Department of Health and Human Services
National Institutes of Health (NIH), (http://www.nih.gov)
Components of Participating Organizations
NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research (http://neuroscienceblueprint.nih.gov)
National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), (http://www.nccam.nih.gov)
National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), (http://www.ncrr.nih.gov)
National Eye Institute (NEI), (http://www.nei.nih.gov)
National Institute on Aging (NIA), (http://www.nia.nih.gov)
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), (http://www.niaaa.nih.gov)
National Institute on Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB), (http://www.nibib.nih.gov)
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), (http://www.nichd.nih.gov)
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), (http://www.nidcd.nih.gov)
National Institute on Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR), (http://www.nidcr.nih.gov)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), (http://www.nida.nih.gov)
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), (http://www.niehs.nih.gov)
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), (http://www.nigms.nih.gov)
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), (http://www.nimh.nih.gov)
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), (http://www.ninds.nih.gov)
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), (http://www.ninr.nih.gov)
Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR), (http://obssr.od.nih.gov)
Title: Blueprint Program for Enhancing Neuroscience Diversity through Undergraduate Research Education Experiences (R25)
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:
Request for Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-MH-10-070
NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
APPLICATIONS MAY NOT BE SUBMITTED IN PAPER FORMAT.
This FOA must be read in conjunction with the application guidelines included with this announcement in Grants.gov/Apply for Grants (hereafter called Grants.gov/Apply).
A registration process is necessary before submission and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least four (4) weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Section IV.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.213, 93.389, 93.867, 93.866, 93.273, 93.286, 93.865, 93.173, 93.121, 93.279, 93.113, 93.859, 93.242, 93.853, 93.361
Release/Posted Date: December 4, 2009
Opening Date: February 24, 2010 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): February 24, 2010
NOTE: On-time submission requires that applications be successfully submitted to Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): March 24, 2010
Peer Review Date(s): June 2010
Council Review Date(s): August 2010
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): September 1, 2010
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration/Closing Date: March 25, 2010
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Additional Overview Content
Table of Contents
Part I Overview Information
Part II Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Education Objectives
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
2. Funds Available
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
A. Eligible Institutions
B. Eligible Individuals
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other - Special Eligibility Criteria
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Request Application Information
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
1. Letter of Intent
B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH
C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section V. Application Review Information
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review Considerations
C. Resource Sharing Plan(s)
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
Section VII. Agency Contact(s)
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Section VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations
Part II - Full Text of Announcement
1. Research Education Objectives
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Blueprint for Neuroscience Research is a collaborative and coordinated effort across 16 Institutes and Centers that support research, research education, and research training with the goal of accelerating the pace of discovery in neuroscience research. By pooling resources and expertise, the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research can take advantage of economies of scale, confront challenges too large for any specific Institute or Center, and develop research tools and infrastructure that will serve the entire neuroscience community.
The goals of NIH supported research education and research training programs are to help ensure that a pool of highly trained scientists is available in adequate numbers and in appropriate scientific areas to address the Nation’s biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research needs. Demographic profiles from the NSF and reports from the National Academies reveal the national need for developing a well-trained workforce in biomedical and behavioral sciences and the continuing importance of developing a strong, vital scientific workforce whose diversity reflects that of our nation. It was also reported that as a nation, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, and Natives of US Pacific Islands have been found to be underrepresented in the biomedical and behavioral sciences (National Research Council, 2000. Addressing the Nations Changing Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists. Washington, DC; National Academy Press; and National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, 2002. Characteristics of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in the United States; 2006 Profile. Arlington, VA ; National Science Foundation). NIH legislation acknowledged the national need for minority scientists in the fields of biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and health services research (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ525.106 ). The NIH was specifically encouraged, in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993, to increase the participation of members from nationally underrepresented groups in biomedical and behavioral research. Thus, the NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to promote diversity in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences research workforce. The NIH expects efforts to diversify the research workforce to lead to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups; to improve the quality of the educational and training environment; to broaden and balance the perspective in setting research priorities; to improve the ability to recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols; and to improve the Nation’s ability to address and eliminate health disparities. Therefore, in keeping with the above-mentioned NIH goal, the Neuroscience Blueprint participating Institutes and Centers created the Blueprint Program for Enhancing Neuroscience Diversity through Undergraduate Research Education Experiences (BP-ENDURE) in order to increase the participation of individuals from groups underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences engaged in neuroscience related research. It is expected that this initiative will support the participation of individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research. These groups of individuals will hereafter be referred to as “diverse groups” (see Section IV.6 for additional information).
The overall objective of this funding opportunity is to increase the number of undergraduate participants from diverse groups who successfully enter and complete Ph.D. degree programs in the neurosciences. To accomplish this goal, this initiative will support the development of collaborative research education partnerships that will increase participants’ awareness and interest in the neurosciences, develop participants’ scientific knowledge and research skills that will allow them to progress and transition to more advanced neuroscience related research education and training activities, and to establish working networks with existing Ph.D. degree granting and NIH-supported predoctoral T32 neuroscience programs. This establishment of neuroscience related “networks” is intended to actively facilitate participants’ transition from the undergraduate to the graduate school level. It should be noted that costs associated with students summer research training experiences in on or off-site NIH T32 laboratories will be covered by the BP-ENDURE Program.
Specific components of the collaborative research education partnerships should include:
Depending on the different strengths of the applicant institutions it is expected that academic and curriculum enhancement activities may vary in how they are formalized and integrated, and various strategies, rooted in education research, may be utilized. These approaches may include, but are not limited to core neuroscience coursework tailored around students’ backgrounds and needs; development of interdisciplinary or advanced courses with focus on inquiry-based learning or critical thinking and use of quantitative skills to address neuroscience problems; collaborative learning experiences and group activities to convey the excitement and relevance of neuroscience to students; advisement regarding the number, level, and sequence of math and science courses that students should take to be competitive for graduate school programs in the neurosciences; seminars emphasizing scientific reading comprehension, writing and oral presentation skills; and research career seminars.
The academic year and summer research training experiences may also vary across applicant institutions, but consideration should be made regarding the progressive scientific skill-sets being developed through the research training experiences, the type of mentoring and supervision students are receiving, and the monitoring and evaluation plans for both the students and research mentors.
Specific measurable research education and research training objectives or milestones are to be determined by the applicant institutions. Examples of measurable objectives include: number of students matriculating through the research education programs and admitted to graduate programs in the neurosciences; improvement in students’ quantitative skills and academic achievement; as well as improvement in scientific writing and presentation skills.
The proposed research education program may complement other, ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, but the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those research training and research education programs currently receiving federal support. The R25 is not a substitute for an institutional research training program (T32) and can not be used to circumvent or supplement Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) mechanisms.
