and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
Participating Organization(s) |
National Institutes of Health (NIH) |
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney
Diseases (NIDDK) |
|
Funding Opportunity Title |
Planning Grants for Translational Research to Improve Obesity and Diabetes Outcomes (R34) |
Activity Code |
R34 Clinical Trial Planning Grant Program |
Announcement Type |
Reissue of PAR-09-177 |
Related Notices |
|
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number |
PAR-12-173 |
Companion Funding Opportunity |
PAR-12-172, R18 Translational Research to Improve Obesity and Diabetes Outcomes |
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s) |
93.847, 93.242 |
Funding Opportunity Purpose |
The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) encourage NIH Clinical Trial Planning Grant Program grant (R34) applications from institutions/ organizations to develop and pilot test practical, sustainable, acceptable, and cost efficient adaptations of efficacious strategies or approaches prevent and treat diabetes and/or obesity. Research must target the prevention or reversal of obesity, prevention of type 2 diabetes, improved care of type 1 and type 2 diabetes, or the prevention or delay of the complications of these conditions. NIMH encourages research focused on people with severe mental illness (SMI), whose risk for obesity and type 2 diabetes is twice that of the general population. The approaches tested should have the potential to be widely disseminated to clinical practice, individuals and communities at risk. |
Posted Date |
April 24, 2012 |
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date) |
June 2, 2012 |
Letter of Intent Due Date |
Not Applicable. |
Application Due Date(s) |
(See Notice NOT-DK-13-019 for revised dates), Originally July 2, 2012 , November 1, 2012 , March 1, 2013, July 1, 2013, November 1, 2013, March 3, 2014, July 1, 2014, November 3, 2014, March 2, 2015 , by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. |
AIDS Application Due Date(s) |
Not Applicable. |
Scientific Merit Review |
October 2012, March 2013, July 2013, October 2013, March 2014, July 2014, October 2014, March 2015, July 2015 |
Advisory Council Review |
January 2013, May 2013, October 2013, January 2014, May 2014, October 2014, January 2015, May 2015, October 2015 |
Earliest Start Date(s) |
April 1, 2013 |
Expiration Date |
(Now Expiring March 4, 2014 per NOT-DK-13-019), Originally March 3, 2015 |
Due Dates for E.O. 12372 |
Not Applicable |
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF 424 (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
Research in response to this announcement should propose pilot and feasibility studies to test sustainable, acceptable, and cost efficient adaptations of efficacious strategies or approaches prevent and treat diabetes and/or obesity. Areas of research included in this FOA include:
All grant applications must specifically include a description of the tested approach’s capacity to address the following questions:
a) Could it be applied to a significant number of at risk individuals?
b) Could it be widely disseminated (widely adopted) and implemented (put into practice)?
c) Would the approach be sustainable once the research is concluded?
Studies addressing diverse populations at disproportionate risk for obesity, diabetes, and diabetes complications are encouraged. However, research where the main focus is on development and validation of culturally appropriate materials such as translation into another language or some relatively superficial tailoring of a program (racially and ethnically consonant pictures, food, and exercises) is not consistent with the focus of this FOA. Translation to a different population requires that the adaptation or modification to the evidence based approach must be based on meaningful and mutable differences between the target population and the population addressed in the clinical efficacy research (e.g., research testing adaptations that address unique barriers or differences in lifestyle and beliefs). Also, the proposed research must demonstrate that the approach has the potential to be generalized across a reasonably large segment of the at risk population.
Research addressing high risk populations is encouraged. Research is particularly encouraged in American Indians and/or Alaskan Native populations residing on reservations or in more urban settings. The prevalence of diabetes among the 3.3 million American Indians and Alaska Natives 20 years of age and older is 16.3% with an additional 30% having pre-diabetes as reported in the recent 2008 update. These disparities are over two times higher than seen in non-Hispanic whites and the outcome of this is a death rate that is three times higher.
NIMH encourages research focused on people with severe mental illness (SMI), whose risk for obesity and type 2 diabetes is twice that of the general population. For purposes of this announcement, NIMH defines people with severe mental illness as adults who have a diagnosable psychiatric disorder that has resulted in significant impairment which substantially interferes with or limits major life activities. While schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depression are commonly considered SMI, this funding opportunity includes as SMI those mental disorders with equivalent symptom severity and/or functional impairment. In the 50-state Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study, 41% of participants with schizophrenia had metabolic syndrome, though few received appropriate treatment. Lifestyle behaviors associated with poor health outcomes, such as inactivity and poor diet, are more prevalent in persons with SMI, and these factors may combine with metabolic side effects of antipsychotic medications to produce the high rates of diabetes, heart disease and obesity found in persons with SMI.
Persons with SMI who are often already receiving mental health services represent an identifiable high-risk population with potential for engagement in evidence-based obesity and diabetes care through these service settings. Accordingly, NIMH seeks services research applications that employ population-based approaches to delivering evidence-based screening and care for obesity and type 2 diabetes in persons with SMI.
