STUDIES OF THE ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS (ELSI) OF HUMAN GENETIC 
VARIATION RESEARCH FOR INDIVIDUALS AND DIVERSE RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUPS

Release Date:  November 15, 2001

RFA:  RFA-HG-02-003

National Human Genome Research Institute
National Institute on Aging
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institute on Drug Abuse
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
National Institute of General Medical Sciences
National Institute of Nursing Research
Fogarty International Center
 
Letter of Intent Receipt Date:  March 1, 2002
Application Receipt Date:       July 10, 2002

THIS RFA USES "MODULAR GRANT" AND "JUST-IN-TIME" CONCEPTS.  MODULAR 
INSTRUCTIONS MUST BE USED FOR RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATIONS REQUESTING LESS THAN 
$250,000 PER YEAR IN ALL YEARS. MODULAR BUDGET INSTRUCTIONS ARE PROVIDED IN 
SECTION C OF THE PHS 398 (REVISION 5/2001) AVAILABLE AT 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html.   

PURPOSE
						
Human genetic variation research, especially as it relates to risk factors for 
common, complex disorders, is leading to increased knowledge regarding 
variation among individuals and how this variation may contribute to the 
health status of individuals.  It is also leading to more knowledge about 
variation within and among different racial and ethnic groups (to the extent 
that such groups can reasonably be identified) and how this variation may 
contribute to the aggregate health status of those groups.  The NHGRI"s new 
initiative to develop a haplotype map of the human genome will make it 
possible to conduct this type of research (in particular, disease gene 
association studies) more quickly and efficiently than ever before, resulting 
in an even more rapid proliferation of this new information.  Information 
regarding variation within and among groups, in particular, will increasingly 
be generated, because the map will facilitate the conduct of association 
studies in selected populations where certain diseases are more or less 
prevalent.  

While the ultimate goal of studies aimed at relating human genetic variation 
to disease risk is the improvement of human health, concerns have been raised 
that the findings of some genetic variation research may be misunderstood.  
Concerns have also been raised that such findings, if interpreted incorrectly 
and misused, will exacerbate, rather than ameliorate, already-existing health 
disparities among racial, ethnic, and socio-economic groups.  The NHGRI, 
through its Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Program, 
proposes a new initiative to encourage additional research on the ELSI 
implications of genetic variation research for both individuals and for 
diverse population groups.  This builds on an earlier initiative in the same 
general area.  See http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/Grant_info/Funding/RFA-HG-99-002.html.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010

The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion 
and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national 
activity for setting priority areas.  This Request for Applications (RFA), 
Studies Of The Ethical, Legal, And Social Implications (ELSI) Of Human Genetic 
Variation Research For Individuals And Diverse Racial And Ethnic Groups, is 
related to one or more of the priority areas.  Potential applicants may obtain 
a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople/.

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

Applications may be submitted by domestic and foreign, for-profit and non-
profit organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, 
hospitals, laboratories, units of State and local governments, and eligible 
agencies of the Federal government.  Faith-based organizations are eligible to 
apply for these grants.  Racial/ethnic minority individuals, women, and 
persons with disabilities are encouraged to apply as Principal Investigators. 
Participation in the program by investigators at minority institutions is 
strongly encouraged. Investigators from foreign institutions should review the 
standard NIH criteria for funding foreign applications (see AWARD CRITERIA 
below) before preparing an application.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

This RFA will use the National Institutes of Health (NIH) regular research 
project grant (R01) and small research project grant (R03) award mechanisms.  
Responsibility for the planning, direction, and execution of the proposed 
project will be solely that of the applicant.  The total project period for an 
R01 application submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed 3 years, the 
total project period for an R03 may not exceed 2 years.  This RFA is a one-
time solicitation.  Future unsolicited competing continuation applications 
will compete with all investigator-initiated applications and be reviewed 
according to the customary peer review procedures.  The anticipated award date 
is March 1, 2003.

FUNDS AVAILABLE 

The participating NIH institutes intend to commit approximately $4,500,000 in 
FY 2003 to fund 10-15 new grants in response to this RFA. An applicant for an 
R01 may request a project period of up to 3 years and a budget for direct 
costs of up to $500,000 per year, an applicant for an R03 may request a 
project period of up to 2 years and a budget for direct costs of up to $50,000 
per year. Because the nature and scope of the research proposed may vary, it 
is anticipated that the size of each award will also vary. Although the 
financial plans of the participating Institutes and Centers (IC) provide 
support for this program, awards pursuant to this RFA are contingent upon the 
availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious 
applications. At this time, it is not known whether this RFA will be reissued.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

While it is believed that virtually all disorders have a genetic component, 
the extent to which genetic factors, as distinct from other biological and 
non-biological factors, influence the increased or decreased risk of 
individuals for common, complex disorders remains uncertain.  Genetic 
variation research will help us better understand the contribution that 
genetics makes to such disorders.  However, we currently have few data about 
how individuals, health professionals, or various societal decision makers are 
likely to interpret, understand, and use the findings of such research.  In 
addition, little is understood about how people are likely to react to 
information suggesting the possibility of group differences with respect to 
individual genetic risk for common, complex disorders.     