1. Mechanism of Support
This FOA will use the NIH Research Education Grant (R25) award mechanism. The Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.
This FOA uses just-in-time concepts (see SF424 (R&R) Application Guide). It also uses the non-modular budget format. Applicants must complete and submit budget requests using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) Budget Component found in the application package for this FOA.
Research education grant support is for new projects only; competing renewal (formerly “competing continuation”) applications will not be accepted.
2. Funds Available
The NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research has designated $2,500,000 total costs for FY 2010 to fund five to ten grants in response to this funding opportunity. The total project period for an application submitted in response to this funding opportunity may not exceed five years.
Because the nature and scope of the proposed research education program will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs requested by consortium participants are not included in the direct cost limitation. See NOT-OD-05-004.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Allowable Costs: Allowable costs must be consistent with NIH policy and be reasonable, allocable, well documented and fully justified for the research education program proposed in the application. Grant funds may not be used to supplant funds otherwise available at the applicant institution.
Personnel: Individuals participating in the design and implementation of the research education program may request salary and fringe benefits appropriate for the person months devoted to the program. These expenses must be itemized in Sections A and B, as appropriate, of the Research & Related Budget. Salaries requested may not exceed the levels commensurate with the institution's policy for similar positions and may not exceed the congressionally mandated cap. (If mentoring interactions and other activities with students/participants are considered a regular part of an individual's academic duties, then mentoring and other interactions with students/participants are non-reimbursable from grant funds). Limited administrative and clerical salary costs associated distinctly with the program that are not normally provided by the applicant organization may be direct charges to the grant only when specifically identified and justified. Salary support for the PD/PI (or combination of multiple PDs/PIs) is limited to up to 2.25 person months during the academic year and 0.75 person months in the summer, depending on person months devoted to the administration of the program. Program coordinators are allowed as long as their role is clearly defined and significantly different from the roles of the PDs/PIs. The duties and responsibilities of the program coordinators, with strong justification, must be included in the budget justification.
Other Program-Related Expenses: Consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel for key persons, and other program-related expenses must be justified as specifically required by the proposed research education program and must not duplicate items generally available for educational programs at the applicant institution. These expenses must be itemized, as appropriate, in Sections C. (Equipment), D. (Travel), and F. (Other Direct Costs) of the Research & Related Budget.
Cost of consultants for evaluation of the program is allowed; however, if the evaluator is an employee of one of the collaborating institutions, the cost must be included in the category of key personnel salary.
Participant Costs: Participants are those individuals who benefit from the proposed research education program. Participant costs must be justified as specifically required for the proposed research education program. Participant costs must be itemized in Section E. (Participant/Trainee Support Costs) of the Research & Related Budget.
Salary support is allowed for junior and senior year undergraduate students participating in a research experience, as long as there is an employee-employer relationship between the students and the institution. The total compensation must be reasonable and commensurate with the institution’s support scale for the work performed provided the following criteria are met: (a) it is the institution’s practice to provide compensation for all students in a similar circumstance regardless of the support for the activity, (b) the undergraduate student is not supported for more than 15 hours/week during the academic year and not more than 40 hours/week during the summer, and (c) student participation in the specific development activity is not a curriculum requirement for graduation. A justification must be provided if the request for undergraduates is more than $10 per hour. Support for students is not provided for time spent by the students participating in this program’s sponsored, non-research activities, e.g., group learning activities. It is a goal of this initiative that the NIH Blueprint Institutes will convene an annual meeting that will bring together BP-ENDURE program directors and participating students. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss best practices and provide a forum for student scientific and academic enhancing activities. Travel for attendance to this meeting should be included in the proposed budget.
The application should provide a description of any cost sharing (financial and otherwise) for the off-site summer research experiences being provided by the BP-ENDURE partnering institutions. The applicant should clearly indicate any support (financial and otherwise) being provided by the off-site institution(s) to assist in covering or defraying costs associated with the participants summer research training experiences. Providing funds for summer travel and modest housing arrangements for participants in the off-site summer programs by partnering institutions is encouraged.
Each year, program-supported students must be formally appointed to the BP-ENDURE program using the NIH’s Statement of appointment form (PHS 2271 Statement of Appointment, http://grants.nih.gov/traiing/phs2271.pdf
Because the R25 mechanism is not intended as a substitute for an NRSA institutional training program (T32), costs to support full-time participants are not allowable. A full-time participant is defined for the research education program as an individual supported for 40 hours/week for a continuous, 12-month period.
Institutional Commitment: Evidence of institutional commitment to the research educational program is strongly encouraged. The collaborating institutions must document that the goals of the proposed BP-ENDURE research education program will be an integral part of their research and research training endeavors. The application must include a description of support (financial and otherwise) to be provided to the program, which could support curriculum implementation, support for additional participants in the program, space, shared laboratory facilities and equipment, release time for the Program Director(s) and participating faculty, or any other creative ways to improve and enhance the research education program. While cost sharing is not required, the applicant institution should show that funds for program activities, especially student support, are not being merely substituted for institutional resources.
A letter of institutional commitment may be attached at line item 16 (Letters of Support). Appropriate institutional commitment should include the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education program.
Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs: F&A costs for the applicant organization and consortium participants will be reimbursed at 8 percent of modified total direct costs (exclusive of tuition, fees, and equipment
Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply in response to this FOA.
In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed research education program will complement other ongoing research training occurring at the applicant institution and that a substantial number of program faculty will have active research projects in which participants may gain relevant experiences consistent with their research interests and goals. Institutions with existing Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) institutional training grants (e.g., T32) or other federally funded research education (e.g., R25) or training programs may apply for a research education grant provided that the proposed educational experiences are distinct from those research training and education programs receiving NIH support. Moreover, the R25 mechanism is not intended to support long-term training by NRSA-eligible individuals and may not be used to circumvent or supplement Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA research training mechanisms.
If multiple sites are involved in the research education program, the applicant institution must be one of these sites for the program.
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI 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 NIH support.
The PD/PI should be an established investigator in the scientific area in which the application is targeted who is capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed research education program.
More than one PD/PI (i.e., multiple PDs/PIs), may be designated on the application for projects that require a “team science” approach and therefore clearly do not fit the single-PD/PI model. Additional information on the implementation plans and policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH electronic Research Administration (eRA) Commons prior to the submission of the application (see http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/preparing.htm for instructions).
