and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
Department of Health and Human Services
Participating
Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH), (http://www.nih.gov)
Components of Participating Organizations
National
Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), (http://www2.niddk.nih.gov)
Title: Limited Competition for
the Continuation of the Adult Acute Liver Failure Study Group (U01)
Announcement Type
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:
Request For Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-DK-09-506
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.847
Key Dates
Release Date: January 7, 2010
Letters of
Intent Receipt Date: February 15, 2010
Application
Receipt Date: March 15, 2010
Peer Review Date: June/July 2010
Council Review
Date: October
2010
Earliest
Anticipated Start Date: September 30, 2010
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Url
Activation Date): Not applicable.
Expiration Date: March 16, 2010
Due Dates
for E.O. 12372
Not
Applicable
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, Review and Anticipated
Start Dates
1. Letter of
Intent
B. Sending an Application to
the NIH
C. Application Processing
D.
Application Assignment
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section
V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Section
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
A. Cooperative Agreement
Terms and Conditions of Award
1. Principal
Investigator Rights and Responsibilities
2. NIH
Responsibilities
3.
Collaborative Responsibilities
4. Dispute
Resolution Process
3. Reporting
Section
VII. Agency Contact(s)
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/ Grants Management Contact(s)
Section
VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations
Part II
- Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
The purpose of
this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to continue the support for the Adult
Acute Liver Failure Study Group (ALFSG) to allow for further enrollment of
patients with acute liver failure (ALF) into a clinical database, to increase
the numbers of well characterized biospecimens stored in a central repository,
to continue innovative clinical investigation into the causes and means of
treatment of ALF and to complete follow-up clinical studies on patients who
completed participation in the randomized, placebo-controlled trial of
N-acetylcysteine for non-acetaminophen related-ALF.
Background:
The Adult Acute Liver Failure Study Group was established through partial funding support by the Food and Drug Administration with subsequent full support from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases since 1997. Current and recent activities of the ALFSG include the completion of a large clinical trial on the use of N-acetylcysteine for non-acetaminophen related ALF and a prospective database with more than 1,400 cases and 60,000 biospecimens. The clinical trial has yielded a significant finding: that treatment with intravenous N-acetylcysteine in early stage of ALF significantly increases transplant-free survival. Furthermore, the clinical database and biospecimen collection have been the basis for more than 35 publications and 85 ancillary studies focusing on the nature, course, epidemiology, management and pathogenesis of ALF. The ALFSG has two ongoing clinical studies aimed at extending the findings of the placebo controlled trial of N-acetylcysteine: The Open Label N-acetylcysteine study (ONAC) for non-acetaminophen related ALF and the Acute Liver Injury (ALI) study that extends enrollment to patients with significant liver injury in the absence of hepatic encephalopathy.
Acute Liver Failure is a
rare and clinically devastating condition characterized by the acute loss of
hepatic function. An estimated 2000 cases of ALF occur annually in the United States, often affecting young individuals without previous medical problems and
often leading to death or need for emergency liver transplantation. ALF is not
a single, specific disease, but rather a clinical syndrome that represents the
most extreme consequences of several forms of sudden and severe liver injury.
The causes of ALF encompass a wide range of etiologies including viral
hepatitis, drug- or toxin-induced liver injury, autoimmune conditions,
metabolic disorders, vascular compromise, and other rare causes. Importantly,
despite modern diagnostic tools, a large proportion of cases of ALF remain
indeterminant or of unknown cause. Without knowing the cause of these cases
of ALF, it is difficult or impossible to develop means of prevention and
treatment of this condition. In adults, slightly more than half of the patients
with ALF will either undergo liver transplantation or die from liver failure.
The most common immediate causes of death from ALF are cerebral edema and
sepsis. Other organ system involvement is common,and ALFcan present early with
acute renal or respiratory failure.