Some have argued that genetic variation research will enable people to be 
grouped in new, positive ways, so that health care will become increasingly 
tailored to genetic risk status.  This, it is argued, could have positive 
results over time, not only for the health of individuals, but also for 
reducing health disparities among groups.  For example, pharmacogenomics 
research aimed at determining the proportion of individuals in various 
population groups who have genotypes that make them more or less responsive to 
particular drugs could result in better-targeted drug therapies.  This, in 
turn, could lead to measurable improvements in drug response and decreases in 
the incidence of adverse or toxic reactions in members of those groups.  

On the other hand, concerns have been raised that genetic variation research, 
to the extent that it may lead to an overemphasis on individual and group 
differences, may tend to reinforce existing patterns of racial, ethnic, and 
socio-economic stratification, both in health care and in other societal 
areas.  These reinforced patterns, in turn, could over time lead to an actual 
worsening of the health status of individuals and of health disparities among 
groups.  For example, misinterpretations of the findings of genetic variation 
research could increase the tendency of some to view genetics in an overly 
deterministic manner when assigning causality for common, complex disorders, 
creating a climate in which important non-genetic factors are ignored and 
societal resources are diverted from addressing crucial environmental, 
behavioral, or social concerns.  Diagnoses of certain disorders could more 
often be delayed or even missed in patients who have not been identified as 
members of "high risk" racial or ethnic groups, as has happened in the past 
with such disorders as cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia.  Other concerns 
relate to the potential for stigmatization and for racial and ethnic 
categories to be "reified" as well-defined biological constructs both of which 
could further affect both individual and group health status, even if only 
indirectly.      

Research Scope

Examples of the types of topics that would be appropriate for applications 
submitted under this initiative include but are not limited to the following:

1.  How will individuals understand and use genetic information that suggests 
the possibility of a meaningful association between their genotype and 
increased or decreased risk for a particular common, complex disorder (or 
between their genotype and increased or decreased responsiveness to a 
particular medication or susceptibility to a potentially hazardous 
environmental substance)?  How will genetic information that suggests the 
possibility of differences in frequencies among groups of the genetic variants 
that contribute to these traits be understood and used?   

o Do perceptions, interpretations, or concerns about causality, or about group 
differences, differ between persons with the disorder and unaffected persons?  
	
o Do perceptions, interpretations, or concerns about causality, or about group 
differences, differ among individuals from different racial, ethnic, or socio-
economic groups?  
	
o Do perceptions, interpretations, or concerns about causality, or about group 
differences, differ depending on the nature of the disorder, or on whether the 
non-genetic factors involved are environmental, behavioral or social in 
nature? 
	
o Do perceptions, interpretations, or concerns about causality, or about group 
differences, vary as a function of age? 

o What effect, if any, will the knowledge that one is at increased or 
decreased genetic risk for a particular disorder have on perceived health 
status and on individual health behaviors?  How are these effects modified by 
such factors as age, gender, or socio-economic status?  
	
o What effect, if any, will the knowledge that a particular group has a higher 
proportion of individuals at increased or decreased genetic risk for a 
particular disorder have on the perceived health status or health behaviors of 
members of that group (including the willingness of group members to be 
screened, adhere to health interventions, and utilize other health services)?
	
2.  How will genetic information that suggests the possibility of group 
differences in the prevalence of a genotype associated with increased or 
decreased risk for a particular common, complex disorder (or increased or 
decreased responsiveness to a particular medication or susceptibility to a 
potentially hazardous environmental substance) be understood and used by 
health professionals?  How will it be understood and used by various other 
societal decision makers (e.g., insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, 
employers, health care policymakers, environmental policymakers, educational 
institutions, courts, adoption agencies, the military)?  How will this 
information differentially affect individual decision-making over the life 
course (e.g., insurance, retirement age, savings)?  How will this information 
affect public and institutional policy for the aged (e.g., Social Security, 
Medicare, retirement benefits), or for individuals with disabilities?  What 
long-term effect, if any, will the use of this information have on health 
disparities among groups?
	
