiveness studies, they should follow the guidelines in the following references:

Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC.  Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.  New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Corso, PS. Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation. Second Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

For randomized trials, applicants are encouraged to clearly state how study subjects, whether individuals or groups, were selected, randomized, and followed through the trial. One relevant useful guidance document is Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT Statement, JAMA 2001;285:1987-2001.

See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations, for policies related to this announcement.

Section II. Award Information

1. Mechanism(s) of Support

This funding opportunity will use the R49 grant award mechanism.

As an applicant, you will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.

This funding opportunity uses the just-in-time budget concepts. It also uses the non-modular budget format described in the PHS 398 application instructions (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html). A detailed categorical budget for the "Initial Budget Period" and the "Entire Proposed Period of Support" is to be submitted with the application.

2. Funds Available

The participating CIO(s) NCIPC, intends to commit approximately $1,800,000 (both direct and indirect costs) in FY 2006 to fund three to five awards. The average award amount will be between $400,000 and $450,000. This includes both direct and indirect costs and is for the first 12- month budget period. An applicant may request a project period of up to three years. An applicant may request up to $450,000 (including both direct and indirect costs) for the first 12-month budget period. The approximate total project period funded amount is $1,350,000 (including both direct and indirect costs), with a maximum of $450,000 per year. The anticipated start date for new awards is September, 2006.

All estimated funding amounts are subject to availability of funds.

Consideration will also be given to current NCIPC R49 acute injury care grantees who submit a competitive supplement application requesting one year of funding to enhance or expand existing projects, or to conduct one-year pilot studies.  These awards will not exceed $150,000, including both direct and indirect costs. Supplemental awards will be made for the budget period to coincide with the actual budget period of the grant and are based on the availability of funds.

If you request a funding amount greater than the ceiling of the award range, your application will be considered non-responsive, and will not be entered into the review process.  You will be notified that your application did not meet the submission requirements.

Although the financial plans of NCIPC provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds, evidence of satisfactory progress by the recipient (as documented in required reports), and the determination that continued funding is in the best interest of the Federal Government.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

1.A. Eligible Institutions

You may submit an application if your organization has any of the following characteristics:

A Bona Fide Agent is an agency/organization identified by the state as eligible to submit an application under the state eligibility in lieu of a state application.  If you are applying as a bona fide agent of a state or local government, you must provide a letter from the state or local government as documentation of your status.  Place this documentation behind the first page of your application form.

1.B. Eligible Individuals

Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research is invited to work with their institution 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 CDC programs.

To be an eligible applicant under this RFA, the principal investigator must have conducted injury prevention and control research, published the findings in a peer-reviewed journal, and have specific authority and responsibility to carry out the proposed project.  Applications from principal investigators who do not meet these requirements will be considered ineligible and will not be reviewed.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching

Matching funds are not required.

The most current Grants Policy Statement can be found at:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/gps/2glossar.htm

3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria

Grant applications must demonstrate an overall match between the applicant's proposed theme and research objectives and the program priorities as described under the heading, “Research Objectives.”

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority A.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that: 1) their research is addressing research priority A; 2) their research is addressing a successful science based recommendation or guideline for the care of the acutely injured; 3) the focus of their research is the dissemination, translation, implementation, and adoption; 4) their research will develop strategies for effective dissemination; and 5) these strategies will identify barriers that must be overcome.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority B.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that: 1) their research is addressing research priority B; 2) their research focuses on the development and evaluation of treatment strategies for the acutely injured; 3) their research will lead to the development of management protocols; and 4) the treatment strategies are for injuries that are life threatening or that could lead to significant disability.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority C.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that: 1) their research is addressing research priority C;2) their research focuses on the evaluation of a specific component of the trauma system; and 3) the component of the trauma system they are evaluating has the potential to improve outcomes of the acutely injured.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority D.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that:1) their research is addressing research priority D; and 2) their research focuses on the evaluation of how acute injury care is affected by mass casualty and disaster situations.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority E.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that:1) their research is addressing research priority E; and 2) their research focuses on the development and evaluation of protocols that provide on-site interventions in acute care settings or linkages to off-site services for patients at risk of injury or psychosocial problems following injury.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority F.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that: 1) their research is addressing research priority F; and 2) their research focuses on the development and evaluation of interventions for the individual, sociocultural, and community consequences of acute injury.