Therapy for ALF is largely supportive in nature. Specific therapies are available for some forms of ALF such as N-acetylcysteine for acetaminophen overdose and prompt delivery of a fetus for pregnancy-related ALF. However, for other forms of acute liver failure, there are no specific treatments. Liver transplantation is effective as a treatment of last resort for ALF but is problematic because of the acute, unanticipated nature of ALF, the need for immediate transplantation (within hours or days) and the national shortage of liver donor organs. Paramount to the management of patients with ALF is the timing of the decision for liver transplantation, determining whether the patient will recover spontaneously or will continue to deteriorate require transplantation. Timing is critical because waiting too late to go to transplantation may result in irreversible renal, lung or brain damage such that the patient will not recover even if a successful liver transplantation is performed. Going to transplantation too early is also problematic because some patients will recover spontaneously and thus will undergo the procedure unnecessarily and be left with a life-time need for immunosuppression to protect the liver graft from rejection. These challenges make development of prognostic algorithms critical for proper management of ALF.
Rapid identification of the cause, improved prognostication of the disease course, and institution of appropriate supportive and therapeutic measures are essential for optimal clinical management of ALF patients. Understanding the pathophysiological basis of these clinical manifestations of ALF remain daunting and formed the basis for several research recommendations in ALF that were identified at the Acute Liver Failure research workshop held in Bethesda, Maryland in December 2006 (Hepatology, vol 47, No 4, 2008). These challenges underscore the need to continue support of the ALFSG.
The overall goal of the ALFSG is to gain a better understanding of the causes, pathophysiologic mechanisms, complications, natural history, and therapy of ALF. Future goals for the ALFSG may include but are not limited to:
See Section
VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations, for policies
related to this announcement.
Section
II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
This
funding opportunity will use the NIH Cooperative
Agreement (U01) award mechanism.
The Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.
This FOA uses Just-in-Time information concepts. It also uses non-modular budget formats described in the PHS 398 application instructions (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html).
This funding opportunity will use a cooperative agreement award mechanism. In the cooperative agreement mechanism, the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) retains the primary responsibility and dominant role for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project, with NIH staff being substantially involved as a partner with the Principal Investigator, as described under the Section VI. 2. Administrative Requirements, "Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award".
2. Funds Available
Because the nature
and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application,
it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary.
Although the financial plans of the IC(s) provide support for this program,
awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the
availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious
applications.
Facilities and
administrative costs requested by consortium participants are not included in
the direct cost limitation, see NOT-OD-05-004.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
The following organizations/institutions
are eligible to apply:
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI is invited to work with his/her 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 NIH support.
More than one PD/PI, or multiple PDs/PIs, may be designated on the application for projects that require a team science approach and therefore clearly do not fit the single-PD/PI model. Additional information on the implementation plans, policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH eRA Commons prior to the submission of the application (see http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/preparing.htm for instructions).
The decision of whether to apply for a grant with a single PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs is the responsibility of the investigators and applicant organizations, and should be determined by the scientific goals of the project. Applications for grants with multiple PDs/PIs will require additional information, as outlined in the instructions below. When considering multiple PDs/PIs, please be aware that the structure and governance of the PD/PI leadership team as well as the knowledge, skills and experience of the individual PDs/PIs will be factored into the assessment of the overall scientific merit of the application. Multiple PDs/PIs on a project share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the project, intellectually and logistically. Each PD/PI is responsible and accountable to the grantee organization, or, as appropriate, to a collaborating organization, for the proper conduct of the project or program, including the submission of required reports. For further information on multiple PDs/PIs, please see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
This
program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy
Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Number of
Applications. Applicants may submit only one application in response to this
limited competition FOA as a PI.
Resubmissions. Resubmission applications are not permitted in response to this FOA.
Renewals. Renewal applications are permitted in response to this FOA.
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to
Request Application Information
The current 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) 710-0267, Email: [email protected].
Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY
301-451-5936.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Prepare all
applications using the PHS 398 application forms and in accordance with the PHS
398 Application Guide (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html).
Applications
must have a D&B Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 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 in item (box) 2 only of the
face page of the application form and the YES box must be checked.
SPECIAL
INSTRUCTIONS
Applications with Multiple PDs/PIs
When multiple PD/PIs are proposed, use the Face Page-Continued page to provide items 3a 3h for all PD/PIs. NIH requires one PD/PI be designated as the contact PD/PI for all communications between the PD/PIs and the agency. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PD/PIs, but has no special roles or responsibilities within the project team beyond those mentioned above. The contact PD/PI may be changed during the project period. The contact PD/PI should be listed in block 3 of Form Page 1 (the Face Page), with all additional PD/PIs listed on Form Page 1-Continued. When inserting the name of the PD/PI in the header of each application page, use the name of the Contact PD/PI, et. al. The contact PD/PI must be from the applicant organization if PD/PIs are from more than one institution.
