FAMILY AND CHILD WELL-BEING RESEARCH NETWORK

Release Date:  April 1, 1998

RFA:  HD-98-009

P.T.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Application Receipt Date:  July 9, 1998

PURPOSE

The Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch (DBSB) of the Center for
Population Research at the National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development (NICHD) announces the availability of a Request For Applications that
invites applications for cooperative agreements to continue and expand the NICHD
Family and Child Well-being Research Network investigating the relationship of
family factors to child welfare.  The research network will continue to analyze
existing data examining the relationship of family factors to child well-being
and cooperate in pursuing  multi-disciplinary data analysis that has public
policy utility.  In addition, the network may cooperate to collect data if
resources are made available to it from sources outside of the network.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2000

The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion
and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2000," a PHS-led national
activity for setting priority areas.  This RFA, Family and Child Well-being
Research Network, is related to the priority areas of family planning,
educational and community-based programs, and maternal and infant health. 
Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2000" (Full Report: 
Stock No. 017-001-00474-0 or Summary Report:  Stock No. 017-001-00473-1) through
the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
20402-9325 (telephone 202-512-1800).

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

Applications may be submitted by domestic for-profit and non-profit
organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, hospitals,
laboratories, units of State or local governments, and eligible agencies of the
Federal government. Applications from minority individuals, persons with
disabilities and women are encouraged.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

The funding mechanism to be used to support the research network will be the NIH
cooperative agreement (U01).  Cooperative agreements are assistance mechanisms
but differ from research project grants in that there is substantial programmatic
involvement of the NICHD Project Coordinator above and beyond the levels required
for traditional program management of grants.  Specifically, the Project
Coordinator will assist the Principal Investigators in the research network.  All
parties agree to accept the participatory and cooperative nature of the group
process (see Terms and Conditions below).  Some proportion of the cooperative
research funds may be used to support logistic, administrative and policy
outreach activities.

This RFA is intended as recompetition of a network that was first funded in 1993. 
The total project period for the research network is five years and an
application submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed five years of
requested support.  Applicants who are currently supported in the NICHD Family
and Child Well-being Research Network may apply for competing continuations of
the current U01 cooperative agreements.  Applicants who are not current members
of the network may apply for new U01 cooperative agreements.  The anticipated
award date is April 1, 1999.

FUNDS AVAILABLE

It is anticipated that up to nine awards will be made.  $1,350,000 for direct
costs have been set aside to support the network in the first year and this
amount will increase by the standard NIH inflation allowance in subsequent years
of the network.  The actual level of support is dependent on the receipt of a
sufficient number of applications of high scientific merit.  Individual
applicants may apply for up to $75,000 per year of direct cost to support their
individual research programs.  In addition, $675,000 per year of direct cost
support will be allocated to support the cooperative research plan, to be
distributed according to the needs of the overall cooperative research plan
across the participating members of the network.  It is anticipated that several
elements of the current cooperative research program will be continued in the 
network.  These are described in the RESEARCH OBJECTIVES section below.  Current
grantees will not be given any preference over new applicants in the competition.

Although this program is provided for in the financial plan of the NIH, the award
of grants pursuant to this RFA is also contingent on the availability of funds
for this purpose.  The number of awards or funding for co-operative research may
increase if programs outside of DBSB, NICHD wish to augment the network.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

In 1993, NICHD created the Family and Child Well-being Research Network by
supporting seven cooperative agreements for five years.  The network was formed
to address the frustration within public policy circles that basic information
relating to family and child well-being was filled with gaps and analyzed in an
uneven manner and within the research community that family and child research
was spread among a large number of disciplines so diverse in their research
approaches that communication across fields was difficult.  The network was
conceptualized as a systematic effort to both understand the relationship of
family and child well-being from a multi-disciplinary point of view and address
public policy concerns in a comprehensive and responsive manner.

