Department of Health and Human Services


Part 1. Overview Information
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 Ad Hoc Review Process.

Components of Participating Organizations

Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Office of Strategic Programs (OSP)

Funding Opportunity Title

Data Concepts and Terminology Standards for Clinical Research and Drug Development (U24)

Activity Code

U24 Resource-Related Research Projects – Cooperative Agreements

Announcement Type

New

Related Notices
None
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number

RFA-FD-14-004

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 FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research is encouraging applications for projects to expedite development of data concepts and terminology to support human drug development and evaluation.  The primary objective is to support the development of non-proprietary, consensus-based, national data standards for use in clinical studies of human drugs and biologics. Projects may focus on the identification of solutions to data standards development and their challenges in areas, such as general clinical and nonclinical study data, specific therapeutic areas, as well as other sections of the regulatory submission (e.g., quality / Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC). 

Key Dates
Posted Date
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)

April 25, 2014

Letter of Intent Due Date(s)

Not Applicable

Application Due Date(s)

June 15, 2014 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

June, 2014

Advisory Council Review

September, 2014

Earliest Start Date

September, 2014

Expiration Date

June 16, 2014

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.

Table of Contents

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

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement


Section I. Funding Opportunity Description


BACKGROUND:

The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) receives a vast and growing amount of data in a variety of regulatory submissions from a multitude of sources and in a variety of formats. This wealth of data holds great potential to advance CDER’s regulatory and scientific work, but the present lack of standardized data creates significant challenges to realizing that potential. The volume and complexity of drug-related information submitted to CDER for regulatory review is creating significant challenges to the Center’s ability to efficiently and effectively perform its critical public health mission.

The lack of standardized data affects CDER’s review processes by curtailing a reviewer’s ability to perform integral tasks such as rapid acquisition, analysis, storage and reporting of regulatory data. Improved data quality, accessibility and predictability will give reviewers more time to carry out complex analyses, ask in-depth questions and address late-emerging issues. Standardized data will allow reviewers to increase review consistency and perform evaluations across the drug lifecycle. This will enhance the Center’s performance across key drug regulatory functions and ongoing business operations, including pre-market review, post-market safety, oversight of drug quality, and oversight of drug promotion.

In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119, the FDA will: use voluntary, consensus-based standards development processes in place of government unique standards unless such standards are inconsistent with law or otherwise impractical; advocate to align these standards with existing health information technology initiatives, laws, regulations, and mandates; and promote coordination with other standards currently in use.  The projects selected under this funding opportunity must adhere to these principles.

OVERARCHING PROGRAM GOAL:

The CDER Data Standards Program's goals are:

PROGRAM PRIORITIES:

The Food and Drug Administration is announcing the availability of cooperative agreements for the development of data concepts and terminology standards to support human drug development and evaluation.  The primary objective is to support the development of non-proprietary, consensus-based data standards for use in clinical studies of human drugs and biologics.  Projects may focus on the identification of solutions to data standards development and their challenges in areas, such as general clinical and nonclinical study data, specific therapeutic areas, as well as other sections of the regulatory submission (e.g., quality / Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC)).

DESCRIPTION:

The application must include:

Description of the coordination/collaboration (to achieve consensus) needed to address the area of standardization including by not limited to: engagement of subject matter experts, organizations, standards development organizations, affected stakeholders

Specific Areas of Research Interest: 

FDA/CDER is specifically interested in projects to develop standardized clinical research concepts and terminology for therapeutic areas with significant drug development pipeline activity, emerging or complex analytical challenges, and/or are of significant public health concern. The list of therapeutic areas with current status is available at: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmissionRequirements/ElectronicSubmissions/ucm287408.htm.

Section II. Award Information
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.

The following FDA components intend to commit the following amounts in FY 2014:

CDER intends to commit up to $1,000,000 to fund up to 4 awards.

Award Budget

Application budgets need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project. Applications should not exceed $225,000 per budget year in Total Costs.

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.