All individuals designated as PD/PI must be registered in the eRA Commons and must be assigned the PD/PI role in that system (other roles such as SO or IAR will not give the PD/PI the appropriate access to the application records). Each PD/PI must include their respective eRA Commons ID in the eRA Commons User Name field.
All projects proposing Multiple PDs/PIs will be required to include a new section describing the leadership plan approach for the proposed project.
Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, the Research Plan section, and the Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan must be included. A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, and should include communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators.
If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocations may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Award (NoA).
Additional information is available in the PHS 398 grant application instructions.
3.
Submission Dates and Times
Applications must be
received on or before the receipt date described below (Section IV.3.A). Submission times N/A.
3.A. Receipt, Review and Anticipated Start Dates
Letter
of Intent Receipt Date: February
15, 2010
Application Receipt
Date: March 15, 2010
Peer Review Date: June/July 2010
Council Review
Date: October
2010
Earliest
Anticipated Start Date: September
30, 2010
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 IC 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:
Francisco O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3.B. Sending an
Application to the NIH
Applications must be
prepared using the forms found in the PHS 398 instructions for preparing a
research grant application. 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 (U.S. Postal Service Express
or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service;
non-USPS service)
Personal deliveries
of applications are no longer permitted (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-040.html).
At
the time of submission, two additional copies of the application and all
copies of the appendix material must be sent to:
Francisco O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3.C. Application
Processing
Applications must be received
on or before the application receipt date) described above (Section
IV.3.A.). If
an application is received after that date, the application may be delayed in
the review process or not reviewed. Upon receipt, applications will be
evaluated for completeness by the CSR and for responsiveness by the reviewing
Institute. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will not be reviewed.
The NIH will not accept any application in response to this funding opportunity that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an investigator-initiated application, is to be submitted in response to a funding opportunity, it is to be prepared as a NEW application. That is, the application for the funding opportunity must not include an Introduction describing the changes and improvements made, and the text must not be marked to indicate the changes from the previous unfunded version of the application.
Information on the status of an application should be checked by the Principal Investigator in the eRA Commons at: https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental
review.
5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards
are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other
considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The Grants Policy
Statement can be found at NIH Grants Policy
Statement.
Pre-award costs
are allowable. A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval,
incur obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the
beginning date of the initial budget period of a new or renewal award if such costs: 1) are
necessary to conduct the project, and 2) would be allowable under the grant, if
awarded, without NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise
require prior approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval before incurring
the cost. NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be incurred more than
90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new or
renewal award.
The incurrence
of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or non-competing award
imposes no obligation on NIH either to make the award or to increase the amount
of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated
and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. NIH expects the
grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against
future support and that such borrowing must not impair the grantee's ability to
accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way
adversely affect the conduct of the project (see NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part6.htm.)
6. Other Submission Requirements
In order to fully assess the prior accomplishments and future potential of the ALFSG to address the significant research challenges that confront ALF investigators, additional submission requirements and information are requested to be included in the application.
The application should demonstrate prior accomplishments during the previous funding cycle including but not limited to original publications and abstracts, ancillary studies, requests for biosamples and data requests, status of current ongoing clinical studies and any completed clinical studies or trials.
The application should describe the current and future organizational structure of the ALFSG in terms of the executive and steering committees and functional roles of these committees. A listing of other supportive subcommittees should be included with a concise description of the supportive roles to the ALFSG.
The components and roles of the ALFSG such as the clinical sites and Data Coordination Center should be described. An estimate of the anticipated number of clinical sites should be included along with a description of selection factors used to determine participation in the ALFSG such as but not limited to prior performance, intellectual contributions, initiation of ancillary studies, institutional support for the conduct of clinical studies, and participation on committees.
The Data Coordination Center selection factors should also be reviewed with respect to the following issues in support of the ALFSG:
A description of prior and potential future partnerships from industry in support of the research mission of the ALFSG should be described. Any future partnerships should be discussed in terms of the investigative value added to the ALFSG research efforts and goals.