The decision of whether to apply for a grant with a single PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs grant is the responsibility of the investigators and applicant organizations and should be determined by the scientific goals of the project. Applications for grants with multiple PDs/PIs will require additional information, as outlined in the instructions below. When considering the multiple PD/PI option, please be aware that the structure and governance of the PD/PI leadership team as well as the knowledge, skills and experience of the individual PDs/PIs will be factored into the assessment of the overall scientific merit of the application. Multiple PDs/PIs on a project share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the project, intellectually and logistically. Each PD/PI is responsible and accountable to the grantee organization, or, as appropriate, to a collaborating organization, for the proper conduct of the project or program, including the submission of required reports. For further information on multiple PDs/PIs, please see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Sponsoring Institution: The sponsoring institution must assure support for the proposed research education project. Appropriate institutional commitment to the project includes the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education project. The application should include a letter explaining the institutional commitment to the proposed research education program.
For this multiple site initiative, it is the responsibility of the partnering institutions to determine which institution will serve as the applicant institution. The applicant institution must document the requisite administrative/technical capacity and support for the management of a collaborative multisite research education and research training project. All collaborative arrangements must be clearly described and agreements included in the application. A resource format page must be included in the application for each site. Information from all of the collaborative sites must include letters of institutional commitment, descriptions of their research education and research training experience and resources, research funding of participating faculty, applicant pool of potential students eligible to participate in the program, and a plan for how the research education and research training activities will be integrated across the different sites. Documenting the feasibility of the proposed program by describing the direct lines of communication, and site-specific administrative and research education and training responsibilities across the partnering institutions must also be included in the application. Remote partnerships are allowable, however, applications whose integration is seriously compromised by geographical or other constraints are discouraged from applying. Although undergraduate education/training support may not be provided from NIH-supported T32 programs, the applicant should also include information describing other current federally funded undergraduate research education and research training programs across the collaborating sites.
For the purposes of this FOA, the number of institutions that constitute a collaborative partnership are two or more. Components of large multi-component organizations that are sufficiently independent to constitute, in effect, separate organizations will be considered separate institutions. For example, the multiple campuses of the University of California system are considered different institutions. Multiple departments and/or schools within the same institution e.g., neuroscience department and the school of medicine at the same institution, will be considered a single institutional site in this type of collaborative multisite program.
Participants: Describe who the intended participants are, and the eligibility and/or specific educational background characteristics that are essential for participation in the proposed program.
Eligible individuals must be matriculated full-time, and in their last two years (juniors and seniors), of a baccalaureate degree program.
Undergraduate students from engineering, mathematics, computer science, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, and other relevant science programs who have an interest in the neurosciences should be encouraged to participate in the program.
Eligible individuals are those who are considered underrepresented in the fields of biomedical or behavioral sciences, such as: individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research (see Section IV.6. for additional information). The program will not deny participation to anyone based on the criteria described in Section IV.6. however, to receive salary/wages from this initiative, individuals must be (a) from one of the groups described above, (b) U.S. citizens, non-citizen nationals, or permanent residents, and (c) must be full-time matriculated in a baccalaureate degree program at one of the partnering institutions. Institutions are required to develop selection plans and criteria to identify students who are interested in pursuing a career in neuroscience research.
The collaborating institutions will select the participants for this initiative. It is the responsibility of the institutions to establish the selection criteria for the students before they are allowed to participate in the program, and to establish selection criteria, which will ensure a highly qualified applicant pool. Examples of accepted indicators include, but are not limited to, previous academic success, practical research experience, written statements that expresses interest and commitment and letters of recommendations from faculty, research supervisors and/or other community leaders that speak to the applicant’s merit. Participants may be selected from any of the partnering institutions and the criteria describing how participants from the different sites are selected should be included in the application.
Training in Responsible Conduct of Research: Applicants are required to include a plan for Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (see Section IV.6).
Evaluation Plan: Applications must contain an evaluation plan. Applications submitted without evaluation section may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. The application must describe a strong evaluation plan for all program components for which funding is being is being requested.
Dissemination Plan: Applications must contain a dissemination plan in order to determine their effectiveness. Applications submitted without a Dissemination Plan section may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed.
Number of Applications: Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each application is scientifically distinct.
Resubmissions: Resubmission applications are not permitted in response to this FOA.
Renewals: Renewal applications are not permitted in response to this FOA.
Appropriate registrations with Grants.gov and eRA Commons must be completed on or before the due date in order to successfully submit an application. Several of the steps of the registration process could take four weeks or more. Therefore, applicants should immediately check with their business official to determine whether their organization/institution is already registered with both Grants.gov and the Commons. All registrations must be complete by the submission deadline for the application to be considered “on-time” (see 3.C.1 for more information about on-time submission).
A one-time registration is required for institutions/organizations at both:
PDs/PIs should work with their institutions/organizations to make sure they are registered in the eRA Commons.
Several additional separate actions are required before an applicant institution/organization can submit an electronic application, as follows:
1) Organizational/Institutional Registration in Grants.gov/Get Registered
3) Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) Registration in the NIH eRA Commons: Refer to the NIH eRA Commons System (COM) Users Guide.
Both the PDs/PI(s) and AOR/SO need separate accounts in the NIH eRA Commons since both are authorized to view the application image.
Note: The registration process is not sequential. Applicants should begin the registration processes for both Grants.gov and eRA Commons as soon as their organization has obtained a DUNS number. Only one DUNS number is required and the same DUNS number must be referenced when completing Grants.gov registration, eRA Commons registration and the SF424 (R&R) forms.
1. Request Application Information
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
Note: Only the forms package directly attached to a specific FOA can be used. You will not be able to use any other SF424 (R&R) forms (e.g., sample forms, forms from another FOA), although some of the "Attachment" files may be useable for more than one FOA.
For further assistance, contact GrantsInfo -- Telephone 301-435-0714, Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.
Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY 301-451-5936.
Prepare all applications using the SF424 (R&R) application forms and in accordance with the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
The SF424 (R&R) Application Guide is critical to submitting a complete and accurate application to NIH. Some fields within the SF424 (R&R) application components, although not marked as mandatory, are required by NIH (e.g., the “Credential” log-in field of the “Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile” component must contain the PD/PI’s assigned eRA Commons User ID). Agency-specific instructions for such fields are clearly identified in the Application Guide. For additional information, see “Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.”
The SF424 (R&R) application has several components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY includes all applicable components, required and optional. A completed application in response to this FOA includes the data in the following components:
SF424 (R&R) (Cover component)
Research & Related Project/Performance Site Locations
Research & Related Other Project Information
Research & Related Senior/Key Person
PHS398 Cover Page Supplement
PHS398 Research Plan
SF 424 Research & Related Budget, as appropriate (See Section IV.6., “Special Instructions,” below regarding appropriate required budget component.)
