RELEASE DATE:  October 28, 2003

PA NUMBER:  PAR-04-015

EXPIRATION DATE:  May 1, 2006 (This PA has been reissued as PAR-06-441)

Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)



o  Purpose of the PA
o  Research Objectives
o  Mechanism(s) of Support
o  Eligible Institutions
o  Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators
o  Where to Send Inquiries
o  Submitting an Application
o  Peer Review Process
o  Review Criteria
o  Award Criteria
o  Required Federal Citations


This program announcement supercedes three prior announcements for the support 
of research infrastructure:  Interventions and Practice Research Infrastructure 
Program (PAR-00-096), Interventions Infrastructure Program (PAR-99-064), 
and the Research Infrastructure Support Program (PAR-94-096).

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) seeks to expand the number of 
partnerships between community-based, clinical/services settings and academic 
institutions.  The goal is to enhance the national capacity to provide evidence-
based mental health care in community settings that is sensitive to the social 
and cultural needs of patients and providers and to the feasibility concerns of 
the community organizations involved.  This program announcement (PA), 
Interventions and Practice Research Infrastructure Support Program (IP-RISP), 
responds to recommendations made by the National Advisory Mental Health 
Council’s (NAMHC) report, Bridging Science and Service 
The IP-RISP seeks to foster an active, synergistic partnership between mental 
health researchers and community-based, clinical/services staff, clinicians and 
patients/clients to: (1) advance our knowledge about developing research 
infrastructure in community settings and the establishment of collaborative 
partnerships; (2) identify and incorporate those factors (e.g., organizational, 
sociocultural, interpersonal) in community settings that may be associated with 
quality care and optimal outcomes for patients and clients; and (3) test 
adapted, evidence-based interventions (treatment, rehabilitative, and 
preventive) in community settings.



The 1999 NAMHC report, Bridging Science and Service, was written to focus the 
attention of NIMH and the research community on the gulf between what is known 
about treatments for mental illness and what is available and provided to people 
in the community who need care.  The report’s conclusions indicate that many 
changes need to take place to bridge that gulf.  Three of the recommendations 
focused on increasing academic-community partnerships in research:

o  NIMH should revise and renew program announcements (PAs) in the spirit of the 
Public-Academic Liaison (PAL) Program to maintain and promote existing 
partnerships between academic researchers and public care systems, health plans, 
both carve-outs and health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and employers 
providing health benefits and their representative groups.

o  NIMH should stimulate new alliances by providing developmental funds to 
establish shared research resources such as data banks, staff time, consultant 
time, etc.

o  NIMH should commit resources to identify, describe, and disseminate models of 
successful partnerships.

This PA is designed to provide tangible support and encouragement for researchers 
and community mental health providers to establish working and sustainable 
partnerships to make evidence-based mental health services available and 
acceptable for people in need of mental health care.  The IP-RISP mechanism is 
applicable to a wide range of possible partnerships.  Community settings may 
include general and primary health care, public or tribal health and mental 
health clinics, community-based specialty care, long-term care facilities, 
schools, family service or faith-based organizations, State or tribal components 
of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, and 
elements of local and/or State correctional systems.

The ultimate goal of the IP-RISP partnerships is to make available evidence-
based care for those in need of mental health care.  However, to make that goal 
possible, NIMH expects the partnerships to be:  sustainable, even after NIMH 
infrastructure funding has ended; synergistic, leading to mutual learning for 
both researchers and community providers; productive, with additional mental 
health services research grant applications submitted; receptive to providing 
information to others seeking to form partnerships; and based in theoretical 
and/or conceptual models of action research, human behavior, and/or 
organizational/systems behavior so that the mechanisms or process underlying 
successful partnerships can be understood and tested in other settings.  A plan 
for continuous assessment and improvement of the infrastructure development is 
required.  The result should be an environment capable of nurturing and 
sustaining researchers, providers, and the infrastructure development and 
research plans.

