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

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

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

Progress in relating genomics to health and disease requires a constant infusion of new ideas and approaches. These may differ substantially from current thinking or practice and may not yet be supported by preliminary data. By using the R21 activity code, NHGRI seeks to foster the introduction of novel scientific ideas, approaches, tools, and technologies that have the potential to make large advances in relating genomic variation to function, health, and disease.

The R21 activity code is intended to encourage new exploratory and developmental research projects. For example, such projects could assess the feasibility of a novel area of investigation or a new experimental system or use an existing methodology to explore novel genomic approaches to relating genetic variation to function, health, and disease. These studies may involve considerable risk but may lead to important breakthroughs.

Applications for R21 awards should describe projects distinct from those that could be supported through the traditional R01 activity code. Applications submitted to this FOA should be exploratory and novel. These studies should break new ground or extend previous discoveries in new directions or applications.

Background

Sequencing studies, including the 1000 Genomes Project and many disease studies, have identified more than 100 million sites in the human genome that vary among people. However, it is likely that most of the variants do not contribute to differences in function, traits, disease risk, or clinical outcomes. Thus, methods to figure out which variants or sets of variants causally lead to differences in function are needed for a deeper understanding of the processes that lead to differences among people in many traits, including disease risk and clinical phenotypes.

For this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA), the term disease or trait is used broadly, to encompass diseases, risk of diseases, protective effects against diseases, molecular phenotypes, organismal phenotypes, clinical phenotypes or outcomes, traits, responses to therapeutic drugs or vaccines, and other outcomes relevant to human health and disease.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been highly successful in looking at genome-wide sets of genetic variants to detect their associations with disease and many other traits. The GWAS catalog provides a comprehensive listing of almost 60,000 SNP-trait associations (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/). Whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing studies have identified rare variants associated with disease.

The linkage disequilibrium patterns in the genome mean that disease- or trait-associated regions may contain many genes, other functional genomic elements, and variants. Thus, determining which variants affect the function of genes or other genomic elements is a major challenge. Even for situations with a higher likelihood of a variant being causal, such as a missense variant in a protein-coding region, the functional significance of this variant generally cannot be determined with available data. When variants in known disease- or trait-associated regions of the genome are studied, it can be unclear how they contribute to phenotype, without, for example, replicating the phenotype in a model system. In GWAS and whole-genome sequencing projects, the majority of disease- and trait-associated variants fall outside the coding regions and usually cannot be interpreted without substantial functional data.

Understanding which variants in a person’s genome lead to disease risk and changes in health is important for clinical implementation. Genomic sequencing is increasingly being performed in clinical settings and precision medicine, and function data can be essential for classifying the variants identified in patients. Linking high-throughput assays of variant effects to patients phenotypic characteristics and treatment responses could increase our understanding of the functional consequences of variants. The Genomic Medicine Meeting IX (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28340351) discussed several issues related to using functional data to understand clinical genomes. The recommendations included improving approaches for studies of animal and cell models to better understand genetic variants observed in human studies, improving the connection of functional data with standardized phenotypic data, and enhancing collaborations between clinical and basic scientists. It will be important to determine what types of functional data would be most valuable for interpreting genomic variation in clinical settings at the individual and population levels, and how these data could best be used to advance the science of clinical medicine.

Many resources help the interpretation of variants identified through association studies and clinical sequencing. For example, the GTEx Project (https://www.gtexportal.org/home/) studied the effect of variants on gene expression across many tissues from many individuals. The ENCODE Project (www.encodeproject.org), the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Program (https://commonfund.nih.gov/epigenomics), and other genomics projects have mapped many types of functional genomic elements across the genome. The ClinGen Project (https://www.clinicalgenome.org/) is building an authoritative central resource that defines the clinical relevance of genes and variants for precision medicine and research. The eMERGE Network (https://emerge.mc.vanderbilt.edu/) is sequencing and assessing the phenotypic effects of ~100 clinically relevant genes, including studying the penetrance of rare variants.

Research efforts are needed to develop novel and transformative approaches for the next steps of identifying which variants, genes, and other genomic elements cause disease or result in other traits, and how they function to do so. Even variants in relevant functional genomic elements may not cause differences in function. A major need is to figure out what types of data, methods, and approaches will allow researchers to discover which genes or other genomic elements contribute to disease or traits, how variants in those elements result in higher or lower risk, and how they affect disease and biological processes. Differences in function may be at the molecular or cellular level, leading to differences at the tissue and organismal level. Generalizable approaches are needed that provide a deeper understanding and go beyond association to investigate the black box that currently exists between variants and diseases and other traits.

Scope

This FOA aims to support research that develops novel, transformative, and generalizable genomic approaches to study the functional and disease effects of genomic variation, specifically how differences in sequence lead to differences in genome function, and to better understand how functional differences lead to disease risk or traits, or how to this knowledge can be used clinically. These new approaches could fall into a range of activities, from exploring novel concepts, developing new methods, or developing new ways to analyze data that will substantially advance the ability to understand the functional consequences of sequence variation and provide fundamental knowledge to directly or indirectly accelerate scientific and medical breakthroughs that improve human health.