The following is the responsiveness criteria if the applicant is addressing research priority G.  In the “Research Plan” section of their application the applicant must document that: 1) their research is addressing research priority G; and 2) their research focuses on the identification and evaluation of new or existing health measures to better assess both short-term and long-term outcomes for persons treated in a prehospital and hospital acute injury care setting.

Evidence that the principal investigator has conducted injury prevention and control research and published the findings in a peer-reviewed journal must be documented by listing the relevant publication(s) under section B “Selected peer-reviewed publications” of the principal investigator’s Biographical Sketch page in the application.

Applications must demonstrate effective and well defined working relationships within the performing organization and with outside entities which will ensure implementation of the proposed activities, as evidenced by letters of support from all relevant participating organizations. Place these letters in the appendix of your application.

Principal investigators are encouraged to submit only one grant application in response to this RFA.  With few exceptions only one application per principal investigator will be funded under this announcement.

If your application is incomplete or non-responsive to the special requirements listed in this section, it will not be entered into the review process.

Note: Title 2 of the United States Code Section 1611 states that an organization described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engages in lobbying activities is not eligible to receive Federal funds constituting an award, grant, or loan.

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Address to Request Application Information

The PHS 398 application instructions are available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive format. Applicants must use the currently approved version of the PHS 398. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 435-0714, Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.

CDC Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY 770-488-2783.

If you do not have access to the Internet, or if you have difficulty accessing the forms on-line, you may contact the CDC Procurement and Grants Office Technical Information Management Section (PGO-TIM) staff at: 770-488-2700. Application forms can be mailed to you.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

Applications must be prepared using the most current PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms. Applications must have a Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System number as the universal identifier when applying for Federal grants or cooperative agreements. The D&B number can be obtained by calling (866) 705-5711 or through the web site at http://www.dnb.com/us/. The D&B number should be entered on line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398 form.

The title and number of this funding opportunity must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be checked.

This announcement uses the non-modular budgeting format. Follow the PHS-398 instructions for non-modular budget research grant applications.

An applicant organization has the option of having specific salary and fringe benefit amounts for individuals omitted from the copies of the application which are made available to outside reviewing groups.  To exercise this option: on the four copies of the application to be sent to the NCIPC Extramural Resource Team, the applicant must use asterisks to indicate those individuals for whom salaries and fringe benefits are not shown; however, the subtotals must still be shown.  In addition, the applicant must submit an additional copy of page four of Form PHS-398, completed in full, with the asterisks replaced by the salaries and fringe benefits.  This budget page will be reserved for internal staff use only.

Abstract (Project Summary and Relevance)

It is especially important that the abstract (Description, PHS 398 form page 2) of your grant application reflects the project’s focus. The following instructions supercede those provided in the PHS 398 instructions.  If your application is funded, your abstract will become public information.

The abstract should contain the following sections:

The language of the abstract must be simple and easy to understand for a broad audience.

For more information on how to write an abstract please see the “Structured Abstracts” section at: http://jama.ama-assn.org/ifora_current.dtl

Research Plan

You must include a research plan in your application. The research plan should address activities to be conducted over the entire project period. The research plan should include the following information:

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the research plan.  In addition to letters of support, the appendix may include the following items: 1) Up to 10 publications, manuscripts (accepted for publication), abstracts, patents, or other printed materials directly relevant to this project. 2) Surveys, questionnaires, data collection instruments, clinical protocols, and informed consent documents. 3) Original glossy photographs or color images of gels, micrographs, etc., provided that a photocopy (may be reduced in size) is also included within the 25-page limit of the research plan.

3. Submission Dates and Times

All requested information must be received in the CDC Procurement and Grants Office by 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the deadline date.  If you submit your application by the United States Postal Service or commercial delivery service, you must ensure that the carrier will be able to guarantee delivery by the closing date and time.  If CDC receives your submission after closing due to: (1) carrier error, when the carrier accepted the package with a guarantee for delivery by the closing date and time, or (2) significant weather delays or natural disasters, you will be given the opportunity to submit documentation of the carrier’s guarantee.  If the documentation verifies a carrier problem, CDC will consider the submission as having been received by the deadline. 