PHS398 Cover Letter File
Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form
Applications with Multiple PDs/PIs
When multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, NIH requires one PD/PI to be designated as the "Contact” PI, who will be responsible for all communication between the PDs/PIs and the NIH, for assembling the application materials outlined below, and for coordinating progress reports for the project. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PDs/PIs, but has no other special roles or responsibilities within the project team beyond those mentioned above.
Information for the Contact PD/PI should be entered in item 14 of the SF424(R&R) Cover component. All other PDs/PIs should be listed in the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component and assigned the project role of “PD/PI.” Please remember that all PDs/PIs must be registered in the eRA Commons prior to application submission. The Commons ID of each PD/PI must be included in the “Credential” field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component. Failure to include this data field will cause the application to be rejected.
All projects proposing Multiple PDs/PIs will be required to include a new section describing the leadership of the project.
Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, a new section of the Research Plan, entitled “Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan” must be included. A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the Research Plan should be described, and should include communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators.
If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocations may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Award.
Research Education Program
Although the proposed research education program may complement other, ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those research training and research education programs currently receiving federal support.
If multiple sites are involved in the research education program, the applicant institution must be one of these sites for the program.
Although research education grants are not typical research instruments, they do involve experiments in education and/or dissemination of research knowledge that require an evaluation plan in order to determine the degree of success or failure. A plan must be provided for program evaluation. Benchmarks should be specified, and specific plans and procedures must be described to capture, analyze and report outcome measures that would determine the success of the research education and research training objectives of the integrated programs.
The evaluation plan should include the review of the effectiveness of all aspects of the program (including curriculum and academic enhancement activities, research training activities, programmatic activities, training faculty). More specifically, a prospective evaluation plan for process and outcome measures should be included. Outcome measures may include, but are not limited to, current activities related to academic performance and development of research skills, improvements in scientific reading comprehension, writing, and oral presentation skills, and success rates of participating students entering research-intensive graduate programs in the neurosciences. Plans may include gathering feedback from participating students and training faculty to help identify weaknesses in the program and to encourage suggestions for program improvements. The evaluation plan must be based on appropriate literature and cited methodology. The plan should also identify the selected evaluator and present his/her credentials. In general, the evaluator must have formal training and experience in methodology and statistics as demonstrated by publications and/or reports in the field.
A specific plan must be provided to disseminate nationally any materials developed under the auspices of the research education program, e.g., Web postings, presentations at scientific meetings, workshops, etc. The plan must describe how the resources, (including but not limited to websites) will be maintained and/or institutionalized beyond the funding cycle.
3. Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A for details.
3.A. Application Due, Review and Anticipated Start Dates
Opening Date: February 24, 2010 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date: February 24, 2010
Application Submission/Receipt Date: March 24, 2010
Peer Review Date: June 2010
Council Review Date: August 2010
Earliest Anticipated Start Date: September 2010
3.A.1. Letter of Intent
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed in Section IV.3.A.
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Mark Chavez, Ph.D.
Division of Translational Research & Treatment Development
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 7101, MSC 9632
Bethesda, MD 20892-9632
Rockville, MD 20852 (FedEx, UPS, etc).
Telephone: (301) 443-8942
FAX: (301) 443-4611
3.B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH
To submit an application in response to this FOA, applicants should access this FOA via http://www.grants.gov/Apply and follow steps 1-4. Note: Applications must only be submitted electronically. PAPER APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
In order to expedite the review, applicants are requested to notify the NIMH Referral Office by email (firstname.lastname@example.org) when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
3.C. Application Processing
3.C.1 Submitting On-Time
Applications may be submitted on or after the opening date and must be successfully received by Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization) on the application due date(s). (See Section IV.3.A. for all dates.) If an application is not submitted by the due date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. All applications must meet the following criteria to be considered “on-time”:
Please visit http://era.nih.gov/electronicReceipt/app_help.htm for detailed information on what to do if Grants.gov or eRA system issues threaten your ability to submit on time.
Submission to Grants.gov is not the last step – applicants must follow their application through to the eRA Commons to check for errors and warnings and view their assembled application!
3.C.2 Two Day Window to Correct eRA Identified Errors/Warnings
IMPORTANT NOTE! NIH has eliminated the error correction window for due dates of January 25, 2011 and beyond. As of January 25, all corrections must be complete by the due date for an application to be considered on-time. See NOT-OD-10-123.
Once an application package has been successfully submitted through Grants.gov, NIH provides applicants a two day error correction window to correct any eRA identified errors or warnings before a final assembled application is created in the eRA Commons. The standard error correction window is two (2) business days, beginning the day after the submission deadline and excluding weekends and standard federal holidays. All errors must be corrected to successfully complete the submission process. Warnings will not prevent the application from completing the submission process.
Please note that the following caveats apply:
3.C.3 Viewing an Application in the eRA Commons
Once any eRA identified errors have been addressed, and the assembled application has been created in the eRA Commons, the PD/PI and the Authorized Organization Representative/Signing Official (AOR/SO) have two weekdays (Monday – Friday, excluding Federal holidays) to view the assembled application before it automatically moves forward to NIH for further processing.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the CSR and responsiveness by the IC. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will not be reviewed.
There will be an acknowledgement of receipt of applications from Grants.gov and the Commons. The submitting AOR/SO receives the Grants.gov acknowledgments. The AOR/SO and the PI receive Commons acknowledgments. Information related to the assignment of an application to a Scientific Review Group is also in the Commons.
Note: Since email can be unreliable, it is the responsibility of the applicant to check periodically on the application status in the Commons.
The NIH will not accept any application in response to this funding opportunity that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an investigator-initiated application, is to be submitted in response to a funding opportunity, it is to be prepared as a NEW application. That is, the application for the funding opportunity must not include an “Introduction” describing the changes and improvements made, and the text must not be marked to indicate the changes from the previous unfunded version of the application.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable. A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new award if such costs: 1) are necessary to conduct the project, and 2) would be allowable under the grant, if awarded, without NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise require prior approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval before incurring the cost. NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be incurred more than 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new award.
The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project. See theNIH Grants Policy Statement.
6. Other Submission Requirements
PD/PI Credential (e.g., Agency Login)
The NIH requires the PD(s)/PI(s) to fill in his/her Commons User ID in the “PROFILE – Project Director/Principal Investigator” section, “Credential” log-in field of the “Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile” component.
The applicant organization must include its DUNS number in its Organization Profile in the eRA Commons. This DUNS number must match the DUNS number provided at CCR registration with Grants.gov. For additional information, see “Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.”
PHS 398 Research Plan Component Sections
All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide are to be followed, with the following requirements for R25 applications:
Supplementary Research Education Program Application Instructions
Applicants should use the following guidance, in addition to the instructions accompanying the SF 424 (R&R) form.