The application must present a focused and linked two-part plan for five years 
of proposed NIMH IP-RISP funding.  The plan should include: (1) background 
information on the community setting needs for research infrastructure; 
(2) evidence of the fit and strengths of the partner institutions; 
(3) description of the activities that have been and will be undertaken to 
develop and strengthen the unique community-academic partnership; (4) at least 
two pilot or developmental/exploratory studies intended to provide the data and 
foundation for subsequent research applications from the partnership in mental 
health interventions and services research.  The partnership development 
activities and the research studies should be unambiguously linked and 
justified; both development and research activities should have clearly 
articulated and justified aims and methods.

Listed below are examples of research topics that can contribute to scientific 
knowledge about mental health interventions in diverse, community settings.  The 
list is not exhaustive; it is meant only to be illustrative.  Also consider all 
the research questions presented in the Research Programs page of the Services 
Research and Clinical Epidemiology Branch website:  The IP-RISP research projects 
are not expected to be major research proposals, providing definitive data.  
They are intended to provide preliminary data to be used to guide the design of 
larger scale, more complex research applications.  IP-RISP projects are similar 
to the ones typically supported under the NIMH developing grant mechanism (R34):  
From Intervention Development to Services: Exploratory Research Grants,

o  Assess and test methods to more quickly and effectively synthesize and 
incorporate existing evidence into clinical practice 

o  Determine patient, provider and contextual factors that may enhance or 
detract from the effective delivery of interventions

o  Evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and costs of efficacious interventions 
but not adequately tested in practice settings

o  Evaluate alternative methods of adapting assessment and treatment protocols 
originally developed in academic settings 

o  Determine whether fidelity (by patients and providers) to adapted 
interventions is related to patient outcomes

o  Test methods to improve the recruitment and retention of patients and 
providers in community-based intervention studies

o  Determine whether patient and provider treatment choice is related to 
positive patient outcomes

o  Determine different stakeholders’ perceptions of quality of care and develop 
instruments  to assess the relationship between various definitions of quality 
and patient/client outcomes

o  Test the effectiveness of evidence-based care for subsyndromal and comorbid 

o  Determine how economic factors (e.g., at the patient and community 
organization levels) affect the provision and receipt of services and 

o  Test state-of-the-art dissemination and implementation strategies

Listed below are examples of research questions that can inform our 
understanding of community-academic partnerships.  Again the list is not 
exhaustive; it is meant only to be illustrative.

o  What theoretical conceptualizations best explain the functioning of the 

o  How do provider and patient perceptions of researchers (and vice versa) 
change over time and is change related to patient outcomes?

o  What factors best predict individual provider-researcher alliances?

o  What are provider concerns about evidence-based practice and what processes 
are acceptable for working through barriers and addressing concerns? 

o  What mechanisms can be implemented and accepted by providers and researchers 
to allow for sharing of power/control and trust?

o  How do financial constraints for the community partner affect the research 
relationship?  Are there innovative ways that researchers can help alleviate 
stress caused by financial cutbacks?

o  Under what circumstances do conflict resolution procedures aid the 
collaborative partnership?

Allowable costs

A central principle of the IP-RISP is that different partnerships will require 
different types of research infrastructure and development support.  A 
substantial part of the support should be targeted to the community settings.  
Examples of types of support under this program are:

o  Database and information management system construction or conversion, 
ongoing data management, and related technical support

o  Research on the partnership process

o  Training and supporting research assistants from the community or the partner 

o  Treatment protocol and instrument adaptation and/or translation 

o  Partial salary support for persons engaged in the research of the partnership 
(including practice site staff)

o  Methodological, statistical, or theoretical consultation

o  Costs related to subject recruitment and retention.

o  Costs related to testing dissemination and implementation strategies


This PA will use the NIH resource related research projects (R24) award 
mechanism.  As an applicant, you will be solely responsible for planning, 
directing, and executing the proposed project.  This mechanism is used to 
support projects that enhance capabilities to contribute to extramural research 
of the PHS.  The total project period for an application submitted in response 
to this PA may not exceed 5 years and is not renewable.  These grants are not 

The funding cap for each year for the IP-RISP awards is $400,000 maximum direct 
costs, plus negotiated indirect costs.  Annual awards will be made subject to 
continued availability of funds and progress achieved.