Other Special Performance Requirements
The ALFSG will continue to be a collaborative effort that will require frequent interactions of the awardee with the Steering Committee members and the Data Coordination Center and the NIDDK. The applicant must explicitly indicate their willingness to:
1. Participate in Executive and Steering Committee meetings as teleconferences and face to face meetings and other regular telephone conference calls;
2. Cooperate with Steering Committee and the Data Coordinating Center in the development and design or modification of research protocols and in carrying out approved research protocols;
3. Abide by common definitions; common methods for patient selection and enrollment; and common protocols, procedures, tests, and reporting forms as chosen by majority vote of the Steering Committee;
4. Cooperative oversight with the NIDDK of the clinical sites and the Data Coordinating Center performance in support of the ALFSG investigative activities.
5. Actively seek to implement each consortium-wide protocol approved by the DSMB and the NIDDK;
6. Comply with all study policies and quality assurance measures approved by the Steering Committee;
7. Agree to oversight of the study by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB);
8. Accept awards for the support of research based on per-patient (capitated) rates and the actual numbers of subjects enrolled, followed, and completing the study (Clinical Centers only);
9. Transmit study data to the Data and Coordinating Center in a timely and accurate manner (Clinical Centers only);
10. Report all adverse events in accordance with procedures established by the Steering Committee and NIDDK policies;
11. Cooperate with clinical sites and the Data Coordinating Center in the publication of study results and the eventual release to the scientific community of study procedures and other resources;
12. Serve as chair of the Executive and Steering committees.
The awardee must agree to the "Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award" in Section VI.2.A "Award Administration Information".
PHS398 Research Plan Component Sections
All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide are to be followed, with the following additional requirements:
Budget Component
This FOA uses non-modular budget formats described in the PHS 398 application instructions (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html).
Appendix Materials
All paper PHS 398 applications submitted must provide appendix material on CDs only. Include five identical CDs in the same package with the application. See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-031.html.
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations. An application that does not observe the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.
Resource Sharing Plan(s)NIH considers the sharing of unique research resources developed through NIH-sponsored research an important means to enhance the value of, and advance research. When resources have been developed with NIH funds and the associated research findings published or provided to NIH, it is important that they be made readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community. If the final data/resources are not amenable to sharing, this must be explained in Resource Sharing section of the application. See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_faqs.htm.
(a) Data Sharing Plan: Investigators seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year are expected to include a brief 1-paragraph description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data-sharing is not possible. Applicants are encouraged to discuss data-sharing plans with their NIH program contact. See Data-Sharing Policy or http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-032.html.
(b) Sharing Model Organisms: Regardless of the amount requested, all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated are expected to include a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organisms and related resources, or state appropriate reasons why such sharing is restricted or not possible. See Sharing Model Organisms Policy, and NIH Guide NOT-OD-04-042.
(c) Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS): Regardless of the amount requested, applicants seeking funding for a genome-wide association study are expected to provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the repository is not possible. A genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic variation across the entire genome that is designed to identify genetic associations with observable traits (such as blood pressure or weight) or the presence or absence of a disease or condition. For further information see Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Guide NOT-OD-07-088, and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/gwas/.
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review
criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Review
Process
Applications that are complete and responsive to the FOA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) and in accordance with NIH peer review procedures (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/peer/), using the review criteria stated below.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will:
The mission of the NIH is to support science in pursuit of knowledge about the biology and behavior of living systems and to apply that knowledge to extend healthy life and reduce the burdens of illness and disability. As part of this mission, applications submitted to the NIH for grants or cooperative agreements to support biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
Overall Impact. Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following five scored review criteria, and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Scored Review Criteria. Reviewers will consider each of the five review criteria below in the determination of scientific and technical merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Significance. Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Investigator(s). Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
Innovation. Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Approach. Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the
project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks
for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of
development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly
risky aspects be managed?
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of
human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members
of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms
of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Environment. Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
Additional Review Criteria
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider the following additional items in the determination of scientific and technical merit, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Protections for Human Subjects. For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children. When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children.
Vertebrate Animals. The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For additional information, see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/VASchecklist.pdf.
Biohazards. Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
Renewal Applications. When reviewing a Renewal application (formerly called a competing continuation application), the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Additional Review Considerations
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will address each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items and should not consider them in providing an overall impact/priority score.
Select Agents Research. Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans. Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan (http://grants.nih/gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm); 2) Sharing Model Organisms (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-04-042.html); and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-088.html).
