Participating Organization(s)	U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) The FDA does not follow the NIH Page Limitation Guidelines or the Enhanced Peer Review Scoring Criteria. Applicants are encouraged to consult with FDA Agency Contacts for additional information regarding page limits and the FDA Peer Review Process.
Components of Participating Organizations	Center of Drug Evaluation and Research/Office of Pharmaceutical Science/Office of Generic Drugs (CDER)
Funding Opportunity Title	Development of in vivo predictive dissolution method for orally inhaled drug products (U01)
Activity Code	U01 Research Project Cooperative Agreements
Announcement Type	New
Related Notices	August 21, 2013: Removed reference to ASSIST in section IV.3, since ASSIST is currently only available for multi-project applications. May 3, 2013 - See Notice NOT-FD-13-003. Notice of Change to Funds Available, Anticipated Number of Awards, and Contact Information.
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number	RFA-FD-13-014
Companion Funding Opportunity	None
Number of Applications	See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)	93.103
Funding Opportunity Purpose	The goal of this project is to develop an in vitro dissolution method for orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) which will be capable of predicting in vivo dissolution of drugs that are administered via the inhalation route. The results obtained from this study will be used to gain better understanding of the formulation factors that impact dissolution and thereby in vitro-in vivo relationships for orally inhaled drugs. This investigation will constitute a significant step towards gaining a better understanding of relationship among OIDP formulations and local availability (efficacy) and pharmacokinetics (PK, safety). The outcome of the project will aid in development of a quality-by-design (QbD) tool that could be used for formulation development and optimization as well as product quality control.

Posted Date	April 18, 2013
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)	May 15, 2013
Letter of Intent Due Date(s)	Not Applicable
Application Due Date(s)	July 1, 2013 by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
AIDS Application Due Date(s)	Not Applicable
Scientific Merit Review	July 2013
Advisory Council Review	August, 2013
Earliest Start Date	September, 2013
Expiration Date	July 2, 2013
Due Dates for E.O. 12372	Not Applicable

Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information

Background

Clinical performance of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) depends not only on regional drug deposition in the lung but also on in vivo drug dissolution rate, thereby affecting local availability of the drug at sites of action in the lung as well as rate and extent of the drug absorption from the lung.

An ideal dissolution method for inhalation products should take into account various biological and physicochemical factors including, but not limited to, scarce lung lining fluid available for drug dissolution, presence of endogenous lung surfactants, mass of drug deposited per unit surface area of lung and inter-particulate interactions of the depositing particles. Several attempts have been made to develop dissolution methods for characterization of OIDPs; however, none of the methods captures all the key factors described above and the methods developed have not been shown to be predictive of in vivo dissolution.

In order to provide better prediction of drug dissolution within the lung, it is necessary to develop a dissolution method that accounts for relevant biological and physicochemical factors that impact drug dissolution in vivo.

In 2011, OGD initiated a study titled Pharmacokinetics of Locally Acting Orally Inhaled Drug Products to evaluate the sensitivity of PK to differences in the aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) for three different formulations of an inhaled corticosteroid (fluticasone propionate, FP) dry powder inhaler (DPI). As differences in PK may result due to factors including, but not limited to, differences in dissolution rate of the formulations, it would be preferable to study the dissolution of the these formulations and incorporate this information to build a model to link regional lung deposition to PK.

Objective

The goal of this project is to develop an in vitro dissolution method for OIDPs which will be capable of predicting in vivo dissolution of drugs that are administered via the inhalation route. The results obtained from this study will be used to gain better understanding of the formulation factors that impact dissolution and thereby in vitro-in vivo relationships for orally inhaled drugs. This investigation will constitute a significant step towards gaining a better understanding of relationship among OIDP formulations and local availability (efficacy) and pharmacokinetics (PK, safety). The outcome of the project will aid in development of a quality-by-design (QbD) tool that could be used for formulation development and optimization as well as product quality control.

Detailed Description

A predictive dissolution model will be developed to study the effect of formulation factors (API particle size, formulation composition, etc.) on dissolution of aerosolized drug particles.

This investigation will consist of 3 phases:

Phase 1: Development/modification of existing dissolution methods for OIDPs, by accounting for mass of drug deposited per unit surface lung area, limited lung lining fluid and other factors that may impact drug dissolution in vivo.

Phase 2: Selection of OIDPs for dissolution study. OIDPs should be selected to represent a range of physicochemical properties of the API (e.g., solubility, particle size, crystallanity, lipophilicity, adhesive/cohesive properties). The selected OIPDs should represent solution and suspension-based metered dose inhalers, and DPIs. OGD’s research FP formulations will be provided for the study.

Phase 3: Development of a mathematical model to describe a relationship between the in vitro dissolution data and PK.

Funding Instrument	Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, FDA scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities.
Application Types Allowed	New The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards	The number of awards is contingent upon FDA appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. FDA/CDER intends to fund up to 3 grants, corresponding to a total of $200,000, for fiscal year 2013. Future year amounts will depend on annual appropriations.
Award Budget	Awards are contingent upon the availability of funds. Application budgets are not limited, but need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.
Award Project Period	The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period. The maximum project period is 2 Years.

FDA grants policies as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.

Higher Education Institutions

• Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
• Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for FDA support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

• Hispanic-serving Institutions
• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
• Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
• Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
• Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

• Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
• Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

• Small Businesses
• For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Governments

• State Governments
• County Governments
• City or Township Governments
• Special District Governments
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)
• Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
• U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

• Independent School Districts
• Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
• Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
• Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
• Regional Organizations
• Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions)

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the HHS Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.