3.  In reporting the results of human genetic variation research, how do 
investigators assign causality when a particular disorder is associated with 
both genetic and non-genetic (environmental, behavioral, or social) risk 
factors?  How do the media assign causality when reporting on such studies?  
What are the ethical obligations of investigators when they report the 
findings of disease gene association research involving common, complex 
disorders?  What are the ethical obligations of the media when they report on 
such studies?  
	
4.  How do investigators define and describe the groups with whom they conduct 
human genetic variation research?   How do the media describe those groups 
when reporting on such studies?  What are the ethical obligations of 
investigators when they define and describe the groups with whom they conduct 
genetic variation research?  What are the ethical obligations of the media 
when they report on such studies?   
	
5.  What new problems arise for individuals and groups when genetic variation 
data are incorporated into social survey research?  (See Cells and Surveys:  
Should Biological Measures be Included in Social Science Research?   
Washington, DC:  National Academy Press, 2001, available at 
http://www.nap.edu.)  How will individuals and groups perceive the risks and 
benefits of participating in these surveys?  How can these surveys be used to 
study the factors motivating participation?

6.  How are the statements that "all human beings are 99.9% genetically the 
same" and "there is no biological basis for precise racial categorizations" 
understood by individuals who self-identify as members of particular racial, 
ethnic, or socio-economic groups?  How do such statements affect how groups 
define themselves or are defined by others?  What is the impact of such 
statements on individual conceptions of self and group identity?  
	
7.  In broad terms, what is likely to be the long-term impact of genetic 
variation research on the health status of individuals and on health 
disparities among groups?

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

To allow researchers to compare findings on issues common to all the projects, 
to reduce duplication of effort, and to promote sharing of information, 
grantee workshops will be arranged on an annual basis in the Bethesda area. 
The initial meeting will take place shortly after the grants are funded. Funds 
for travel to these meetings for up to two investigators (the PI and one 
other) per year should be included in the requested budget.

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 sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research 
projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating 
that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or 
the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization 
Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43).

All investigators proposing clinical research should read the AMENDMENT "NIH 
Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical 
Research - Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and 
Contracts on October 9, 2001 
(http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html), 
a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are 
available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. 
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of 
clinical research, updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the 
new OMB standards, clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III 
clinical trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398, and updated roles and 
responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community.  The policy 
continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) 
all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of 
plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by 
sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable, and 
b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting 
analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group 
differences.

INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

It is the policy of NIH that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) 
must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported by the 
NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.  
This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for receipt 
dates after October 1, 1998.

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the 
"NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the Inclusion of Children as Participants in 
Research Involving Human Subjects that was published in the NIH Guide for 
Grants and Contracts, March 6, 1998, and is available at the following URL 
address: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-024.html.

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

REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS

NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants 
for all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human 
subjects.  This policy announcement is found in the NIH Guide for Grants and 
Contracts Announcement dated June 5, 2000, at the following web site: 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.

URLS IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES

All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within 
specified page limitations.  Unless otherwise specified in an NIH 
solicitation, internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide 
information necessary to the review because reviewers are under no obligation 
to view the Internet sites.  Reviewers are cautioned that their anonymity may 
be compromised when they directly access an Internet site.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to 
provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA) under some circumstances.  Data that are (1) first produced in a 
project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited 
publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has 
the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA.  
It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this 
amendment.  NIH has provided guidance at:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.

Applicants may wish to place data collected under this RFA in a public 
archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the 
distribution for an indefinite period of time.  If so, the application should 
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include 
information about this in the budget justification section of the application. 
In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent 
statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider 
use of data collected under this award.

LETTER OF INTENT

Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes a 
descriptive title of the proposed research, the name, address, and telephone 
number of the Principal Investigator, the identities of other key personnel 
and participating institutions, and the number and title of the RFA in 
response to which the application may be submitted.  Although a letter of 
intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of 
a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to 
estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

The letter of intent is to be sent by March 1, 2002 to:

Jean E. McEwen, J.D., Ph.D.
ELSI Research Program
National Human Genome Research Institute
Building 31, Room B2B07
31 Center Drive, MSC 2033
National Institutes of Health 
Bethesda, MD  20892-2033
TEL:  (301) 402-4997 
FAX:  (301) 402-1950 
E-mail:  [email protected]

APPLICATION PROCEDURES

The PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001) at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html must be used in 
applying for these grants. This version of the PHS 398 is available in an 
interactive, searchable format. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, 
Telephone 301/710-0267, Email: [email protected].  

For R01 applications, the Research Plan section should not exceed a total of 
25 pages, for R03 applications, the Research Plan section should not exceed a 
total of 10 pages.   