Section III. Eligibility Information


1. Eligible Applicants


Eligible Organizations

Higher Education Institutions

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

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

For-Profit Organizations

Governments

Other

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 NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.

Required Registrations

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. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.

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

All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account.  PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. 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.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator)

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.

2. Cost Sharing

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

3. Additional Information on Eligibility


Number of Applications

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 (as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement, except for submission:

Section IV. Application and Submission Information


1. Requesting an Application Package

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.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

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.

Page Limitations

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

Required and Optional Components

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.

Instructions for Application Submission

The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.

SF424(R&R) Cover

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

SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations

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

SF424(R&R) Other Project Information

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

SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile

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

R&R Budget

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

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement

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

PHS 398 Research Plan

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 modification:

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.

Planned Enrollment Report

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. 

PHS 398 Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report

When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. 

Foreign Institutions

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.

3. Submission Dates and Times

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, an electronic system for grants administration. FDA 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.

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.

4. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

5. Funding Restrictions

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.

6. Other Submission Requirements and Information

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 eRA Commons. 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 Management. 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 FDA Grants Management Specialist and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, FDA. Applications that are incomplete and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.

Section V. Application Review Information


1. Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the FDA Mission all applications submitted to the FDA in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the FDA Ad Hoc Review process.

Overall Impact

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).

Scored Review Criteria

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? Do the investigators have experience in coordinating efforts to develop open source data standards?       

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 human subjects and/or clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion 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 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 Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children 

When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.

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.

Additional Review Considerations

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.

Management

The extent to which the plan is adequate to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

The background, expertise, and administrative experience of key project staff who will direct, manage, and administer the program and/or identify key hires that will be necessary to carry out the program and whether is it appropriate.

The extent to which the applicant describes expected organizational, fiscal, administrative and programmatic challenges or limitations associated with their proposed activities and strategies to overcome these challenges or limitations.

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.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Ad Hoc Review Group(s) convened by CDER, in accordance with FDA Ad Hoc Review process, using the stated review criteria.  

As part of the scientific Ad Hoc Review, all applications:

Appeals of initial Ad Hoc Review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.

Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial Ad Hoc Review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Cancer Institute, National Cancer Advisory Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

After the Ad Hoc Review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via Email through the assigned Grants Management Specialist. 

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

Section VI. Award Administration Information


1. Award Notices

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 on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

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

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

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

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

The administrative and funding mechanism used for this program is cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism in which substantial FDA programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities.

Under the cooperative agreement, FDA's 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, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and FDA as defined below.

a. All awardees are required to participate in a cooperative manner with FDA.

b. 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 polices.

c. An agency program official or a Center program director will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice. FDA staffs have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards as described below.

Cooperative Agreement - Principal Investigator(s) (PI)/Program Director (PD) responsibility:

The Principal Investigator (PI)/Program Director (PD) will have responsibility for the scientific, technical, and programmatic aspects of the grant and for day-to-day management of the project or program.  The PD/PI(s) will maintain general oversight for ensuring compliance with the financial and administrative aspects of the award, as well as ensuring that all staff has sufficient clearance and/or background checks to work on this project or program.  This individual will work closely with designated officials within the recipient organization to prepare justifications; appropriately acknowledge Federal support in publications, announcements, news programs, and other media; and ensure compliance with other Federal and organizational requirements.

The awardee is responsible for submitting interim progress reports (e.g. at specified intervals), when requested, to the FDA Project Officer (PO) and the Grants Management Specialist (listed as contacts on the Notice of Grant Award) including summary data on progress and expenses to date.

The awardee is encouraged to publish and 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 FDA.  Awardee will work with the appropriate FDA staff to develop and implement an appropriate rapid data release policy.

Manuscripts shall be submitted to FDA Project Officer within two weeks of submission for publication.  Publications or oral presentations of work performed under this Cooperative Agreement will require appropriate acknowledgement of FDA support.  Timely publication of major findings is encouraged

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.