This announcement is the definitive guide on LOI and application content, submission address, and deadline.  It supersedes information provided in the application instructions.  If your application does not meet the deadline above, it will not be eligible for review, and will be discarded.  You will be notified that you did not meet the submission requirements.

CDC will not notify you upon receipt of your submission.  If you have a question about the receipt of your LOI or application, first contact your courier.  If you still have a question, contact the PGO-TIM staff at: 770-488-2700.  Before calling, please wait two to three days after the submission deadline.  This will allow time for submissions to be processed and logged.

3.A. Receipt, Review and Anticipated Start Dates

Letter of Intent Receipt Date: January 3, 2006
Application Receipt Date: February 3, 2006
Peer Review Date: April 2006
Council Review Date: June, 2006
Earliest Anticipated Start Date: September, 2006

3.A.1. Letter of Intent

Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

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 NCIPC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed in Section IV.3.A

The letter of intent should be sent to:

NCIPC Extramural Resources Team
CDC, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control

Address for Express Mail or Delivery Service:
2945 Flowers Road
Yale Building, Room 2054
Atlanta, Georgia 30341

Address for U.S. Postal Service Mail:
4770 Buford Hwy, NE, Mailstop K-62
Atlanta, GA 30341

Telephone:  770-488-4037
Fax:  770-488-1662
Email: CIPERT@CDC.GOV

3.B. Sending an Application

Applications follow the PHS 398 application instructions for content and formatting of your applications.  If the instructions in this announcement differ in any way from the PHS 398 instructions, follow the instructions in this announcement.

Applications must be prepared using the research grant applications found in the PHS 398 instructions for preparing a research grant application. Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application and all appendices, including the checklist, and one signed photocopy in one package to:

Technical Information Management – CDC-RFA-CE06-005
CDC Procurements and Grants Office
2920 Brandywine Road
Atlanta, GA  30341

At the time of submission, four additional copies of the application, including the appendix material, must be sent to:

NCIPC Extramural Resources Team
CDC, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control

Address for Express Mail or Delivery Service:
2945 Flowers Road
Yale Building, Room 2054
Atlanta, Georgia 30341

Address for U.S. Postal Service Mail:
4770 Buford Hwy, NE, Mailstop K-62
Atlanta, GA 30341

Note: Applications must be sent to CDC in Atlanta, GA not NIH in Bethesda, MD.

3.C. Application Processing

Applications must be received on or before the application receipt date(s) described above (Section IV.3.A.). If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the PGO and responsiveness by the NCIPC. Incomplete and non-responsive applications will not be reviewed.

4. Intergovernmental Review
Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program.

5. Funding Restrictions

All CDC awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the  PHS Grants Policy Statement.  

Restrictions, which must be taken into account while writing your budget, are as follows:

6. Other Submission Requirements

If you are requesting indirect costs in your budget, you must include a copy of your indirect cost rate agreement.  If your indirect cost rate is a provisional rate, the agreement should be less than 12 months of age.

Your research plan should address activities to be conducted over the entire project period.

Plan for Sharing Research Data

The precise content of the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing, the format of the final dataset, the documentation to be provided, whether or not any analytic tools also will be provided, whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under their own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their institutional or personal website, through a data archive or enclave). References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of the application.

Note: Only proposals submitted to NCIPC for individual research projects of $500,000 or more in total (direct and indirect) costs per year require the applicant to include a data-sharing plan.  Because the ceiling for this RFA is $450,000, a data sharing plan is not required.

Sharing Research Resources
Not applicable

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

2. Review and Selection Process

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 NCIPC in accordance with the review criteria stated below.

As part of the initial merit review, all responsive applications will:

The goals of CDC-supported research are to advance the understanding of health promotion and prevention of disease, injury, and disability, and enhance preparedness.  In the written comments, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the application in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. 

Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?  Does the project include plans to measure progress toward achieving the stated objectives?  Is there an appropriate work plan included?

Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?

Investigators: Are the investigators 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? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?  Is there a prior history by the principal investigator of conducting injury prevention and control research?

Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?  Is there an appropriate degree of commitment and cooperation of other interested parties as evidenced by letters of support detailing the nature and extent of the involvement?