1. SF 424 Research & Related Project/Performance Site Location(s): Include collaborating sites, if appropriate.
If multiple sites are involved in the research education program, the applicant institution must be one of these sites for the program. A justification must be included for sites other than the applicant institution in the program narrative.
2. SF 424 Research & Related Other Project Information, Item 9 (Facilities & Other Resources): Describe the educational environment, including the facilities, laboratories, participating departments, computer services, and any other resources to be used in the development and implementation of the proposed program. List all thematically related sources of support for research training and education following the format for Current and Pending Support.
3. SF 424 Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile: Key Personnel must include the PD/PI (or multiple PDs/PIs, if applicable) as well as any other key persons (such as those involved in developing, implementing, directing, monitoring, evaluating, etc., who are integral to the proposed research education program) participating in the research education program. Provide the biographical sketch for each key personnel across the partnering institutions, including the consultant(s) and potential research mentors. The biographical sketches of the faculty must include the past record in training and mentoring students from diverse groups, their teaching and/or research achievements, and extramural research support. Additional biographical sketches of faculty members, including those that may serve as mentors during participants off-site summer research internships, should be included as a document in the appendix.
4. Research & Related Budget: Complete for each budget period requested.
A. Senior/Key Person: complete for all senior/key persons associated with the research education program. The PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs must be included here.
B. Other Personnel: complete for all other personnel (including clerical and administrative staff) associated with the research education program.
C. Equipment: self-explanatory.
D. Travel: include here any travel funds requested for senior/key persons and other personnel (i.e., those persons identified in Sections A. and B.) associated with the research education program.
E. Participant/Trainee Support Costs: include here all allowable categories of funds requested to support participants in the research education program. If categories in addition to those listed in this section of the 424R&R form are needed, describe in Other. State the number of Participants/Trainees to be supported by the proposed research education program. The allowable categories for participant costs are summarized in Sections IV.2 and IV.5.
F. Other Direct Costs: itemize as appropriate and allowed for the research education program.
K. Budget Justification: provide a detailed justification for each category for which funds are requested. For Section E, itemize each category of support costs per participant and justify.
5. PHS 398 Research Plan Attachments:
The Research Education Program Plan (attached using the Research Strategy section) should contain material organized under the following subheadings in a single attachment and as appropriate to the specific program.
Proposed Research Education Program: Provide programmatic detail on the special activities proposed (e.g., courses, curricula, seminars, workshops). Provide detailed information of an integrated plan across the partnering institutions to improve academic and research competiveness of undergraduate students from diverse groups to enter Ph.D. degree programs in the neurosciences. A coordinated development plan designed to achieve the overall goals and specific measurable objectives of the proposed program is required.
Provide a brief rationale for each activity proposed and concise information on the selection and retention process for the participants in the BP-ENDURE program, including the criteria related to the students’ academic status, participants’ research education and training progress, and role of the faculty/personnel involved. Describe how each proposed academic development activity will contribute toward realization of the measurable objectives. Describe the milestones (i.e., anticipated intermediate steps toward the objectives). Give a brief account of the proposed schedule of the activities and whether these activities will be available to all students. Describe alliances that have formed for participant summer research experiences with on and off-site predoctoral neuroscience research training programs and PDs. Costs associated with students research training experiences in on or off-site NIH T32 laboratories will be covered by the BP-ENDURE R25 Program. Discuss activities that are designed to actively facilitate early communication and interaction between undergraduate participants and appropriate personnel at Ph.D. degree granting programs in the neurosciences. Discuss any perceived impediments to implementing the proposed activities and alternative strategies to achieve the measurable objectives.
Program Director/Principal Investigator (for multiple PDs/PI Leadership Plan, see instructions for item 12) the Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan section of the Research Plan ): Describe arrangements for administration of the program, provide evidence that the Program Director(s) is actively engaged in research and/or teaching in an area related to the mission of the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers, and can organize, administer, monitor, and evaluate the research education program; and provide evidence of institutional and community commitment and support for the proposed program. The responsibilities of the PD(s) typically include placement of students in research laboratories and coordination and implementation of developmental and mentoring activities across the different participating institutions. In addition, the PD(s) prepares and submits in a timely manner the required reports, e.g., annual progress reports, changes in program activities if any, etc. The PD works with the program evaluator (see below) to monitor and evaluate the progress of the individual program elements and the overall functioning of the integrated program.
A BP-ENDURE advisory committee for this collaborative R25 project may be included as a component of the application. Describe its role and how it will provide guidance to the PD(s) in meeting goals of the partnership program. The following are some typical functions of an advisory committee: advise and assist the PD(s) in the development, standardization, and implementation of integrated program procedures and practices, assist the PD(s) in establishing criteria and procedures for the admittance/retention of students and faculty mentors across the partnering institutions, monitor progress of program activities and student participants, help to expand the present effort by identifying internal and external funding sources, monitor compliance with NIH policies and regulations, and assist in addressing faculty and student grievances related the BP-ENDURE program.
Program Faculty/Staff: Describe the characteristics and responsibilities of the participating faculty; provide evidence that the participating faculty and preceptors are actively engaged in research or other scholarly activities related to the mission of the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers.
Program Participants: Provide details about the pool of proposed participants, their qualifications, recruitment strategies and sources of applicant pool, etc. Applications must include a description (including number and percent) of the potential applicant pool from the different partnering institutions based on the selection criteria established for the proposed BP-ENDURE program. Describe the process for selection of the program-supported participants. Examples of accepted indicators include, but are not limited to, previous academic success, practical research experience, written statements that express interest and commitment and letters of recommendations from faculty, research supervisors and/or other community leaders that speak to the applicant’s merit. Include the program selection criteria, candidate qualification process, and final selection process. Describe the retention strategies and follow-up activities across the participating institutions that would ensure a highly qualified participant pool.
Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan: Provide a detailed diversity recruitment and retention plan for the research education program. Renewal applications must detail experiences in recruiting and retaining individuals from underrepresented groups during the previous award period. Include, in a table, the total numbers of individuals who applied, were interviewed, admitted, and participated in the research education program as well as the total number of individuals from the three classes defined below. For those programs where individuals are not participating, e.g., a program requesting support to develop a curriculum, the PD/PI must explain why this information is not appropriate.
The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to promote diversity in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences research workforce. The NIH expects efforts to diversify the workforce to lead to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups; to improve the quality of the educational and training environment; to balance and broaden the perspective in setting research priorities; to improve the ability to recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols; and to improve the Nation's capacity to address and eliminate health disparities.