Budget and Period Support. Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Selection Process
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award
Dates
Not
Applicable
Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
After the peer review
of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her
Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
If the application is under consideration for funding,
NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant. For
details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement
Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General.
A
formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be
provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the grants management
officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative and programmatic
issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via email notification
from the awarding component to the grantee business official.
Selection of an application for award is not an
authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the
NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the
extent considered allowable pre-award costs. See Also Section
IV.5. Funding Restrictions.
2. Administrative and National
Policy Requirements
All NIH grant
and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as
part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement
Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part4.htm) and Part II Terms and
Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific
Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part9.htm).
The following Terms and Conditions will be incorporated into the award statement and will be provided to the Principal Investigator as well as to the appropriate institutional official, at the time of award.
2.A. Cooperative Agreement
Terms and Conditions of Award
The following special
terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB
administrative guidelines, HHS grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Parts
74 and 92 (Part 92 is applicable when State and local Governments are eligible
to apply), and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and
funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement an
"assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition"
mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the awardees
is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative
agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients'
activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award
recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime
responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this
concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees
for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be
shared among the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
2.
A.1. Principal Investigator Rights and Responsibilities
The Principal Investigator will have the primary responsibility for all aspects of the protocols, including any modification of study design; conduct of the study including participant recruitment, safety and follow-up; assuring quality of patient care and protocol adherence; data collection; quality control; data and safety monitoring, data analysis and interpretation; preparation of publications; and collaboration with other investigators, unless otherwise provided for in these terms or by action of the Steering Committee. Awardee agrees to the governance of the study through a Steering Committee. Awardee will be required to accept and implement the common protocol(s) and procedures approved by the Steering Committee, the NIDDK and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board.
All applicants will be
required to participate in a cooperative and interactive manner with one
another and with the DCC in all aspects of the ALFSG.
Awardee will retain custody of and have primary rights to their data
developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent
with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies. The collaborative protocol and
governance policies will call for the continued submission of data centrally to
the DCC for a collaborative database; procedures for data analysis, reporting
and publication; and procedures to protect and ensure the privacy of medical
and genetic data and records of individuals. The NIDDK Project Scientist,
on behalf of the NIDDK, will have the same access, privileges and
responsibilities regarding the collaborative data as the other members of the
Steering Committee.
Awardee will be responsible for implementing the clinical trials and studies according to the protocols and methodologies decided upon by the Steering Committee. For a study involving multiple institutions, it is the responsibility of the awardee and Clinical Site to ensure that data will be submitted in a timely manner to the central Data Coordinating Center. Additionally, individual investigators/sites must demonstrate the ability to implement the strategy specifically designed for their individual study population.
Awardee is responsible for ensuring accurate and timely assessment of the progress of each study, including development of procedures to ensure that data collection and management are: (1) adequate for quality control and analysis; (2) for clinical trials, as simple as appropriate in order to encourage maximum participation of physicians and patients and to avoid unnecessary expense; and (3) sufficiently staffed across the participating institutions. For research involving multiple awards, strategies for the analyses of pooled data will be developed by the Steering Committee. No site may publish or share data collected at their own individual site while following an ALFSG protocol in accordance with policies, including the data sharing plan, approved by Steering Committee.
Awardee is responsible for submitting interim progress reports, when requested, to the NIDDK Project Scientist including as a minimum, summary data on protocol performance. For coordinated multiple awards or a multi-site single award, the NIDDK may require additional information from individual awardees/sites. Such reports are in addition to the annual awardee noncompeting continuation progress report.
Awardee is responsible for establishing procedures, where applicable, for all participating institutions in coordinated awards to comply with FDA regulations for studies involving investigational agents or devices and to comply with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 46 for the protection of human subjects, and the NIH policy requirements for the inclusion of women, minorities and children.
The Data Coordinating Center will be involved in collaborations with the NIDDK and the Clinical Centers during all phases of the study. Thus, the DCC is expected to work cooperatively with Clinical Centers and sponsoring organizations in multicenter studies and oversee the implementation of and adherence to a common protocol, as well as assure quality control of the data collected and storage of collected specimens. In addition to organizing and attending regular meetings, the Data Coordinating Center will be expected to maintain close communications with the NIDDK Project Scientist and the Principal Investigators of the Clinical Centers.