The network was designed to support secondary data analysis and such activities
necessary to make research accessible for public policy purposes.  It engaged in
research with the Federal Interagency  Forum for Child and Family Statistics and
its component agencies to improve and balance the information base about families
and children.  In the process, it helped create a series of indicators about
child and family well-being which have been designated by Presidential Executive
Order to be an official yardstick of child well-being.  It sponsored a number of
papers and conferences that supported the federal fatherhood initiative which,
in turn, has greatly improved the information base regarding the family behavior
of men.  A by-product of the research program on fathers has been the planned or
actual enhancement of several important data sets with respect to male behavior.
These data sets are: the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), the Early Head
Start Evaluation (EHS), the National Longitudinal Survey 1997 Cohort (NLSY97),
the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), and the National
Survey of Family Growth (NSFG).  The network has also engaged in a multi-faceted
research program on the interaction of poverty and child well-being.  In the
process, the network has been involved in the development of the Survey of
Population Dynamics (SPD), the Twelve State Welfare Reform project and the
National Child Welfare Study.  In all of these cases, the process of secondary
data analysis has led to research, conferences, workshops and consultation which,
in turn, has enabled others to field and/or plan new data collection that the
network (and anyone else) can analyze in the future. More information on these
activities can be obtained from the program contact.

Continuing Activities

The network will continue to function in the public policy niche that it has
established for itself.  Specifically, it will continue to be an interface to the
research world for the Federal Interagency Forum for Child and Family Statistics
and be prepared to work with the Forum on an evolving agenda of research topics
designed to improve our information base about families and children.  Also, the
network has undertaken a number of projects in regard to welfare reform that must
continue until they are concluded sometime in the next century.  Specifically,
the network will continue its work on the development and analysis of the SPD
with the Census Bureau, the Twelve State Project with ACF and related
coordination workshops held to support the DHHS Welfare to Work Initiative.  All
applicants should address how they might contribute to these activities as part
of the cooperative research plan section of their applications. Members of the
network will not be required to participate in these activities but the network
will be configured so that activities with respect to these commitments will
continue.

Objectives

In addition to the continuing research objectives mentioned above, applicants are
invited to address the concerns discussed below.  Applicants should propose both
a plan for individual research activities and for cooperative activities once the
new network is formed.  Each investigator in the network will be expected to have
demonstrated expertise and access to at least one data set relevant to the topic. 
Also, applicants must demonstrate that they have both the substantive and
statistical expertise to function as part of an interdisciplinary research
network. Each investigator will be given support to pursue his or her individual
research agenda but a large part of the available resources will be held in
reserve to address cooperative research questions agreed upon by the network.

The major objective of the network will continue to be secondary data analysis
of the relationship of family factors to child well-being in the context of
neighborhood, community, societal and public policy influences.  The network will
be expected to work cooperatively to field a systematic, multi-disciplinary set
of analyses on various dimensions of these themes which will be composed of the
sum of individual and cooperative work of the network.  It is important to
describe fully these interconnections and to formulate and test models of the
causes and consequences of these relationships.  It is also important to
elucidate the mechanisms of action by which family factors affect child
well-being so that possible avenues of social intervention can be ascertained or
existing interventions, such as welfare reform, can be evaluated.

The American family has undergone considerable change in modern times.  These
changes are associated with changes in the way children are raised and with
changes in familial support structures that sustain children and develop them
into productive adults.  It is the intent of this RFA to assist in measuring both
family factors and child well-being very broadly so as to develop as
comprehensive a picture as possible about the relationship between these
considerations.  It is also important to understand how family factors and
socio-economic conditions combine to influence the nurture of children and help
children develop into productive adults from both an individual and societal
perspective.  It is important to understand how the intergenerational structure
of the family marshals resources to care for dependent children and how
intergenerational family processes relate to public intervention to sustain and
develop children.