Accordingly, the NIH continues to encourage institutions to diversify their student and faculty populations and thus to increase the participation of individuals currently underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences such as: individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research. Institutions are encouraged to identify candidates who will increase diversity on a national or institutional basis. The NIH is particularly interested in encouraging the recruitment and retention of the following classes of participants:
A. Individuals from racial and ethnic groups that have been shown by the National Science Foundation to be underrepresented in health-related sciences on a national basis (see http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/women/start.htm). In addition, it is recognized that underrepresentation can vary from setting to setting; individuals from racial or ethnic groups that can be convincingly demonstrated to be underrepresented by the grantee institution should be encouraged to participate in this program
B. Individuals with disabilities, who are defined as those with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.
C. Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who are defined as:
1. Individuals who come from a family with an annual income below established low-income thresholds. These thresholds are based on family size; published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census; adjusted annually for changes in the Consumer Price Index; and adjusted by the Secretary for use in all health professions programs. The Secretary periodically publishes these income levels at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/index.shtml. For individuals from low income backgrounds, the institution must be able to demonstrate that such participants have qualified for Federal disadvantaged assistance or they have received any of the following student loans: Health Professions Student Loans (HPSL), Loans for Disadvantaged Student Program, or they have received scholarships from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Scholarship for Individuals with Exceptional Financial Need.
2. Individuals who come from a social, cultural, or educational environment such as that found in certain rural or inner-city environments that have demonstrably and recently directly inhibited the individual from obtaining the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to develop and participate in a research career. Recruitment and retention plans related to a disadvantaged background are most applicable to high school and perhaps to undergraduate candidates, but would be more difficult to justify for individuals beyond that level of academic achievement.
Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the diversity recruitment and retention plan after the overall score has been determined. Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the recruitment and retention of individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. The review panel’s evaluation will be included in an administrative note in the summary statement. If the diversity recruitment and retention plan is judged to be unacceptable, funding will be withheld until a revised plan (and report) that addresses the deficiencies is received. Staff within the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers, with guidance from the appropriate national advisory committee or council, will determine whether amended plans and reports submitted after the initial review are acceptable.
Responsible Conduct of Research: Describe plans to provide formal and informal instruction to participants on scientific integrity and ethical principles in research. The plan should be appropriate for the duration and content of the proposed research education program. Although the NIH does not establish specific curricula or formal requirements, all programs are encouraged to consider instruction in the following areas: conflict of interest, responsible authorship, policies for handling misconduct, data management, data sharing, and policies regarding the use of human and animal subjects. Plans must address: 1) the subject matter of the instruction, the format of the instruction, the degree of program faculty participation, participant attendance, and the frequency of instruction; and 2) the rationale for the proposed plan of instruction.
If such instruction is not appropriate for the proposed research education program, then the PD/PI must provide a strong justification for its exclusion.
Evaluation Plan: Include evaluation plans for assessing the success of the program in achieving its goals and objectives. Benchmarks should be specified, and specific plans and procedures must be described to capture, analyze and report outcome measures that would determine the success of the research education program in achieving its objectives. The inclusion of evaluation instruments is encouraged. Applications that lack an evaluation plan will not be reviewed. The plan should be designed to assess and evaluate the programs progress toward meeting its specific aims, measurable objectives, goals and outcomes. The plan must provide useful information to the PD(s) and partnering institutions for improving the BP-ENDURE program. The emphasis of the evaluation activities in the plan should be on assessment of the overall impact of the program on the institution’s baseline numbers and efforts to accomplish the proposed goals of increasing the number of participants who enter Ph.D. degree programs in the neurosciences, and improvement of the overall program outcome. The evaluation strategy and plan must be based on appropriate literature and cited methodology, and should identify the selected evaluator and present his/her credentials.
Dissemination Plan: A specific plan must be provided to disseminate nationally any materials developed under the auspices of the research education program, e.g., Web postings, presentations at scientific meetings, workshops, etc. Applications that lack a dissemination plan will not be reviewed. The plan must describe how the resources (including but not limited to websites) will be maintained.
Institutional Environment and Commitment: Describe the institutional environment, including facilities and educational resources, that can contribute to the planned Research Education Program. A letter of institutional commitment may be attached at line item entitled “Letter of Support. Appropriate institutional commitment should include the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education program.Resource Sharing Plan(s)
(a) Data Sharing Plan: Investigators seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year are expected to include a brief 1-paragraph description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data-sharing is not possible. Applicants are encouraged to discuss data-sharing plans with their NIH program contact (see Data-Sharing Policy or http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-032.html.)
(b) Sharing Model Organisms: Regardless of the amount requested, all applications in which the development of model organisms is anticipated are expected to include a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organisms and related resources, or state appropriate reasons why such sharing is restricted or not possible (see Sharing Model Organisms Policy, and NIH Guide NOT-OD-04-042.)
(c) Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS): Regardless of the amount requested, applicants seeking funding for a genome-wide association study are expected to provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the repository is not possible. A genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic variation across the entire genome that is designed to identify genetic associations with observable traits (e.g., blood pressure or weight) or the presence or absence of a disease or condition. For further information see Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies (NOT-OD-07-088) and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/gwas/.
(d) Research education programs: These programs are not generally expected to generate research resources. However, applications are expected to include a software dissemination plan if support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested in the application. There is no prescribed single license for software produced. However, the software dissemination plan should address, as appropriate, the following goals:
The initial review group will comment on the appropriateness of the proposed software dissemination plan. Program staff will also consider the adequacy of the software dissemination plan as one of the criteria for award.
The proposed sharing plan, after negotiation with the applicant when necessary, will be made a condition of the award. Evaluation of annual non-competing progress reports will include assessment of the dissemination practice by the grantee. The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans (if applicable) will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3., “Reporting.”
Applicants must follow the specific instructions on Appendix materials as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/index.htm).
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations. An application that does not comply with the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
The mission of the NIH is to support science in pursuit of knowledge about the biology and behavior of living systems and to apply that knowledge to extend healthy life and reduce the burdens of illness and disability. As part of this mission, applications submitted to the NIH for grants or cooperative agreements to support biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
Applications submitted for this funding opportunity will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the ICs for funding consideration.
Applications that are complete and responsive to this FOA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by the National Institute of Mental Health on behalf of the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research and in accordance with NIH peer review procedures (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/peer/), using the review criteria stated below.
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
The goals of NIH-supported research training, education, and career development programs are to help ensure that a diverse pool of highly trained scientists is available in adequate numbers and in appropriate scientific areas to address the Nation’s biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research needs. The goals of NIH-supported science education projects at science centers and museums are to provide public education and outreach on NIH-supported research at these institutions. In their written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research education program 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, and weighted as appropriate for each application.