Application Review

The primary review will be a peer review conducted by the NCIPC Initial Review Group (IRG). Applications may be subjected to a preliminary evaluation (streamline review) by the IRG to determine if the application is of sufficient technical and scientific merit to warrant further review.  NCIPC will withdraw from further consideration applications judged to be noncompetitive and promptly notify the principal investigator/program director and the official signing for the applicant organization.  Those applications judged to be competitive will be further evaluated by the IRG. These applications will be reviewed for scientific merit using current NIH criteria (a scoring system of 100 - 500 points) to evaluate the methods and scientific quality of the application. 

The secondary review will be conducted by the Science and Program Review Subcommittee (SPRS) of the Advisory Committee for Injury Prevention and Control (ACIPC).  The ACIPC Federal agency experts will be invited to attend the secondary review and will receive modified briefing books (i.e., abstracts, strengths and weaknesses from summary statements, and project officer’s briefing materials).  ACIPC Federal agency experts will be encouraged to participate in deliberations when applications address overlapping areas of research interest, so that unwarranted duplication in federally-funded research can be avoided and special subject area expertise can be shared.  The NCIPC Division Associate Directors for Science (ADS) or their designees will attend the secondary review in a similar capacity as the ACIPC Federal agency experts to assure that research priorities of the announcement are understood and to provide background regarding current research activities.  Only SPRS members will vote on funding recommendations, and their recommendations will be carried to the entire ACIPC for voting by the ACIPC members in closed session.  If any further review is needed by the ACIPC, regarding the recommendations of the SPRS, the factors considered will be the same as those considered by the SPRS.

The ACIPC committee’s responsibility is to develop funding recommendations for the NCIPC Director based on the results of the primary review, the relevance and balance of proposed research relative to the NCIPC programs and priorities, and to assure that unwarranted duplication of federally-funded research does not occur.  The secondary review committee has the latitude to recommend to the NCIPC Director, to reach over better ranked proposals in order to assure maximal impact and balance of proposed research.  The factors to be considered will include:

All awards will be determined by the Director of the NCIPC based on priority scores assigned to applications by the primary review committee IRG, recommendations by the secondary review committee of the Science and Program Review Subcommittee of the ACIPC, consultation with NCIPC senior staff, and the availability of funds.

2.A. Additional Review Criteria:

In addition to the above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the priority score:

Dissemination: What plans have been articulated for disseminating findings?

Protection of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be assessed (see the Research Plan, Section E on Human Subjects in the PHS Form 398).   http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm Additional CDC Requirements under AR-1 Human Subjects Requirements can be found on http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.

Care and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to be used in the project, the five items described under Section F of the PHS Form 398 research grant application instructions will be assessed. Additional CDC Requirements under AR-3 Animal Subjects Requirements can be found on http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.

Biohazards: If materials or procedures are proposed that are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, determine if the proposed protection is adequate.

2.B. Additional Review Considerations

Budget: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the budget.

2.C. Sharing Research Data

Data Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score. The presence of a data sharing plan will be part of the terms and conditions of the award. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy.

Note: A data sharing plan is required by NCIPC only for applications requesting total (direct and indirect) costs of $500,000 or more per year. Because the ceiling for this RFA is $450,000, a data sharing plan is not required.

2.D. Sharing Research Resources
Not applicable

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

Grantees will be notified in August or early September of 2006 by CDC’s Procurement and Grants Office (PGO) if their applications were funded. 

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

After the peer review of the application is completed, the Principal Investigator will also receive a written critique called a Summary Statement.

Those applicants under consideration for funding will be contacted by CDC for additional information.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization.  The notice of award signed by the Grants Management Officer (GMO) is the authorizing document.  This document will be mailed and/or emailed to the recipient fiscal officer identified in the application. 

Selection of the application for award is not an authorization to begin performance.  Any cost incurred before receipt of the NoA is at the recipient’s risk.  These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.  See also Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

The Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR Part 74 and Part 92 have details about policy requirements.  For more information on the Code of Federal Regulations, see the National Archives and Records Administration at the following Internet address: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html.  The following additional requirements can be found in Section VIII. Other Information of this document or on the CDC website at the following Internet address: http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.  These will be incorporated into the NoA by reference.
 