Awardee is encouraged to publish and to publicly release and disseminate results, data and other products of the study, concordant with the study protocol and governance and the approved plan for making data and materials available to the scientific community and the NIDDK. In additional they will adhere to the steering committee approved publication/presentation policy.
Support or other involvement of industry or any other third party in any study performed by the Network -- e.g., participation by the third party; involvement of project resources or citing the name of the project or the NIDDK support; or special access to project results, data, findings or resources -- may be advantageous and appropriate. However, except for licensing of patents or copyrights, support or involvement of any third party will occur only following notification to, and concurrence by the NIDDK.
Upon completion of the project, the DCC is
expected to transfer all study intervention materials and procedure manuals
into the NIDDK Central Repository, which in accordance with current NIDDK and
NIH policies, will make them available to the scientific community for the
conduct of research at no charge other than the costs of reproduction and
distribution.
2.
A.2. NIH Responsibilities
An NIH Project
Scientist will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and
beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below.
1. Retaining overall programmatic responsibility for the award, and will clearly specify to the awardee the name(s) and role (s) of any additional individuals with substantial involvement in the project and the lines of reporting authority.
2. Interacting with the principal investigator on a regular basis to monitor study progress. Monitoring may include: regular communications with the principal investigator and staff, periodic site visits for discussions with awardee research teams, observation of field data collection and management techniques, quality control, fiscal review, and other relevant matters; as well as attendance at Steering Committee, data safety and monitoring board, and related meetings. The NIDDK retains the option of periodic external review of progress.
3. Reviewing and approving protocols to insure they are within the scope of peer review and for safety considerations, as required by Federal regulations. The NIDDK Project Scientist will monitor protocol progress, and may request that enrollment in a protocol study be terminated for reasons including: (a) accrual rate insufficient to complete study in a timely fashion; (b) accrual goals met early; (c) poor protocol performance; (d) patient safety and regulatory concerns; (e) study results that are already conclusive; and (f) emergence of new information that diminishes the scientific importance of the study question. The NIDDK will not permit further expenditures of NIDDK funds for a study after requesting closure (except for patients already on-study).
4. Making recommendations for continued funding based on: a) overall study progress, including sufficient patient and/or data accrual; b) cooperation in carrying out the research (e.g., attendance at Steering Committee meetings, implementation of group decisions, compliance with the terms of award and reporting requirements); and/or c) maintenance of a high quality of research, which will allow pooling of data and comparisons for common data elements.
The NIDDK reserves the right to terminate or curtail the study (or an individual award or Clinical Site) in the event of (a) failure to develop or implement a mutually agreeable collaborative protocol, (b) substantial shortfall in participant recruitment, follow-up, data reporting, quality control, or other major breach of the protocol, (c) substantive changes in the agreed-upon protocol with which NIDDK cannot concur, (d) reaching a major study endpoint substantially before schedule with persuasive statistical significance, or (e) human subject ethical issues that may dictate a premature termination.
The NIDDK will name additional scientific advisors as necessary from within the National Institutes of Health whose function will be to assist the NIDDK Project Scientist and the Steering Committee in carrying out the goals and aims of the approved studies. NIDDK will have one vote for all key study group subcommittees, regardless of the number of NIDDK personnel involved.
The Project Scientist will have substantial scientific programmatic involvement in quality control, interim data analysis, safety monitoring, and final data analysis and interpretation, preparation of publications, and coordination and performance monitoring. The dominant role and prime responsibility for these activities resides with the awardee for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities in carrying out the studies will be shared among the awardee and Clinical Sites and the NIDDK Project Scientist.
Other NIDDK Project Scientist responsibilities and levels of involvement in the project, as described below.
1. For multi-institutional protocols, participation in the Steering Committee that oversees study conduct. The NIDDK Project Scientist or designee will be a full participant and voting member of the Steering Committee and, if applicable, subcommittees.
2. Serves as a resource with respect to other ongoing NIDDK activities that may be relevant to the protocol to facilitate compatibility and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.
3. Has substantial involvement in assisting in the design and coordination of research activities for awardees as elaborated below:
Assisting by providing advice in the management and technical performance of the investigations and in coordinating clearances for investigational agents held by NIDDK. The NIDDK may reserve the right to cross file or independently file an Investigational New Drug Application form with the FDA.