Applicant Organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.

• Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants be issued a DUNS number. After obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin both SAM and eRA Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
• System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly CCR) Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
• NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code - Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
• eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the eRA Commons registration. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
• Grants.gov Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))

All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account and should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate an existing account with the applicant organization’s eRA Commons account. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for FDA support.

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

FDA will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed within the past thirty-seven months, except for submission:

• To an RFA of an application that was submitted previously as an investigator-initiated application but not paid;
• Of an investigator-initiated application that was originally submitted to an RFA but not paid; or
• Of an application with a changed grant activity code.

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide must be followed, with the following exceptions or additional requirements:

• For this specific FOA, the Research Strategy section is limited to 20 pages.

The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, required and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modifications:

• All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.

Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov, the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH's electronic system for grants administration. eRA Commons and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Late applications will not be accepted for this announcement.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

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

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically.

Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to FDA. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.

The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Managment. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the assigned Grants Management Specialist and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, FDA. Applications that are incomplete and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Applicants requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year (excluding consortium F&A) must contact FDA program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the application and follow the Policy on the Acceptance for Review of Unsolicited Applications that Request $500,000 or More in Direct Costs as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described below:

Post-submission application materials are those submitted after submission of the grant application but prior to the initial peer review. The FDA policy on post-submission application materials specifies that, for the majority of applications, the only post-submission materials that the FDA will accept are those resulting from unforeseen administrative issues, an option to be used when an unexpected event such as the departure of a participant, natural disaster, etc. has occurred, not to correct oversights/errors discovered after submission of the application.

The list of acceptable post-submission materials in the policy includes:

Revised budget page(s) (e.g., change in budget request due to new funding or institutional acquisition of equipment)
Biographical sketches (e.g., change in senior/key personnel due to the hiring, replacement, or loss of an investigator)
Letters of support or collaboration resulting from a change in senior/key personnel due to the hiring, replacement, or loss of an investigator
Adjustments resulting from natural disasters (e.g., loss of an animal colony)
Adjustments resulting from change of institution (e.g., PD/PI moves to another university)
News of an article accepted for publication (a copy of the article should not be sent)

Effective immediately, the following changes will be implemented:

1. News of a professional promotion or positive tenure decision for any Program Directors/Principal Investigators and Senior/Key Personnel also will be accepted as post-submission application material. The news must be received by the Scientific Review Officer one month (30 calendar days) prior to the peer review meeting, and demonstrate concurrence from the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) of the applicant organization.

2. The policy provides exceptions for applications submitted in response to FOAs that have a single due date. Because similar issues apply to the last due date of an FOA with multiple due dates, the policy is revised through this Notice to apply those exceptions to applications submitted for the last due date of an FOA.

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the objective review process.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

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(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

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?

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, 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. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children

When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.

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 on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

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.

Resubmissions

Not Applicable

Renewals

Not Applicable

Revisions

Not Applicable

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Applications from Foreign Organizations

Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.

Select Agent Research

Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Resource Sharing Plans

Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan.

Budget and Period of Support

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

Applications determined to be complete and responsive will undergo an objective review process, in accordance with FDA Objective Review policy and procedures using the stated review criteria.

As part of the objective review, all applications:

• Will receive a written critique.

Appeals of initial objective review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.

Applications will be ranked on the basis of their Composite Score and will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. Following the objective review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and National Cancer Advisory Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by objective review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
• Agreement to accept the Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award delineated in this FOA.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

If the application is under consideration for funding, FDA will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.

Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to the DUNS, SAM Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

All FDA grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA.

Additional terms and conditions regarding FDA regulatory and Programmatic requirements may be part the Notice of Award.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) 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 FDA 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 FDA programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the FDA 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 FDA as defined below.

The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:

• Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and FDA policies.

FDA staff will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:

• Participate in developing a study protocol;
• Participate in data analysis;
• Review method validation;
• Review and conduct quality assurance of results;
• Participate in writing manuscripts for publication;
• Additionally, an agency program official or program director will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice.

Areas of Joint Responsibility include:

• None; all responsibilities are divided between awardees and FDA staff as described above.

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the annual Non-Competing Progress Report (PHS 2590 or RPPR) and financial statements as required in the HHS Grants Policy Statement and the terms and conditions of the Notice of Award.

A final progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement and the terms and conditions of the Notice of Award.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable FDA grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the HHS Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

eRA Commons Help Desk (Questions regarding eRA Commons registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

Web ticketing system: https://public.era.nih.gov/commonshelp
TTY: 301-451-5939
Email: [email protected]

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and application packages)
Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726

Web ticketing system: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/ContactUs.aspx
Email: [email protected]

GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding FDA grant resources)
Telephone 301-827-7175
TTY 888-262-7848
Email: [email protected]

Sau L. Lee
Food and Drug Administration
Office of Generic Drugs (OGD)
Telephone: 204-276-8426
Email: [email protected]

Bhawana Saluja
Food and Drug Administration
Office of Generic Drugs (OGD)
Telephone: 204-276-8465
Email: [email protected]

Bhawana Saluja
Food and Drug Administration
Office of Generic Drugs (OGD)
Telephone: 204-276-8465
Email: [email protected]

Gladys Melendez (Bohler)
Food and Drug Administration
Office of Acquisition and Grant Services
Telephone: 301-827-7175
Email: [email protected]

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

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.