3. Reporting

You must provide CDC with an original, plus two hard copies of the following reports:

  1. Interim/Grant Progress Report, (use form PHS 2590, OMB Number 0925-0001, rev. 9/04 as posted on the CDC website) no less than 120 days before the beginning of the budget period.  The progress report will serve as your non-competing continuation application.
  2. Yearly outcome report summarizing the results, including publications, and impact resulting from the research.  An outcome report form will be sent by NCIPC to the grantees. The outcome report will be due at the same time as the Interim/Grant Progress Report.
  3. Financial status report, no more than 90 days after the end of the budget period.
  4. Final financial and performance reports, no more than 90 days after the end of the project period.
  5. At the completion of the project, the grant recipient will submit a final yearly outcome report and a brief summary of the research written in non-scientific [laymen’s] terms.  The summary should highlight the findings and their implications for injury prevention programs, policies, environmental changes, etc.  The grant recipient will also include a description of the dissemination plan for research findings.  This plan will include publications in peer-reviewed journals and ways in which research findings will be made available to stakeholders outside of academia (e.g., state injury prevention program staff, community groups, public health injury prevention practitioners, and others).  CDC will place the summary report and each grant recipient’s final report with the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) to further the agency’s efforts to make the information more available and accessible to the public.

These reports must be forward by U.S. Postal Service or Express Delivery to the Grants Management Specialist listed in the “Agency Contacts” section of this announcement.

Although the financial plans of the CIO(s) provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds, evidence of satisfactory progress by the recipient (as documented in required reports) and the determination that continued funding is in the best interest of the Federal government. 

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management issues:

1. Scientific/Research Contacts:

Paul Smutz, Ph.D
Project Officer
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-02
Atlanta, Georgia 30341
Telephone: 770-488-1508
FAX: 770-488-4422
E-mail: wsmutz@cdc.gov

2. Peer Review Contacts:

Gwendolyn Cattledge, Ph.D
Scientific Review Administrator
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
4770 Buford Highway, NE, Mailstop K-02
Atlanta, Georgia 30341
Telephone: 770-488-4655
FAX: 770-488-4422
E-mail: gxc8@cdc.gov

3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:

James Masone, Grants Management Specialist
CDC Procurement and Grants Office
2920 Brandywine Road
Atlanta, GA 30341
Telephone:  770-488-2736
FAX: 770-488-2670
E-mail: zft2@cdc.gov

4. General Questions Contacts:

Technical Information Management Section
CDC Procurement and Grants Office
2920 Brandywine Road
Atlanta, GA  30341
Telephone: 770-488-2700
Email: PGOTIM@cdc.gov

5. Special Guidelines for Technical Assistance:

Conference Call

Technical assistance will be available for potential applicants during one conference call. The call for eligible applicants will be held on November 15, 2005 from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. (Eastern Time). The conference can be accessed by calling 1-888-381-5777 and entering access code 14954.

Participation in this conference call is not mandatory.

At the time of the call, if you have problems accessing the conference call, please call 404-639-7550 for assistance.

NCIPC Website

For additional help in preparing your grant application please see the “frequently asked questions” section on the NCIPC webpage at:  http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/res-opps/2004pas.htm.

Section VIII. Other Information

Required Federal Citations

Human Subjects Protection:
Federal regulations (45CFR46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).   Additional CDC Requirements under AR-1 Human Subjects Requirements can be found on http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.

Use of Animals in Research:
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals(http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf) as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm), and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm) as applicable.  Additional CDC Requirements under AR-3 Animal Subjects Requirements can be found on http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm

Requirements for Inclusion of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities in Research
It is the policy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to ensure that individuals of both sexes and the various racial and ethnic groups will be included in CDC/ATSDR-supported research projects involving human subjects, whenever feasible and appropriate. Racial and ethnic groups are those defined in OMB Directive No. 15 and include American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. Applicants shall ensure that women, racial and ethnic minority populations are appropriately represented in applications for research involving human subjects. Where clear and compelling rationale exist that inclusion is inappropriate or not feasible, this situation must be explained as part of the application. This policy does not apply to research studies when the investigator cannot control the race, ethnicity, and/or sex of subjects. Further guidance to this policy is contained in the Federal Register, Vol. 60, No. 179, pages 47947-47951, and dated Friday, September 15, 1995.

Smoke-Free Workplace Requirements
CDC strongly encourages all recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and to promote abstinence from all tobacco products. Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities that receive Federal funds in which education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children.

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 PA 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.  