For multi-institutional protocols, through participation in the Steering Committee and with the agreement of the Principal Investigator(s) of any coordinating center and data management centers, the NIDDK Project Scientist or designee may coordinate activities among awardees by assisting in the design, development, and coordination of a common research or clinical protocol and statistical evaluations of data; in the preparation of questionnaires and other data recording forms; and in the publication of results.
Reviewing and approving advice regarding the establishment of mechanisms for quality control and study monitoring.
Additionally, an agency program official or IC program director will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice.
2.A.3. Collaborative Responsibilities (optional)
The Steering Committee, composed of the awardee
as the Chair, Principal Investigators from each of the Clinical Sites, the
Principal Investigator of the DCC, and the NIDDK Project Scientist will be the
main governing board of the studies. Only the awardee, the principal
investigators of the Clinical Sites and the DCC, and the NIDDK Project
Scientist or designee will be voting members of the Steering Committee and all
major scientific decisions will be determined by a majority vote. This
committee will have the primary responsibility for approval of the common
protocols, facilitating the conduct of participant follow-up, monitoring
completeness of data collection and timely transmission of data to the DCC, and
reporting the study results. It will also be responsible for establishing
ALFSG policies in such areas as access to patient data, ancillary studies,
publications and presentations, and performance standards.
The Chairperson of the Steering Committee will be the awardee. In collaboration with the PI of the DCC and the NIDDK Project Scientist, the Chairperson(s) is responsible for coordinating the Committee activities, for preparing meeting agendas, and for scheduling and chairing meetings.
Subcommittees will be established on topics such as ancillary studies, publications and presentations, quality control, recruitment, protocol adherence, among others. Both PIs and Co-PIs may serve as chairs of the subcommittees.
An Executive Committee comprised of the awardee, the Principal Investigator of the DCC, and the NIDDK Project Scientist will be convened to effect management decisions required between Steering Committee meetings, as needed for efficient progress of the trial.
Each Clinical Site PI and the DCC PI agree to the governance of the study through the Steering Committee. Meetings of the Steering Committee will ordinarily be held by telephone conference calls or face to face meeting.
The NIDDK Project Scientist (and the other cited NIDDK scientists) may work with awardee on issues coming before the Steering Committee and, as appropriate, other committees, e.g., issues of recruitment, intervention, follow-up, quality control, standards and methods, adherence to protocol, assessment of problems affecting the study and potential changes in the protocol, interim data and safety monitoring, final data analysis and interpretation, preparation of publications, and development of solutions to major problems such as insufficient participant enrollment. Regardless of the number of NIH staff participating in technical advisory roles, the NIDDK will be limited to one vote on the Steering Committee.
An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will be established by the NIDDK to review protocols and monitor patient safety and performance of each study. As a part of its responsibilities, the DSMB will submit recommendations to the NIDDK regarding the continuation of each study. The DSMB will be responsible for final approval of the Data and Safety Monitoring Plan developed by the DCC. Because the DSMB serves as an independent group advisory to the NIDDK, study investigators will not communicate with the Board members regarding study issues, except as authorized by the Board s Executive Secretary or the NIDDK Project Scientist.
Awardee and members of the Steering Committee will be required to accept and implement policies approved by the Steering Committee.
Each
full member of the Steering Committee will have one vote. Members of the
Steering Committee will be required to accept and implement policies approved by
the Steering Committee.
2.A.4.
Dispute Resolution Process
Any disagreements that
may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award)
between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute
Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three
members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting,
one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who
is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first
member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution
procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that
is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulations 42 CFR Part 50,
Subpart D and HHS regulations 45 CFR Part 16.
3. Reporting
Awardees will be
required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS
2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A
final progress report, invention statement, and Financial Status Report are
required when an award is relinquished when a recipient changes institutions or
when an award is terminated.
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:
Patricia R. Robuck, Ph.D, M.P.H.
Division of Digestive
Diseases and Nutrition
National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard,
Room 659
Bethesda, MD
20892-5450
Telephone:
301-594-8879
FAX: 301-480-3505
Email: [email protected]
Edward Doo, M.D.