There are several new substantive issues that merit attention.  Evidence points
to a fundamental interconnectedness among family structure, fertility and child
well-being and DBSB has adopted a goal of fostering research on "parenting and
partnering," which signifies the search for an integrated explanation of the
behavioral and social processes that influence fertility, family structure and
child well-being.  Interested parties should request the report, Goals and
Opportunities: DBSB Report on Program Planning 1997-2001, March, 1997.  There is
also a pressing need to better integrate health research into studies of family
and child well-being.  Traditionally research on the health and socio-economic
well-being of families and children has tended to be isolated from each other. 
However, the evolution of public policy has created a real need to treat both
health and socio-economic aspects of family and child well-being simultaneously,
especially in regard to childhood disability and the expansion of MEDICAID to
cover increasing numbers of poor children.  A rapidly growing body of evidence
points to the early years of life as a critically important period in a child's
life, in which intervention programs involving families with young children can
be very effective.  It is important to map the behavioral and socio-economic
context that shapes the development of young children and to understand how
family decision making and public policy effects this context.

The research network is expected to concentrate its activity on secondary data
analysis.  This will enable the research community to exploit fully many of the
sources of data that have been specially created for the research community by
NICHD and other agencies.  In addition, there are many data resources of
sub-national populations that should be fully analyzed.  It is the intent of this
RFA to utilize data containing a fair representation of women and minorities. 
In exceptional circumstances data confined to specialized populations may be used
to enhance our understanding of selected dimensions of the research problem. 
Investigators may be actively involved in data collection supported outside of
the network and may apply for support to collect data during the time of their
participation in the network.  In such cases, investigators will not be bound by
any requirements with respect to data collection, other than those required by
the sponsoring agency.  If funds are made available to the network to field a
particular data collection, then the requirements regarding data collection
discussed in the Special Requirements section below will apply.

The network will be assembled to achieve the broadest possible coverage in terms
of research perspective, analytical technique and sources of data.  The focus of
the network is the United States, but the use of foreign data may be justified
if they provides an insight into the American condition.  Investigators must
demonstrate that they have a long-term research agenda that is addressing
important questions relevant to the research goals of this RFA.  In addition they
must describe the sources of data to which they have access and plan to use in
their research plan.  It is important to describe the extent to which the
investigator has experience using these data.  It is also important to outline
the analytic plan and to describe the statistical techniques that will be
employed in each phase of the research plan.

Individual Research Plan

The Principal Investigator should propose an individual research plan to
accomplish his or her personal research agenda featuring the secondary analysis
of data to which the investigator has access. The plan should have the same
degree of specificity  and should follow the same format as a regular research
grant application.  The investigator may request support for any type of research
activity commonly available through research assistance mechanisms offered by the
NICHD except the cost of collecting new data.

Cooperative Research Plan

The Principal Investigator should also propose a cooperative research plan that
will describe the proposed cooperative research effort that transcends his/her
individual research programs.  The cooperative research plan should propose
questions of substantive and/or public policy significance that should be
examined cooperatively.  Applicants should indicate how their disciplinary and
methodological perspectives could contribute to a cooperative research effort. 
Also, investigators should indicate which sources of data, with which they have
familiarity and access, to should be used in the cooperative research plan.

Applicants should address how they might cooperate in the continuing business of
the network describe above, should propose projects that would expand the
research agenda of the network.  Applicants may propose methodological analyses
that might improve our understanding of what existing data measure or lead to new
measure for future data collection efforts that are conducted by others or led
by the network.

BUDGET

Separate detailed budgets should be submitted for both the individual research
plan as well as the cooperative research plan.  In addition, a composite budget
should be submitted.  Applicable facilities and administrative costs will be
provided.  Budgets will be reviewed on the basis of appropriateness for the work
proposed.  Allowable costs and policies governing the research grant program of
the NIH will prevail.

In preparing the budget section of the application, applicants are encouraged to
submit a budget plan for the individual research plan that does not exceed
$75,000 per year in direct cost and may include a request to attend no more than
one scientific meeting per year.  We expect that the budget for the cooperative
research plan will be in the range of $75,000 to $150,000 depending on the scope
of the work proposed.  The cooperative research plan should request funds to
support the Principal Investigator and any other essential personnel to attend
four, two day meetings in Washington, DC per year.  Investigators should identify
research topics and data analyses that they would be willing and able to perform. 
Once the network is formed, the steering committee of the network will establish
a co-operative research agenda which will be derived from the collective plans
offered by successful applicants in the network.  Applicants should propose
co-operative research for as long as they request individual support (typically
five years ) and may budget for the participation of a wide range of colleagues
to assist them in pursuing these research topics.