Note that an application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high impact/priority score. These criteria are not listed in any order of impact/priority.
Research education program grant applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity announcement should be characterized by innovation, scholarship and responsiveness to the priorities and/or changing needs of the NIH Blueprint Institutes in meeting its objectives. Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact program staff listed below for current information about targeted priorities and policies before preparing an application (see Section VII).
Overall Impact/Priority Score: Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the research education program to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the activities involved, in consideration of the following five core review criteria, and additional review criteria (as applicable for the proposed program).
Core Review Criteria: Reviewers will consider each of the five 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 proposed research education program address scientific/education areas and/or topics important to the mission of the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers? How will implementation of the proposed program advance the objectives of this funding opportunity announcement as well as the mission of the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers? Will the proposed BP-ENDURE significantly improve the institutional baseline number of students from the partnering institutions that enter high-quality, competitive programs in the neurosciences with research-intensive environments?
Investigators: Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the proposed program appropriate to the experience level of the PD/PI (or multiple PDs/PIs, if applicable) and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the program (if applicable)? Is there evidence that an appropriate level of effort will be devoted by the program leadership to ensure the program's objectives?
Innovation: Is the research education program original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area? Does this program duplicate, or overlap with, existing research education, training and/or career development activities currently supported at the applicant institution or available elsewhere? Adaptations of existing research education programs may be considered innovative under special circumstances, e.g., the addition of unique components and/or a proposal to determine portability of an existing program.
Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? Is there evidence that the program is based on sound research concepts and educational principles? Is the approach feasible and appropriate to achieve the stated research education goals? If the proposed program will recruit participants, are the recruitment, retention, and follow-up activities adequate to ensure a highly qualified and diverse participant pool?
For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, is the Leadership Plan approach, including the designated roles and responsibilities, governance and organizational structure consistent with and justified by the aims of the project/program and the expertise of each of the PD/PIs?
Environment: Does the scientific/educational environment in which the program will be conducted contribute to the probability of success? Does the proposed research education program benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of appropriate collaboration among participating programs, departments, and institutions? Is the institutional commitment to the proposed program appropriate? If multiple sites are participating, is this adequately justified in terms of the research education experiences provided? Are adequate plans provided for coordination and communication between multiple sites. How well and in what ways does this program interact with on and off-site NIH-supported neuroscience T32 training programs?
2.A. Additional Review Criteria
In addition to the above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the impact/priority score:
Protection for Human Subjects: For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities and Children: When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children.
Vertebrate Animals: The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia.
Evaluation Plan: Are the evaluation plan and timeline adequate for assessing the effectiveness (process and outcome) of the program in achieving its goals and objectives? If applicable, are the plans for obtaining feedback from participants adequate to measure the quality and effectiveness of the research education programs? What is the overall performance evaluation plan (which may include baseline data and milestones for accomplishments as well as plans for tracking and monitoring participants progress)?
Dissemination Plan: Is the dissemination plan strong and of high quality?
Biohazards: Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures are proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
2.B. Additional Review Considerations
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will address each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items and should not consider them in providing an overall impact/priority score.
Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research: Peer reviewers will assess the applicant's plans for training in the responsible conduct of research on the basis of the appropriateness of topics, format, amount and nature of faculty participation, and the frequency and duration of instruction.
The plan will be discussed after the overall determination of merit, and the review panel's evaluation of the plan will not be a factor in the determination of the impact/priority score. Plans will be judged as acceptable or unacceptable. The acceptability of the plan will be described in an administrative note on the summary statement. Regardless of the impact/priority score, applications with unacceptable plans will not be funded until the applicant provides a revised, acceptable plan. Program staff will judge the acceptability of the revised plan.
Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan: The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to promote diversity in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences research workforce. The NIH expects efforts to diversify the workforce to lead to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups; to improve the quality of the educational and training environment; to balance and broaden the perspective in setting research priorities; to improve the ability to recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols; and to improve the Nation’s capacity to address and eliminate health disparities.
Accordingly, the NIH continues to encourage institutions to diversify their student and faculty populations and thus to increase the participation of individuals currently underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences such as: individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research. Institutions are encouraged to identify candidates who will increase diversity on a national or institutional basis.
Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the diversity recruitment and retention plan after the overall score has been determined. Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the recruitment and retention of individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and individuals from socially, culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds.
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 education program.
Select Agents Research: Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans: When relevant, reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable:
Research education programs: The initial review group will comment on the appropriateness of the proposed software dissemination plan.2.C. Resource Sharing Plan(s)
1. Award Notices
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the NIH eRA Commons.
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant. For details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General.
Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the Notice of Award (NoA) are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. See Section IV.5., “Funding Restrictions.”
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via email notification from the NIMH to the grantee business official.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities
Termination of Award: When a grantee institution plans to terminate an award, program and grants management staff at the NIH funding component must be notified in writing as soon as possible.
Change of Institution: The research education program may not be transferred from one institution to another.
Consultation with the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers program staff is strongly encouraged when a change of institution is being considered. In reviewing a request to transfer a grant, NIH will consider whether there is a continued need for the grant-supported project or activity and the impact of any proposed changes in the scope of the project. A change may be made without peer review, provided the PI plans no significant change in the original objectives, and the facilities and resources at the new organization will allow for successful performance of the project or activity. If these conditions or other programmatic or administrative requirements are not met, the NIH Blueprint Institutes and Centers may require peer review or may disapprove the request and, if appropriate, terminate the award.
The applicant must provide the following information to the NIH Blueprint Institutes for review:
Change of Program: Awards are made for a specific program under the guidance and leadership of a particular PD/PI. A change in any of these parameters requires prior approval by the responsible program officer in the NIH funding component. A rationale must be provided for any proposed changes in the aims of the original, peer-reviewed program. If the new program does not satisfy this requirement, the award will be terminated.
Change of PD/PI: If change of the PD/PI is necessary, support of the award is not automatic but may be continued with prior written approval by the NIH funding component, provided that the following conditions are met. The current PD/PI or the grantee institution must submit a written request for the change, signed by the appropriate institutional business official, to the responsible program officer of the NIH funding component that describes the reasons for the change. The Biographical Sketch of the proposed PD/PI, including a complete listing of active research grant support, must be provided. The information in the request must establish that the Specific Aims of the original peer-reviewed research education program will remain unchanged under the direction of the new PD/PI and that the new PD/PI has the appropriate research and administrative expertise to lead the program. This request must be submitted sufficiently in advance of the requested effective date to allow the necessary time for review.