Compliance with Executive Order 13279
Faith-based organization are eligible to receive federal financial assistance, and their applications are evaluated in the same manner and using the same criteria as those for non-faith-based organizations in accordance with Executive Order 13279, Equal Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community Organizations.  All applicants should, however, be aware of restrictions on the use of direct financial assistance from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for inherently religious activities. Under the provisions of Title 45, Parts 74, 87, 92 and 96, organizations that receive direct financial assistance from DHHS under any DHHS program may not engage in inherently religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization as a part of the programs or services funded with direct financial assistance from DHHS.  If an organization engages in such activities, it must offer them separately, in time or location, from the programs or services funded with direct DHHS assistance, and participation must be voluntary for the beneficiaries of the programs or services funded with such assistance.  A religious organization that participates in the DHHS funded programs or services will retain its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, and may continue to carry out its mission, including the definition, practice, and expression of its religious beliefs, provided that it does not use direct financial assistance from DHHS to support inherently religious activities such as those activities described above.  A faith-based organization may, however, use space in its facilities to provide programs or services funded with financial assistance from DHHS without removing religious art, icons, scriptures, or other religious symbols.  In addition, a religious organization that receives financial assistance from DHHS retains its authority over its internal governance, and it may retain religious terms in its organization=s name, select its board members on a religious basis, and include religious references in its organization=s mission statements and other governing documents in accordance with all program requirements, statutes, and other applicable requirements governing the conduct of DHHS funded activities.  For further guidance on the use of DHHS direct financial assistance see Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 87, Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations, and visit the internet site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/

Lobbying Restrictions
Applicants should be aware of restrictions on the use of HHS funds for lobbying of Federal or State legislative bodies. Under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. Section 1352, recipients (and their sub-tier contractors) are prohibited from using appropriated Federal funds (other than profits from a Federal contract) for lobbying congress or any Federal agency in connection with the award of a particular contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or loan. This includes grants/cooperative agreements that, in whole or in part, involve conferences for which Federal funds cannot be used directly or indirectly to encourage participants to lobby or to instruct participants on how to lobby.

In addition no part of CDC appropriated funds, shall be used, other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, for the preparation, distribution, or use of any kit, pamphlet, booklet, publication, radio, television, or video presentation designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress or any State or local legislature, except in presentation to the Congress or any State or local legislature itself. No part of the appropriated funds shall be used to pay the salary or expenses of any grant or contract recipient, or agent acting for such recipient, related to any activity designed to influence legislation or appropriations pending before the Congress or any State or local legislature.

Any activity designed to influence action in regard to a particular piece of pending legislation would be considered "lobbying." That is lobbying for or against pending legislation, as well as indirect or "grass roots" lobbying efforts by award recipients that are directed at inducing members of the public to contact their elected representatives at the Federal or State levels to urge support of, or opposition to, pending legislative proposals is prohibited. As a matter of policy, CDC extends the prohibitions to lobbying with respect to local legislation and local legislative bodies.

The provisions are not intended to prohibit all interaction with the legislative branch, or to prohibit educational efforts pertaining to public health. Clearly there are circumstances when it is advisable and permissible to provide information to the legislative branch in order to foster implementation of prevention strategies to promote public health. However, it would not be permissible to influence, directly or indirectly, a specific piece of pending legislation

It remains permissible to use CDC funds to engage in activity to enhance prevention; collect and analyze data; publish and disseminate results of research and surveillance data; implement prevention strategies; conduct community outreach services; provide leadership and training, and foster safe and healthful environments.

Recipients of CDC grants and cooperative agreements need to be careful to prevent CDC funds from being used to influence or promote pending legislation. With respect to conferences, public events, publications, and "grassroots" activities that relate to specific legislation, recipients of CDC funds should give close attention to isolating and separating the appropriate use of CDC funds from non-CDC funds. CDC also cautions recipients of CDC funds to be careful not to give the appearance that CDC funds are being used to carry out activities in a manner that is prohibited under Federal law.

Prohibition on Use of CDC Funds for Certain Gun Control Activities
The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act specifies that: "None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."

Anti-Lobbying Act requirements prohibit lobbying Congress with appropriated Federal monies. Specifically, this Act prohibits the use of Federal funds for direct or indirect communications intended or designed to influence a member of Congress with regard to specific Federal legislation. This prohibition includes the funding and assistance of public grassroots campaigns intended or designed to influence members of Congress with regard to specific legislation or appropriation by Congress.