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Terms and Conditions

Awardee Responsibilities

Each Principal Investigator will have primary responsibility to define objectives
and approaches, and to plan, conduct, analyze, and publish results,
interpretations and conclusions of his/her studies.  Awardees will retain custody
of, and primary rights to, their data developed under this award, subject to
Government rights of access, consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies. 
A budget supporting the individual research programs will be negotiated with
NICHD based on the corresponding budget presented in the application.  Each
investigator will have the right to publish based on the work of their individual
research programs.  Each Principal Investigator will also propose a cooperative
research plan in which they will identify research questions, methodological
research, protocols and data sets that they propose to work on cooperatively. 
The Steering Committee will formulate a research plan for cooperative research
which will distill the several individual cooperative research plans into a
coherent plan and will involve allocating resources among the participating
cooperative agreements to implement it.  The cooperative research plan will be
agreed upon by majority vote of the Steering Committee, but each Principal
Investigator will have the right of approval for any aspect of the cooperative
research plan involving them.  Due publication credit will be given to all work
done cooperatively.

Steering Committee Responsibilities

Planning and implementation of the cooperative aspects of the study will be done
by a Steering Committee consisting of the Principal Investigator from each
participating awardee institution and the NICHD Project Coordinator.  The
Steering Committee will:

o  Plan the design and implementation of the cooperative research protocols

o  Participate in decision-making regarding allocation of funds for cooperative
research protocols.

o  Publish results, conclusions and interpretations of the cooperative protocols.

o  Formulate publication policy and appoint a Publication Subcommittee, as judged
necessary by the Steering Committee.

o  Agree to accept the coordinating role of the committee and the cooperative
nature of the group process.

NICHD Responsibilities

The NICHD Project Coordinator will be the Family Demography Coordinator of the
Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch, NICHD.  The Project Coordinator is
a partner within the network representing the government's interest in the
substantive work of the network.  The primary role of the Project Coordinator is
to facilitate the work of the network and to connect the network to public policy
operations within the government.  He will:

o  Assist in all functions of the Steering Committee

o  Assist with the development of common protocols
o  Assist the steering committee in reviewing and commenting on each stage of the
program before subsequent stages are started.

o  Assist the steering committee in exercising the options of adding, modifying
or terminating aspects of the program.

o  Assist in the analysis, interpretation and reporting of findings in the
scientific literature and other media to the community at large and the public
policy community within the federal government.

Project Officer

NICHD will appoint a Project Officer who is not the Project Coordinator who will:

o  Have the option to withhold support to a participating institution, if
technical performance requirements such as compliance with the protocol are not
met.

o Carry out continuous review of all activities to ensure objectives are being
met.

The above responsibilities are in addition to, not in lieu of, the levels of
involvement normally required for program stewardship of grants.

Arbitration Procedures

When agreement between an awardee and NICHD staff cannot be reached on
programmatic and scientific-technical issues that may arise after the award, an
arbitration panel will be formed. The panel will consist of one person selected
by the Principal Investigators, one person selected by the NICHD staff, and a
third person selected by these two members. The decision of the arbitration
panel, by majority vote will be binding.  These special arbitration procedures
in no way affect the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action in accordance
with PHS regulations at 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and HHS regulations at 45 CFR
Part 16.

Cooperative Agreements are assistance mechanisms and are subject to the same
administrative requirements as grants. The above Terms of Award are in addition
to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB administrative guidelines, HHS
grant administration regulation at 45 CFR Part 74, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH
grant administration policies and procedures.