Awards made in response to this FOA are subject to SNAP. Since the BP-Endure program may involve multiple years, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The Progress Report should provide information on the development and implementation of the proposed research education program (including education in the responsible conduct of research), modifications to the research education program as originally proposed, details about the applicant pool, updates on the evaluation of the research education program and dissemination activities (if applicable), and a list of any publications and/or other materials arising from the research education program. Each year, the progress report must include the number of appointed (program-supported) undergraduate participants current academic status, degree pursued and institution); the information and number of presentations, as well as information and the number of peer-reviewed publications including program-supported participants as co-authors; the number of former program-supported participants initiating and/or continuing Ph.D. degree training (including name, current academic status, degree pursued and institution), and the number of former program-supported participants engaged in research careers (including name, institution, and current academic status). Since the BP-ENDURE program is an institutional program, the report must also provide the following information: the total (cumulative) number of undergraduates and graduates (M.S. and/or PhD., as applicable) completing degrees at the applicant institution; the total (cumulative) number of students that completed a degree in biomedical and/or behavioral sciences at the applicant institution and then completed a Ph.D. in Neuroscience fields at the applicant institution (if applicable) or elsewhere; and the total (cumulative) number of undergraduate students that enrolled in Ph.D. programs in Neuroscience at institutions with research-intensive environments.
Evaluation: In carrying out its stewardship of human resource-related programs, the NIH may request information essential to an assessment of the effectiveness of this program. Accordingly, award participants are hereby notified that they may be contacted after completion of this award for periodic updates on various aspects of program development, implementation, dissemination, and other information helpful in evaluating the impact of this program.
Publication and Sharing of Research Results: Investigators are encouraged to submit reports of their findings for publication to the journals of their choice. For each publication that results from this award, NIH support should be acknowledged by a footnote in language similar to the following: “This project was supported by NIH grant number ________. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.”
Statement of Appointment: The institution must submit a completed Statement of Appointment (PHS Form 2271) for each participant appointed for eight weeks or more. This form must be submitted to the awarding IC at or before the start of each participant’s appointment or reappointment If registered in the NIH eRA Commons, grantees may submit the PHS 2271 data electronically using the X-TRAIN application. More information on X-TRAIN is available at https://commons.era.gov/commons/. An appointment or reappointment may begin any time during the budget period, but not before the budget period start date of the grant year.
Failure by the grantee institution to submit the required forms in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award.
Termination Notice: Within 30 days of the end of the total support period for each participant, the institution must submit a Termination Notice (PHS Form 416-7) to the NIH. If registered in the NIH eRA Commons, grantees may submit the PHS 2271 data electronically using the X-TRAIN application. More information on X-TRAIN is available at https://commons.era.gov/commons/.
Failure by the grantee institution to submit the required forms in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award. Forms may be found on the NIH Website at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms.htm.
Final Reports: A final Progress Report and Financial Status Report are required when an award is terminated. Evaluation results should be included as part of the Final Progress Report.
We encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contacts:
Mark Chavez, Ph.D.
Division of Adult Translational Research and Treatment Development
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 7101, MSC 9632
Bethesda, MD 20892-9632
Rockville, MD 20852 (FedEx, UPS, etc.)
Telephone: (301) 443-8942
FAX: (301) 443-4611
2. Peer Review Contacts:
David Armstrong, Ph.D.
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6138, MSC 9606
Bethesda, MD 20892-9606
Telephone: (301) 443-3534
FAX: (301) 443-4720
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6118, MSC 9608
Bethesda, MD 20892-9608
Telephone: (301) 443-3538
Required Federal Citations
Use of Animals in Research:
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf) as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm), and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm) as applicable.
Human Subjects Protection:
Federal regulations (45 CFR 46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety monitoring is required for all types of clinical trials, including physiologic toxicity and dose-finding studies (Phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II); efficacy, effectiveness and comparative trials (Phase III). Monitoring should be commensurate with risk. The establishment of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical trials involving interventions that entail potential risks to the participants (“NIH Policy for Data and Safety Monitoring,” NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing). Investigators should seek guidance from their institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local institutional review board (IRB) rules, as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Rule.
Policy for Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS):
NIH is interested in advancing genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to identify common genetic factors that influence health and disease through a centralized GWAS data repository. For the purposes of this policy, a genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic variation across the entire human genome that is designed to identify genetic associations with observable traits (such as blood pressure or weight), or the presence or absence of a disease or condition. All applications, regardless of the amount requested, proposing a genome-wide association study are expected to provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the repository is not possible. Data repository management (submission and access) is governed by the Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Guide NOT-OD-07-088. For additional information, see
Sharing of Model Organisms:
NIH is committed to support efforts that encourage sharing of important research resources including the sharing of model organisms for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm). At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors to elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Beginning October 1, 2004, all investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal are expected to include in the application/proposal a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organism research resources generated using NIH funding or state why such sharing is restricted or not possible. This will permit other researchers to benefit from the resources developed with public funding. The inclusion of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a cost threshold in any year and is expected to be included in all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated.
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 access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are: (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds; and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm. Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award.
Inclusion of Women And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research” (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the SF424 (R&R) application; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in research involving human subjects (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC):
Criteria for Federal funding of research on hESCs can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.htmlNOT-OD-09-116.html. Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov/). It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC line(s) to be used in the proposed research.
NIH Public Access Policy Requirement:
In accordance with the NIH Public Access Policy, investigators funded by the NIH must submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed Central (see http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/), an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication. The NIH Public Access Policy is available at (). For more information, see the Public Access webpage at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/.
Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information", the "Privacy Rule", on August 14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and enforced by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and research contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. For publications listed in the appendix and/or Progress report, Internet addresses (URLs) or PubMed Central (PMC) submission identification numbers must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles. Publicly accessible on-line journal articles or PMC articles/manuscripts accepted for publication that are directly relevant to the project may be included only as URLs or PMC submission identification numbers accompanying the full reference in either the Bibliography & References Cited section, the Progress Report Publication List section, or the Biographical Sketch section of the NIH grant application. A URL or PMC submission identification number citation may be repeated in each of these sections as appropriate. There is no limit to the number of URLs or PMC submission identification numbers that can be cited.
Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This FOA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and Regulations:
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.
Loan Repayment Programs:
NIH encourages applications for educational loan repayment from qualified health professionals who have made a commitment to pursue a research career involving clinical, pediatric, contraception, infertility, and health disparities related areas. The LRP is an important component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the next generation of researchers by providing the means for developing a research career unfettered by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is not required for eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications are encouraged. The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing the LRP recipient with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP awardees must commit at least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week based on a 40 hour week) for two years to the research. For further information, please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov/.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.