Although the Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs associated with all 
contractual and consortium arrangements are considered as direct costs to the 
applicant organization, for the purposes of this program announcement, these 
will not count against the program direct costs cap of $400,000 per year.  
(However, these costs should be indicated as instructed on Form 398, rev. 5/01.)

This PA uses just-in-time concepts.  Follow the instructions for non-modular 
research grant applications.  This program does not require cost sharing as 
defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement at


You may submit (an) application(s) if your institution and partnering 
institution(s) have any of the following characteristics:

o  For-profit or non-profit organizations
o  Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, 
and laboratories
o  Units of State, local, and tribal governments
o  Eligible agencies of the Federal government
o  Domestic
o  Faith-based or community-based organizations
o  Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply


Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out 
the proposed research is invited to work with their institution to develop an 
application for support.  Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic 
groups as well as individuals with disabilities are strongly encouraged to apply 
for NIH programs.


We encourage your inquiries concerning this PA 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:

o  Direct your questions about scientific/research issues to:

Junius J. Gonzales, M.D.
Division of Services and Intervention Research
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 7141 MSC 9631
Bethesda, MD  20892-9631
Telephone:  (301) 443-3364
FAX:  (301) 443-4045

o  Direct your questions about peer review issues to:

Michael Kozak, Ph.D.
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6138, MSC 9608
Bethesda, MD  20892-9608
Telephone:  (301) 443-1340
FAX:  (301) 443-4720

o  Direct your questions about financial or grants management matters to:

Joy Knipple
Grants Management Branch
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6115, MSC 9605
Bethesda, MD  20892-9605
Telephone:  (301) 443-8811
FAX:  (301) 443-6885


Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application 
instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001).  Applications must have a Dun and 
Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number as the Universal 
Identifier when applying for Federal grants or cooperative agreements.  The DUNS 
number can be obtained by calling (866) 705-5711 or through the web site at  The DUNS number should be entered on 
line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398 form.  The PHS 398 is available at in an 
interactive format.  For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone 
(301) 710-0267, Email:

The title, “Interventions and Practice Research Infrastructure Program (IP-RISP),” 
and number of this program announcement (PAR-04-015) must be typed in Item 2 of 
the face page of the application form and the YES box must be checked.

APPLICATION PAGE LIMITS:  The description of Sections A-D should be limited to a 
total of no more than 30 pages and should be equally balanced between 
descriptions of the infrastructure and research plans.

APPLICATION RECEIPT DATES:  Applications submitted in response to this program 
announcement will be accepted at the standard application deadlines, which are 
available at  Application 
deadlines are also indicated in the PHS 398 application kit.

SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH:  Submit a signed, typewritten original of the 
application, including the checklist, and three signed photocopies in one 
package to:

Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD  20892-7710
Bethesda, MD  20817 (for express/courier service)

At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application and all 
copies of the appendix material must be sent to:

Jean G. Noronha, Ph.D.
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6154, MSC 9609
Bethesda, MD  20892-9609
Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier service)
Telephone:  (301) 443-3367
FAX:  (301) 443-4720

APPLICATION PROCESSING:  Applications must be mailed on or before the receipt 
dates described at  
The CSR will not accept any application in response to this PA that is 
essentially the same as one currently pending initial review unless the 
applicant withdraws the pending application.  The CSR will not accept any 
application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed.  This does not 
preclude the submission of a substantial revision of an application already 
reviewed, but such application must include an Introduction addressing the 
previous critique.  

Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an application, 
applicants are generally notified of the review and funding assignment within 8 


Applications submitted for this PA will be assigned on the basis of established 
PHS referral guidelines.  Appropriate scientific review groups convened in 
accordance with the standard NIH peer review procedures 
will evaluate applications for scientific and technical merit.

As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:

o  Undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have 
the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of applications under 
review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score
o  Receive a written critique
o  Receive a second level review by the National Advisory Mental Health Council.