Meetings

Each investigator should budget for four (4) meetings a year in the Washington,
DC area.  Each meeting will be approximately two days in length.  During these
meetings, the steering commit- tee will decide upon the operating policies of the
network, discuss on-going research, formulate the collaborative research plan,
and discuss the implications of their research with interested parties outside
of the network who may be invited by the steering committee as the occasion
warrants. These meetings will be coordinated by the Project Coordinator.

Communications

There will be a much greater level of communication among network members than
is normal for individual research project grants. Individual Investigators should
budget appropriately for greater telephone usage, more copies of research papers,
and greater mailing costs than in a regular research grant.  The use of the
Internet will be a central feature of the network.

Expectation of Cooperation

There will be high expectations of the members of the research network to
interact with other members of the network, share research insights, cooperate
in the design and implementation of a cooperative research plan, be responsive
to needs of the cooperative work of the network, and sensitive to the public
policy significance of its activities.  Applicants should indicate their
willingness and ability to participate in these stated aspects of the network. 
The statement of willingness to cooperate should be included under
Consortium/Collaborators, section C-8 of the Research Plan in the application.

Advisory Committee

NICHD will appoint an advisory panel to assist the Steering Committee in carrying
out the goals of this network.  The advisory panel will be appointed by NICHD and
be comprised of senior scientists in the areas central to the work of the network
who are not affiliated with NICHD or part of the network.  As well as serving in
an advisory capacity to the Steering Committee as deemed necessary, the advisory
panel will serve in a  review capacity whenever a project is approved by the
steering committee which falls outside of research reviewed and approved as part
of the research scope of the network.  The network's scope is defined as the sum
of the approved individual and cooperative research plans of participating
cooperative agreements in the network.  In cases when the network wishes to
pursue a project outside of its approved research scope or when another agency
wishes the network to undertake a project outside of the approved research scope
of the network, the advisory panel will review that project.  Also the advisory
board will review the content and design of any proposed data collection project
as well as serve as the data safety and monitoring committee.

INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their
subpopulations must be included in all NIH-supported biomedical and behavioral
research projects involving human subjects, unless a clear and compelling
rationale and justification are provided that inclusion is inappropriate with
respect to health of the subjects or the purpose of the research.  This policy
results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law
103-43).

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the NIH
guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities in Clinical Research, which have
been published in the federal register of March 28, 1994 (FR 59 14508-14513) and
in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, Volume 23, Number 11, b March 18,
1994.

Investigators may obtain copies of the policy from the program staff listed under
INQUIRIES.  Program staff also can provide additional relevant information
concerning the policy.

APPLICATION PROCEDURES

Grant application form PHS-398 (rev. 9/95) is to be used to apply for these
grants.  The PHS-398 is available from most institutional offices of sponsored
research and can also be obtained from the Division of Extramural Outreach and
Information Resources, 6701 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7910, Bethesda, MD 20892
(telephone: 301-435-0714; Email: asknih@od.nih.gov).

The research plan section of the application should conform to the guidelines of
PHS-398.  The individual research plan should be presented first and should
follow steps 1-4, i.e., Specific Aims, Background and Significance, Progress
Report/Preliminary Studies, and Research Design and Methods, of the standard
research plan section.  The budget for the application should be predicated on
the requirements of the individual research plan and on the cooperative research
plan that the investigator is proposing to work on cooperatively.  Since these
applications will in fact be proposing two research plans, the individual and the
collaborative, the standard 25-page limitation will not apply.  However,
applicants may not exceed 40 pages.

The RFA label available in the 9/91 version of PHS form 398 must be affixed to
the bottom of the face page.  Failure to use this label could result in delayed
processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee in
time for the review.  In addition, the RFA Title and number must be typed on line
2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be marked.

Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the
checklist, and three signed photocopies, in one package to:

CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
6701 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE, ROOM 1040, MSC 7710
BETHESDA, MD  20892-7710
BETHESDA, MD  20817 (for express/courier service)

At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must also be
sent to:

Susan Streufert, Ph.D.
Division of Scientific Review
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5E03F, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD 20892-7510
Bethesda, MD 20854 (for express/courier service)

Applications must be received by July 9, 1998.  If an application is received
after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review.  The Center
for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in response to this
RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending in initial review,
unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.  CSR will not accept any
application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed.  This does not
preclude the submission of substantial revisions of applications already
reviewed, but such applications must include an introduction addressing the
previous critique.

REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS

Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by CSR and  for
responsiveness by NICHD.  Incomplete or non-responsive applications will be
returned to the applicant without further consideration.  Those applications that
are complete and responsive will be evaluated for scientific/technical merit by
an appropriate peer review group, convened by the NICHD in accordance with the
review criteria stated below.  The second level of review will be provided by the
National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council.

As part of the initial merit review, a process may be used by the initial review
group in which applications will be determined to be competitive or
non-competitive based on their scientific merit relative to other applications
received in response to this RFA.  Applications judged to be competitive will be
discussed further and assigned a priority score.  Applications determined to be
non-competitive will be withdrawn from further consideration and the Principal
Investigator will receive a summary statement of reviewers comments.

Review Criteria

The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health.  In the
written review, comments on the following aspects of the application will be made
in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a
substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals.  Each of these criteria will
be addressed and considered in the assignment of the overall score, which is to
reflect the overall impact of the project on the field, weighing the criteria
appropriately for each application.  An application does not need to be strong
in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact and thus
deserve a high merit rating.  For example, an investigator may propose to carry
out important work, that by its nature is not innovative, but is essential to
move a field forward.

(1) Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of
the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?  What
will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive this
field?

(2) Approach: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses
adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the
project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider
alternative tactics?

(3) Innovation: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or methods? 
Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing
paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?

(4) Investigator: Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to
carry out this work?  Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level
of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)?

(5) Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done
contributes to the probability of success?  Do the proposed analyses take
advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful
collaborative arrangements?  Is there evidence of institutional support?

(6) Value to Network:  Does the investigator contribute to the multi-disciplinary
concept of the research network?  Does the cooperative research plan offer ideas
which are likely to stimulate important research that has useful public policy
implications?

In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with NIH policy, all
applications will also be reviewed with respect to the following:

- The adequacy of plans to include both genders, minorities, and their subgroups
as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research.  Plans for the
recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated.

- The reasonableness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the
proposed research.

- The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans, animals or the environment,
to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project proposed in the
application.

AWARD CRITERIA

The anticipated date of award is April 1, 1999.  An attempt will be made to
balance the network so that it will have a multi-disciplinary composition, a
diversity of research issues and broad coverage of extant data sources.  Awards
will be made on the basis of the scientific merit of the research application as
determined by peer review, the need to create a balanced network and the
availability of funds.

INQUIRIES

Written and telephone inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged.  The
opportunity to clarify any issues or questions from potential applicants is
welcome.

Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to:

V. Jeffery Evans, Ph.D., J.D.
Center for Population Research
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8B13
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
Telephone:  (301) 496-1174
FAX:  (301) 496-0962
Email:  Jeff_Evans@NIH.gov

Direct inquiries regarding fiscal matters to:

Ms. Melinda Nelson
Grants Management Branch
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8A17K
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
Telephone: (301) 496-5481
FAX:  (301) 402-0915
Email:  nelsonm@exchange.nih.gov

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS

This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.
93.864 (Population Research).  Awards are made under authorization of the Public
Health Service Act, Title IV, Part A (Public Law 78-410, as amended by Public Law
99-158, 42 USC 241 and 285) and administered under PHS grant policies and Federal
Regulations, 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 74.  This program is not subject to
the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372, or to Health
Systems Agency Review.

The PHS strongly encourages all grant and contract recipients to provide a
smoke-free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products.  In
addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in
certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of  a facility) in which
regular or routine education, library, day care, health care or early childhood
development services are provided to children.  This is consistent with the PHS
mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American
people.


Return to Volume Index

Return to NIH Guide Main Index


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


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