In addition to the restrictions in the Anti-Lobbying Act, CDC interprets the language in the CDC's Appropriations Act to mean that CDC's funds may not be spent on political action or other activities designed to affect the passage of specific Federal, State, or local legislation intended to restrict or control the purchase or use of firearms.

Small, Minority, And Women-owned Business
It is a national policy to place a fair share of purchases with small, minority and women-owned business firms. The Department of Health and Human Services is strongly committed to the objective of this policy and encourages all recipients of its grants and cooperative agreements to take affirmative steps to ensure such fairness. In particular, recipients should:

  1. Place small, minority, women-owned business firms on bidders’ mailing lists.
  2. Solicit these firms whenever they are potential sources of supplies, equipment, construction, or services.
  3. Where feasible, divide total requirements into smaller needs, and set delivery schedules that will encourage participation by these firms.
  4. Use the assistance of the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, DHHS, and similar state and local offices.

Research Integrity

The signature of the institution official on the face page of the application submitted under this Program Announcement is certifying compliance with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regulations in Title 42 Part 50, Subpart A, entitled "Responsibility of PHS Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science."

The regulation places several requirements on institutions receiving or applying for funds under the PHS Act that are monitored by the DHHS Office of Research Integrity's (ORI) Assurance Program.

For examples:

Section 50.103(a) of the regulation states: "Each institution that applies for or receives assistance under the Act for any project or program which involves the conduct of biomedical or behavioral research must have an assurance satisfactory to the Secretary (DHHS) that the applicant: (1) Has established an administrative process, that meets the requirements of this subpart, for reviewing, investigating, and reporting allegations of misconduct in science in connection with PHS-sponsored biomedical and behavioral research conducted at the applicant institution or sponsored by the applicant; and (2) Will comply with its own administrative process and the requirements of this Subpart."

Section 50.103(b) of the regulation states that: "an applicant or recipient institution shall make an annual submission to the [ORI] as follows: (1) The institution's assurance shall be submitted to the [ORI], on a form prescribed by the Secretary,...and updated annually thereafter...(2) An institution shall submit, along with its annual assurance, such aggregate information on allegations, inquiries, and investigations as the Secretary may prescribe."

An additional policy is added in the year 2000 that "requires research institutions to provide training in the responsible conduct of research to all staff engaged in research or research training with PHS funds.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Requirements
Recipients of this grant award should note that pursuant to the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164) covered entities may disclose protected health information to public health authorities authorized by law to collect or receive such information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability, including, but not limited to, the reporting of disease, injury, vital events such as birth or death, and the conduct of public health surveillance, public health investigations, and public health interventions.  The definition of a public health authority includes a person or entity acting under a grant of authority from or contract with such public agency.  CDC considers this project a public health activity consistent with the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information and CDC will provide successful recipients a specific grant of public health authority for the purposes of this project.

Release and Sharing of Data
The Data Release Plan is the Grantee's assurance that the dissemination of any and all data collected under the CDC data sharing agreement will be released as follows:

a. In a timely manner.

b. Completely, and as accurately as possible.

c. To facilitate the broader community.

d. Developed in accordance with CDC policy on Releasing and Sharing Data.

April 16, 2003, http://www.cdc.gov/od/foia/policies/sharing.htm and in full compliance with the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), (where applicable), The Office of Management and Budget Circular A110, (2000) revised 2003, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/query.html?col=omb&qt=Releasing+and+Sharing+of+Data and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

Applications must include a copy of the applicant's Data Release Plan.  Applicants should provide CDC with appropriate documentation on the reliability of the data.  Applications submitted without the required Plan may be ineligible for award.  Award will be made when reviewing officials have approved an acceptable Plan.  The successful applicant and the Program Manager will determine the documentation format.  CDC recommends data is released in the form closest to micro data and one that will preserve confidentiality. 

Note: Only proposals submitted to NCIPC for individual research projects of $500,000 or more in total (direct and indirect) costs per year require the applicant to include a data-sharing plan.  Because the ceiling for this RFA is $450,000, a data sharing plan is not required.


Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices


Office of Extramural Research (OER) - Home Page Office of Extramural
Research (OER)
  National Institutes of Health (NIH) - Home Page National Institutes of Health (NIH)
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
  USA.gov - Government Made Easy


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