All R03 applications, and any R01 application that requests $250,000 or less 
per year in direct costs, must use the modular grant application instructions.  
Complete instructions and information on Modular Grant applications can be 
found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MODULAR GRANT APPLICATIONS

The modular grant concept establishes specific modules in which direct costs 
may be requested as well as a maximum level for requested budgets. Only 
limited budgetary information is required under this approach.  The 
just-in-time concept allows applicants to submit certain information only when 
there is a possibility for an award. It is anticipated that these changes will 
reduce the administrative burden for the applicants, reviewers and NIH staff.  
The research grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html is to be used in 
applying for these grants, with modular budget instructions provided in 
Section C of the application instructions.  

The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) application form must be 
affixed to the bottom of the face page of the application.  Type the RFA 
number on the label.  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 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. The RFA label is also available at: 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf.

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 be 
sent to:

Rudy Pozzatti, Ph.D.
Office of Scientific Review
National Human Genome Research Institute
31 Center Drive, Room B2B37
Bethesda, MD  20892-2033

Applications must be received by the application receipt date listed in the 
heading of this RFA.  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 
initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.  The 
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 the CSR and 
responsiveness by NHGRI.  Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will 
be returned to the applicant without further consideration.

Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated for 
scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by 
the NHGRI in accordance with the review criteria stated below.  As part of the 
initial merit review, all applications will receive a written critique and 
undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest 
scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under review, 
will be discussed, assigned a priority score, and receive a second level 
review by the appropriate Institute or Center Advisory Council

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 comments reviewers will be asked to discuss the following aspects 
of the application 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 assigning the overall score, 
weighting them as appropriate for each application.  Note that the application 
does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major 
scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score.  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 method? 
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 contribute to the probability of success?  Do the proposed experiments 
take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ 
useful collaborative arrangements?  Is there evidence of institutional 
support?

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

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

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

o 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.

Schedule

Letter of Intent Receipt Date:    March 1, 2002
Application Receipt Date:         July 10, 2002
Peer Review Date:                 Fall 2002
Council Review:                   January 2003
Earliest Anticipated Start Date:  March 1, 2003

AWARD CRITERIA

Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended 
applications. The following will be considered in making funding decisions: 
scientific merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review, 
availability of funds, and program priority. In order for the NIH to fund 
applications from foreign institutions, the application must meet the 
following three criteria: (1) The proposed project must have special relevance 
to the mission and objectives of the awarding organization and have the 
potential to advance knowledge that will benefit the United States, (2) The 
project must present special opportunities for furthering research programs           
through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental 
conditions in other countries which are not readily available in the United 
States or which provide augmentation of existing U.S. resources, and (3)          
The foreign grant application must be in the upper half of the research grant 
priority scores.

INQUIRIES

Inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged.  The opportunity to clarify any 
issues or answer questions from potential applicants is welcome.

Direct inquiries regarding review issues to:

Rudy Pozzatti, Ph.D.
Office of Scientific Review
National Human Genome Research Institute
31 Center Drive, Room B2B37
Bethesda, MD  20892-2033
TEL:  (301) 402-0838
FAX:  (301) 435-1580
E-mail:  [email protected]  

Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to:

Jean E. McEwen, J.D., Ph.D.
ELSI Research Program
National Human Genome Research Institute
Building 31, Room B2B07
31 Center Drive, MSC 2033
National Institutes of Health 
Bethesda, MD  20892-2033
TEL:  (301) 402-4997 
FAX:  (301) 402-1950 
E-mail:  [email protected]

Barbara Sina, Ph.D.
Division of International Training and Research
Fogarty International Center
31 Center Drive, Room B2C39, MSC 2220
Bethesda, MD  20892-2220
TEL:  (301) 402-9467
FAX:  (301) 402-0779
Email:  [email protected]

Jennifer Harris, Ph.D.
Behavioral and Social Research Program
National Institute on Aging
7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 533, MSC 9205
Bethesda, MD  20892-9205
TEL:  (301) 496-3138
FAX:  (301) 402-0051
Email:  [email protected]

Amy M. Donahue, Ph.D.
Chief, Hearing and Balance/Vestibular Section
National Institute on Deafness and
   Other Communication Disorders
6120 Executive Boulevard EPS 400C
Rockville, MD  20892
TEL:  (301) 402-3458
FAX:  (301) 402-6251
Email:  [email protected]

Patricia S. Bryant, Ph.D.
Director, Behavior, Health Promotion, and Environment Program
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
Building 45, Room 4AN-24
45 Center Drive, MSC 6402
Bethesda, MD  20892-6402
TEL:  (301) 594-2095
FAX:  (301) 480-8318
Email:  [email protected]