The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of 
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health.  In the 
written comments, reviewers will be asked to evaluate your application in order 
to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial 
impact on the pursuit of these goals.  The scientific review group will address 
and consider each of these criteria in assigning your application’s overall 
score, weighting them as appropriate for each application.

o  Significance 
o  Approach 
o  Innovation
o  Investigator
o  Environment

Your application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged 
likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score.  
For example, you may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is 
not innovative but is essential to move a field forward.

SIGNIFICANCE:  Does the IP-RISP address important problems?  If the aims of the 
application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge of intervention 
effectiveness and real world practice be advanced?  What will be the effect on 
the provision and receipt of care in community settings?  Will the infrastructure 
development contribute to broader theoretical and conceptual frameworks?

APPROACH:  Is the approach appropriately conceived?  Is the approach likely to 
successfully develop the partnerships needed to carry out relevant and wide-
reaching studies?  Does the applicant exhibit knowledge of and appreciation for 
the challenges involved in building infrastructure and conducting research in 
practice settings?  Thus, does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas 
and consider alternative tactics?  Is the infrastructure proposed adequate to 
sustain research capacity?  How well linked are the research aims and the plans 
for infrastructure development?

INNOVATION:  Does the applicant acknowledge the complexity of the specific 
settings, populations, and professions engaged in each study? Does the IP-RISP 
employ novel concepts, approaches or methods? Are the aims (for both the 
infrastructure development and research plans) original and innovative?  Does 
the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies for both 
research and establishing partnerships?

INVESTIGATOR:  Do the partners have a commitment to the mission of the IP-RISP 
and the necessary expertise to organize, administer and direct the IP-RISP?  Is 
the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal 
investigator and to that of other key personnel?

ENVIRONMENT:  Do the practice and academic environments in which the work will 
be done contribute to the probability of success?  Do the proposed research 
projects take advantage of the unique features of the practice context 
(patients, providers, system)?  Is there evidence of institutional support and 
leadership from all partners?

ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA:  In addition to the above criteria, the following 
items will be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the 
priority score:

INFRASTRUCTURE:  Is there specificity in the infrastructure plans that are 
tailored to the organizations involved, the nature of the partnership and the 
services/interventions research aims?  Are the infrastructure aims informed by a 
conceptual framework and/or theory?  Do they propose an assessment of the 
feasibility, progress, and accountability?  Are there plans to assure the 
sustainability of the infrastructure after the grant is over?  Will the 
knowledge gained about infrastructure development be transferable to other 

subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in 
the proposed research will be assessed. (See criteria included in the section on 
Federal Citations, below).

to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and 
subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research 
will be assessed.  Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also 
be evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria in the sections on Federal Citations, 

CARE AND USE OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS IN RESEARCH: If vertebrate animals are to be 
used in the project, the five items described under Section f of the PHS 398 
research grant application instructions (rev. 5/2001) will be assessed.


SHARING RESEARCH DATA:  Applicants requesting more than $500,000 in direct costs 
in any year of the proposed research are expected to include a data sharing plan 
in their application. The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the 
rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers.
However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the 
determination of scientific merit or priority score.

BUDGET:  The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period of 
support in relation to the proposed research.


Applications submitted in response to a PA will compete for available funds with 
all other recommended applications.  The following will be considered in making 
funding decisions:

o  Scientific merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review
o  Availability of funds
o  Relevance to program priorities


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). The establishment of data and safety monitoring 
boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical trials involving 
interventions that entail potential risk to the participants. (NIH Policy for 
Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, June 12, 1998:  

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 - 
Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts on 
October 9, 2001
a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are available at  
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical research; 
updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; 
clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials 
consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH 
staff and the extramural community.  The policy continues to require for all NIH-
defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or 
protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, 
to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including 
subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and 
progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic 
group differences.

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

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the 
"NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in 
research involving human subjects that is available at

requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all 
investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human subjects.  
You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts 
Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, at

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

Applicants may wish to place data collected under this PA 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.

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

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 PA is related to one or more 
of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 
2010" at

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS: This program is described in the Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance at and is not subject to the 
intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems 
Agency review.  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 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 NIH Grants Policy Statement can be found at 

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.

Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

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

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