Division of Digestive Diseases
and Nutrition
National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 651
Bethesda, MD 20892-5450
Telephone: (301) 451-4524
Fax: (301) 480-8300
Email: [email protected]
2. Peer Review Contacts:
Francisco
O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Ms. Sharon Bourque
Division of Extramural
Activities
National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 719
Bethesda, MD 20892-5456
Telephone: (301) 594-8846
FAX: (301) 594-9523
Email: [email protected]
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
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.
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).
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety monitoring is required for all types
of clinical trials, including physiologic toxicity and dose-finding studies
(phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II); efficacy, effectiveness and comparative
trials (Phase III). Monitoring should be commensurate with risk. The
establishment of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) is required for
multi-site clinical trials involving interventions that entail potential risks
to the participants (NIH Policy for Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for
Grants and Contracts, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking
$500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include a
plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their
institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules,
as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy
Rule.
Policy for Genome-Wide Association Studies
(GWAS):
NIH is interested in advancing genome-wide association
studies (GWAS) to identify common genetic factors that influence health and
disease through a centralized GWAS data repository. For the purposes of this
policy, a genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic
variation across the entire human genome that is designed to identify genetic
associations with observable traits (such as blood pressure or weight), or the
presence or absence of a disease or condition. All applications, regardless of
the amount requested, proposing a genome-wide association study are expected to
provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data
repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the
repository is not possible. Data repository management (submission and access)
is governed by the Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or
Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Guide NOT-OD-07-088. For additional information, see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/gwas/.
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
funding opportunity 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.
Sharing of Model Organisms:
NIH is committed to support efforts that encourage
sharing of important research resources including the sharing of model
organisms for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm). At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of
grantees and contractors to elect and retain title to subject inventions
developed with Federal funding pursuant to the Bayh Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm). All investigators submitting an NIH application or
contract proposal, beginning with the October 1, 2004 receipt date, are
expected to include in the application/proposal a description of a specific
plan for sharing and distributing unique model organism research resources
generated using NIH funding or state why such sharing is restricted or not
possible. This will permit other researchers to benefit from the resources
developed with public funding. The inclusion of a model organism sharing plan
is not subject to a cost threshold in any year and is expected to be included
in all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated.
Inclusion of Women And Minorities in Clinical
Research:
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
clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is
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 clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH
definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in
compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing
NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and
updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community.
The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials
that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must 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) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in
conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group
differences.
Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical
Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e.,
individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research,
conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical
reasons not to include them.
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 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
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 applications
for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key
personnel. The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC):
Criteria for federal funding of research on hESCs can
be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-116.html. Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the
NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov).
It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide in the project description
and elsewhere in the application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s)
for the hESC line(s) to be used in the proposed research.
NIH Public Access Policy Requirement:
In accordance with
the NIH Public Access Policy (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-033.html) investigators must
submit or have submitted for them their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts that
arise from NIH funds and are accepted for publication as of April 7, 2008 to PubMed Central (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/), to be made publicly
available no later than 12 months after publication. As of May 27, 2008,
investigators must include the PubMed Central reference number when citing an
article in NIH applications, proposals, and progress reports that fall under
the policy, and was authored or co-authored by the investigator or arose from
the investigator’s NIH award. For more information, see the Public Access
webpage at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/.
Standards
for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually
Identifiable Health Information", the "Privacy Rule", on August
14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal regulation under the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection
of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and
enforced by the DHHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of
the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR
website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a
complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered
entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes
involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative
agreements, and research contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within
specified page limitations. For publications listed in the appendix and/or
Progress report, internet addresses (URLs) must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles. Unless otherwise specified in this solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide
any other information necessary for the review because reviewers are under
no obligation to view the Internet sites. Furthermore, we caution reviewers
that their anonymity may be compromised when they directly access an Internet
site.
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 FOA 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.
Authority and Regulations: This program is
described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the
intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372. Awards are made
under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service
Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and
45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions,
cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants Policy Statement
can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to
provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the 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.
Loan Repayment Programs:
NIH encourages applications for educational loan
repayment from qualified health professionals who have made a commitment to
pursue a research career involving clinical, pediatric, contraception,
infertility, and health disparities related areas. The LRP is an important
component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the next generation of
researchers by providing the means for developing a research career unfettered
by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is not required for
eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications are encouraged.
The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing the LRP recipient
with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP awardees must commit at
least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week based on a 40 hour week)
for two years to the research. For further information, please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||