Rebekah S. Rasooly, Ph.D.
Program Director, Genetics and Genomics
Division of Kidney, Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Two Democracy Plaza
6707 Democracy Blvd., MSC 5458
Bethesda, MD  20892-5458
TEL:  (301) 594-6007
FAX:  (301) 480-3510
Email:  [email protected]

Jonathan D. Pollock, Ph.D.
Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research
National Institute on Drug Abuse
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 4284, MSC 9555
Bethesda, MD  20892-9555
TEL:  (301) 443-6300
FAX:  (301) 594-6043
Email:  [email protected]

Shobha Srinivasan, Ph.D.
Scientific Program Administrator
Chemical Exposures and Molecular Biology Branch
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-21
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
RTP, NC  27709
TEL:  (919) 541-2506
FAX:  (919) 316-4606
Email:  [email protected]

Rochelle M. Long, Ph.D.
Chief, Pharmacological & Physiological Sciences Branch
Pharmacology, Physiology, & Biological Chemistry Division
National Institute of General Medical Sciences
45 Center Drive, Room 2AS.49H
Bethesda, MD  20892-6200
TEL:  (301) 594-1826
FAX:  (301) 480-2802
Email:  [email protected]

Hilary D. Sigmon, Ph.D., R.N.
Program Director
National Institute of Nursing Research
Building 45, Room 3AN12
45 Center Drive, MSC 6300
Bethesda, MD  20892-6300
TEL:  (301) 594-5970
FAX:  (301) 480-8260
Email:  [email protected]

Direct inquiries regarding fiscal matters to:

Jean Cahill
Grants Administration Branch
Division of Extramural Research 
National Human Genome Research Institute 
Building 31, Room B2B34 
31 Center Drive, MSC 2031
Bethesda, MD  20892-2031
TEL:  (301) 435-7858
FAX:  (301) 402-1951
E-mail:  [email protected]

Bruce Butrum
Office of the Director
Fogarty International Center
31 Center Drive, Rom B2C39, MSC 2220
Bethesda, MD  20892-2220
TEL:  (301) 496-1670
FAX:  (301) 402-0779
Email:  [email protected]

Linda Whipp
Grants and Contracts Management Office
National Institute on Aging
7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2N212, MSC 9205
Bethesda, MD  20892
TEL:  (301) 496-1472
FAX:  (301) 402-3672
Email:  [email protected]

Sherry F. Dabney
Grants Management Officer
National Institute on Deafness and  
   Other Communication Disorders
6120 Executive Boulevard EPS 400B
Rockville, Maryland  20892
TEL:  (301) 402-0909
FAX:  (301) 402-1758
Email:  [email protected]

Martin R. Rubinstein
Chief, Office of Grants Management
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
Building 45, Room 4AN-44A
45 Center Drive, MSC 6402
Bethesda, MD  20892-6402
TEL:  (301) 594-4800
FAX:  (301) 480-8301
Email:  [email protected]

Donna Huggins
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Blvd., Room 711, MSC 5456
Bethesda, MD  20892-5456
TEL:  (301) 594-8848
FAX:  (301) 480-3504
Email:  [email protected]

Gary Fleming, J.D., M.A.
Grants Management Branch
Office of Planning and Resource Management
National Institute on Drug Abuse
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3131, MSC 9541
Bethesda, MD  20892-9541
TEL:  (301) 443-6710
FAX:  (301) 594-6847
Email:  [email protected]

Dorothy Duke
Chief, Grants Management Branch
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-24
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
TEL:  (919) 541-2749
FAX:  (919) 541-2860
Email:  [email protected]

Antoinette Holland
Grants Administration Branch
National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Building 45, Room 2AN.50B 
Bethesda, MD  20892-6200
TEL:  (301) 594-5132
FAX:  (301) 480-3423
Email:  [email protected]

Cindy McDermott  
Grants Management Officer
National Institute of Nursing Research
Building 45, Room 3AN12
45 Center Drive, MSC 6300
Bethesda, MD  20892-6300
TEL:  (301) 594-6869
FAX:  (301) 480-8260
Email:  [email protected]

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS 

This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 
93.172 (NHGRI), No. 93.989 (FIC), No. 93.866 (NIA), No. 93.847 (NIDCD), No. 
93.121 (NIDCR), No. 93-849 (NIDDK), No. 93.279 (NIDA), Nos. 93.113, 93.115 
(NIEHS), No. 93.390 (NIGMS), and No. 93.361 (NINR).  Awards are made under 
authorization of sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as 
amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and administered under NIH grants policies and 
Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.  This program is not 
subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 
or 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, and 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.

Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

			Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®