This FOA aims to develop approaches that can be used broadly to study the relationships among genetic variation, function, traits, and disease. The focus should be on developing approaches that can be applied generally across multiple disease or trait outcomes. Approaches may be tested using specific genomic elements, variants, cell types, diseases, traits, or model organisms; however, the generalizability of the approach must be explained well. Approaches that are comprehensive across the genome and assay many or all variants at once are encouraged. This PA is not intended for approaches that are only applicable to, or tailored towards, study of an individual disease, gene, or variant.

Studies that examine how genetic variants affect molecular phenotypes (e.g., transcriptome and epigenetic profiles) are appropriate. Studies that look at how genetic variants affect tissue or physiological function may be appropriate if the approaches can be generalized across variants, tissues, diseases, or function. Some approaches may relate to the choice of samples or biological contexts to be studied; for example, studying functional data types in people prior to and during the time that they are developing a disease may be informative, as would studying people who are at high risk of a disease but have not developed it. Proposed studies could also investigate genetic interactions, looking at combinatorial effects of multiple variants. The application should explain how generalizable, broadly useful, and transformative the approaches will be.

Approaches may include one or more of these aspects of genomics:

Functional genomics: Applications may propose to develop new functional genomic approaches to study how differences in sequence lead to differences in function, and how this informs disease or related biological processes. This may be for specific types of variants, genomic elements, or genomic regions, for regulatory interactions, or for networks. Use of model organisms or model systems is encouraged, especially where approaches are especially suited for these systems; however, information forthcoming from these models should be relevant to humans, e.g., through understanding of general principles or functional consequences of variants in conserved sequences, or methodological advances. Examples include developing novel gene editing approaches in cell lines or model organisms, or developing methods to study transcription factor binding differences and their effects on transcription and cellular phenotypes, insertion or deletion variants that affect nucleosome spacing and regulation, or variants that cause differences in epigenomic marks and their effects on disease risk. Methods are encouraged that can help to infer causality or indicate which molecular function differences result in phenotypic differences.

Technology development: Applications may propose to develop novel genomic technologies that assay how sequence differences in functional genomic elements lead to differences in function and phenotypes. Development of comprehensive, genome-wide, or high-throughput methods are encouraged. Examples include new assays for function that can detect differences among variants in genomic elements, or improved sequence editing methods that allow single or multiple variants in functional elements to be studied, preferably for many functional elements at a time.

Clinical genomics: Applications may propose to develop new approaches that use functional genomics data to better interpret genomes in a clinical context. This may include developing data sets to deduce whether variants are pathogenic or benign, developing methods to use functional data to better assess penetrance or predict individuals at risk of disease, developing approaches to connect in a comprehensive way phenotype data with functional data for sets of variants in the context of precision medicine and health, or other ways to interpret VUS. Applications may also propose to study how best to implement functional data or functional interpretation methods in clinical settings.

Data integration and analysis: Applications may include the development of novel computational methods to integrate functional data and other data types to help to understand which variants are causal for phenotypes, and how variants lead to differences in function in relation to molecular or cellular phenotypes, clinical phenotypes, disease risk or mechanism, other traits, or other ways of interpreting clinical genomes. Applications may propose to study which data types are most informative for understanding how variants affect function or disease risk, or may be interpreted clinically.

This FOA aims to support the development of novel approaches in this area, so applications whose major aim is the production of functional data sets using existing or established approaches are not appropriate for this FOA; NHGRI program officers may be able to suggest other types of support for those activities. A major outcome of this program will be results showing which data types would be most broadly useful for understanding how genetic variation leads to differences in the function of genomic elements that lead to differences in disease risk, traits, and pathogenicity. Future funding announcements may be developed to scale up the production of such data sets.

Genomic studies have generally lacked inclusion of substantial numbers of non-European-ancestry participants, so the production or analysis of data from individuals of diverse races, ethnicities, and ancestries is encouraged.

NHGRI encourages investigators who plan to collect phenotype or environmental exposure data to use the standard protocols in the PhenX Toolkit (www.phenxtoolkit.org).

Projects that focus on tumor or somatic cancer genomics will not be appropriate for NHGRI funding.

To enable the widest use of the functional data, any human subjects consents should allow broad, general research use of the data, with no restrictions on the types of researchers who may use the data. Where possible, use of samples consented for submission of data into unrestricted databases is strongly encouraged.

In addition to this PA, NHGRI participates in several funding opportunities https://www.genome.gov/10000991/nhgri-funding-opportunities-research/, including the parent R01 announcements. Under those parent announcements, NHGRI will support the development of resources, methods, and technologies that will accelerate research in understanding the structure of genomes, understanding the biology of genomes, understanding the biology of disease, advancing the science of medicine, and improving the effectiveness of healthcare. NHGRI will also support research in several cross-cutting areas, including the ethical, legal and societal implications of genomics research, clinical implementation of genomics, bioinformatics, technology development, and research training and career development. Although clinical trials are not allowed under this FOA, NHGRI supports such research under parent NIH FOAs that allow them.

Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to contact NHGRI staff early in the application development process.

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

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

Higher Education Institutions

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

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

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

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

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

For-Profit Organizations

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

Governments

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

Other

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

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.

Applicant Organizations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:

• A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
• A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
• An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NOT-OD-11-101).

Buttons to access the online ASSIST system or to download application forms are available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

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

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

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Applicants are expected to provide Resource Sharing Plans (Genomic Data Sharing Plan, Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, Software Sharing Plan), if appropriate for the resources proposed, with the following modifications:

--All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should include Resource Sharing Plans.

--Prior to funding, NHGRI program staff may negotiate modifications to the Resource Sharing Plans with the applicant.

Genomic Data Sharing Plan: Applicants are expected to comply with the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy, if appropriate. Applicants should provide a Genomic Data Sharing Plan containing the elements listed here https://gds.nih.gov/03policy2.html and the NHGRI implementation of this policy https://www.genome.gov/27562511/nhgri-implementation-of-nih-genomic-data-sharing-policy/ .

Data Sharing Plan: NIH expects that data, metadata, and technical protocols produced under this FOA will be deposited as appropriate into existing, publicly available data repositories that are easily accessible, in machine-readable formats. For any data produced, applicants should describe the data types, where the data and metadata will be deposited, the timeline and plans for data deposition, and the obtaining of broad consent for any human subjects data. For data types that lack suitable public repositories, applicants should indicate their willingness to identify an appropriate alternative solution. Applicants should ensure that data and other information produced or distributed by the resource follow the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) guidelines.

Protocol and Reagent Sharing Plan: As one of the primary goals of this program is to advance research through the development and broad dissemination of community resources, NIH intends that protocols and reagents produced under this FOA be broadly available, distributed at minimal cost, and without undue intellectual property constraints. Where appropriate, applicants should discuss plans for distributing non-data resources that will be produced, including models, protocols, biomaterials, and reagents.

Software Sharing Plan: A software sharing plan, with appropriate timelines, is expected in applications that are developing software. This plan should be included only in the Overall Component. There is no prescribed single license for software produced in this project; however, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the software sharing plan based on its likely impact. A sharing plan guided by the following principles is thought to promote the largest impact:

1. The software should be freely available to biomedical researchers and educators in the non-profit sector, such as education institutions, research institutions, and government laboratories.

2. The plan should permit the dissemination and commercialization of enhanced or customized versions of the software, or incorporation of the software or pieces of it into other software packages.

3. To preserve utility to the community, the software should be transferable such that another individual or team can continue development in the event that the original investigators are unable to do so.

4. The terms of software availability should include the ability of researchers outside the awardee group and its collaborating projects to modify the source code and to share modifications with other colleagues as well as with the awardee group. Applicants should take responsibility for creating the original and subsequent official versions of a piece of software.

5. Applicants should propose a plan to manage and disseminate the improvements or customizations of their tools and resources by others. This proposal may include a plan to incorporate the enhancements into the official core software, may involve the creation of an infrastructure for plug-ins, or may describe some other solution.

Appendix:

Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

When involving NIH-defined human subjects research, clinical research, and/or clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed with the following additional instructions:

Delayed Onset Study

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

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

Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions.

See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.

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

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

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

All 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 only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

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

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

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Guidelines for Applicants Experiencing System Issues. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

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

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

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete or non-compliant will not be reviewed.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

Important Update: See NOT-OD-18-228 for updated review language for due dates on or after January 25, 2019.

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

The R21 exploratory/developmental grant supports investigation of novel scientific ideas or new model systems, tools, or technologies that have the potential for significant impact on biomedical or biobehavioral research. An R21 grant application need not have extensive background material or preliminary information. Accordingly, reviewers will emphasize the conceptual framework, the level of innovation, and the potential to significantly advance our knowledge or understanding. Appropriate justification for the proposed work can be provided through literature citations, data from other sources, or, when available, from investigator-generated data. Preliminary data are not required for R21 applications; however, they may be included if available.

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

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

Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

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

Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

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

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.

Not Applicable

For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.

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

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

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).

Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: (1) Data Sharing Plan; (2) Sharing Model Organisms; and (3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS).

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.

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

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the Center for Scientific Review, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:

• May undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
• Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications . Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
• Compliance with resource sharing policies.
• Generalizability of the proposed approaches.
• Programmatic balance among the chosen awards.

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 eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

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

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

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

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

Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

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. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.

Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.

For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html; and https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.

In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Not Applicable

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

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

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

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

eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten on-time submission, and post-submission issues)

Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

General Grants Information (Questions regarding application processes and NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]

Lisa D. Brooks, Ph.D.
National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)
Telephone: 301-547-1387
Email: [email protected]

Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).

Lisa Oken
National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)
Telephone: 301-594-5250
Email: [email protected]

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

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 Part 75.