The awardee is responsible for obtaining approval for the development and design of FDA projects prior to execution.

Cooperative Agreement - FDA Project Officer responsibility:

An FDA Project Officer (PO) with scientific/technical expertise and other members of the FDA staff will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:

The responsibilities of the PO include involvement during conduct of the activity, through technical assistance, advice, coordination, and/or other assistance activities.

As appropriate, the PO will participate in the definition of objectives and approaches, and in planning, conducting, analyzing, and publishing results, interpretations, and conclusions of their studies.  However, the dominant role and prime responsibility for the activity reside with the awardees(s) for the project.

The PO will be responsible for the administration and general scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award. And have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:

The FDA through the PO will have access to data generated under this Cooperative Agreement and may periodically review the data and progress reports.  The FDA PO may use information obtained from the data for the preparation of internal reports on the activities of the study.  However, awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to all data developed under these awards or as stated in the terms and conditions of award.

Retain the right to have prior approval on the appointment of all key personnel substantially supported by the grant.

Be directly involved in the guidance and development of the program and the collaborative structure of for the program.

Participate with the grantee in determining and carrying out the methodological approaches to be used.  Collaboration will also include data analysis, interpretation of findings and where appropriate, co-authorship of publications.

Arrange to have professional scientific and administrative/clerical personnel working in collaboration with the grantee as required.

Cooperative Agreement - Collaborative Responsibilities:

As relevant, the PD/PIs in collaboration with PO will work collaboratively in evaluating the most appropriate research methods, data quality control strategies, safety issues, study design and implementation, data analysis and interpretation, publication and dissemination of study results.  Projects require FDA approval prior to implementation/initiation. 

During performance of the award, the PO, with assistance from other scientific program staff, designated based on their relevant expertise, may provide appropriate assistance, advice and guidance.  The role of the PS will be to facilitate and not to direct the activities.  It is anticipated that decisions in all activities will be reached by consensus between the PD/PI and the PO and that the FDA programmatic staff will be given the opportunity to offer input into this process.  The PO will facilitate liaison activity for partnerships, and provide assistance with access to FDA supported resources and services.

The FDA will work collaboratively to identify and coordinate training, professional development and training-related scientific exchange opportunities.

Cooperative Agreement - Steering Committee (Optional)

If a Steering Committee is determined to be necessary, it should be comprised of the PD(s)/PI(s) of the cooperative agreement, the leaders of additional performance sites, the FDA Project Officer, and the FDA agency program official will have primary responsibility for finalizing standard procedures, and measures common to all funded projects. The steering committee will meet every three to six months, or as dictated by the needs of the project. Each full member of the Steering Committee will have one vote, and all major decisions will be determined by majority vote of the Steering Committee. Awardees will be required to accept and implement policies approved by the Steering Committee.

The primary governing body of the study will be the Steering Committee, which will have responsibility for the final details of project activity and policy decisions and will define the rules regarding access to data and/or product outputs or samples, etc.

Cooperative Agreement - Dispute Resolution Process

Any disagreements that may arise in technical or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the FDA 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 FDA staff voting, one FDA 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 awardees’ right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.Disallowance of Cost.

3. Reporting

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.

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.

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. 

Section VII. Agency Contacts

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

Application Submission Contacts

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)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html

TTY: 301-451-5939
Email: commons@od.nih.gov

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

Web ticketing system: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/ContactUs.aspx
Email: support@grants.gov

Scientific/Research/Review Contact(s)

Jenise Gillespie Pedersen
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Telephone: 301-796-4211
Email: Jenise.Gillespie-Pederson@fda.hhs.gov   

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)

Gladys Melendez (Bohler)
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Telephone: 240-402-7565
Email: Gladys.bohler@fda.hhs.gov

Section VIII. Other Information

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Authority and Regulations

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.


Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices



NIH Office of Extramural Research Logo
  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
  USA.gov - Government Made Easy
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®



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