The primary outcomes in all studies submitted to this funding announcement should include objective endpoints such as improvement in glycemia, and/or weight change expressed as BMI, percent weight or body fat decrease, etc. Change in patient behavior is important but will best improve health if it also results in clinically meaningful outcomes related to obesity and/or diabetes.
In some cases behavior change would be acceptable as the primary outcome if it is objectively measured. Changes in healthcare provider assessment or intervention behavior are acceptable as a primary outcome if there is an objective endpoint such as chart or electronic health record review or pharmacy data. A self-reported outcome may not be included as the primary outcome. Also, changes in diet composition and/or physical activity patterns or knowledge acquisition may be included as secondary or intermediate outcomes but should not be used as primary outcome measures.
Study design and the accompanying analysis plan must be linked to the research question. The research designs employed do not necessarily have to be randomized controlled trials. However, researchers should choose the most rigorous design that is still feasible and relevant to the question/s posed.
Funding for this R34 is designed to provide pilot and feasibility data to be used in developing full-scale studies that would be submitted ***EITHER TO NIDDK as R18 research demonstration and dissemination projects (PAR-12-172), OR TO NIMH AS R01 applications for full-scale services research studies that target people with SMI (please see link to PA-11-260 http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-260.html). It is recommended that investigators review the guidance regarding requirements for the R18 (or R01 if submitting applications in populations with SMI that would be directed to NIMH) to help understand the long-terms goals of the R34 project. For example, an R18 must consider capacity for wide dissemination, sustainability, and implementation costs. Additionally, an outline of the key features of the subsequent full-scale study resulting from the R34, including biostatistical considerations should be included along with a discussion of how the R34 will lead to a subsequent R18 or R01 proposal. Applicants who do not require support for a pilot and feasibility study may apply for an R18 directly (PAR-12-172) or an R01 if submitting to NIMH.
The sample size needed to pilot the proposed study, including the assumptions used when estimating the sample size, should be detailed in relation to the analysis plan. Since this FOA is designed to support pilot and feasibility, an efficacy based power analysis is not necessary. However, applicants must detail their plan for determining feasibility and evaluating whether the approach is successful enough to warrant moving to an R18 effectiveness trial.
Research that is not appropriate for this funding opportunity includes:
Applicants may be interested in the messages and resources already developed by the National Diabetes Advisory Board (NDEP) and available on the NDEP web site at http://www.ndep.nih.gov/.
Funding Instrument |
Grant |
Application Types Allowed |
New The OER Glossary and the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. |
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards |
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations, and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. |
Award Budget |
Direct costs of up to $150,000 per year are allowed. |
Award Project Period |
The maximum period is 2 years. |
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.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed.
Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
registrations.
All Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s))
must also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA
Commons or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA
Commons account of the applicant organization.
All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant
organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at
least 4-6 weeks prior to the application due date.
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 PD(s)/PI(s), visit the Multiple
Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) Policy and submission details in
the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF 424 (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.
NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial peer review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. Resubmission applications may be submitted, according to the NIH Policy on Resubmission Applications from the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the 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.
The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits 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 (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Appendix
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit in advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications via 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.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application 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 SF 424 (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.
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 SF
424(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.
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 Central Contractor Registration (CCR). 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 by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete will not be reviewed.
In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the NIDDK Referral Office by email at fc15y@nih.gov when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115.
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.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority 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.
Significance
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? 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?
Investigator(s)
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or 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(s)/PI(s), do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
Innovation
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?
Approach
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
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?
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of
human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members
of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms
of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Environment
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/priority score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Translation
Is the approach to be tested novel and/or significant in relation to its potential to meaningfully improve healthcare or public health? Does the approach to be tested have the potential to reach and/or be generalized to a reasonably large segment of at risk individuals? If the translation is to a new population, is the adaptation or modification to the evidence based approach directed toward meaningful differences between the target population and the population addressed in the clinical efficacy research? For example, does the proposed intervention address unique barriers or differences in lifestyle and beliefs? Does the approach to be tested have the potential for wide dissemination and implementation at the conclusion of the research? Have the researchers justified the sustainability of the approach beyond the research period, including appropriate partnerships and consideration of cost and resources such as personnel and infrastructure?
Protections 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. For
additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to
the Human
Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
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. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
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. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Biohazards
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.
Resubmissions
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.
Renewals
Not Applicable.
Revisions
Not Applicable
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/priority score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Not Applicable.
Select Agent 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
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) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
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.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the NIDDK or the NIMH,,in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Review assignments will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
Applications will be assigned 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 Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council or the National Advisory Mental Health Council, depending on primary assignment. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD(s)/PI(s) will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
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 the DUNS,
CCR Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award
Conditions and Information for NIH Grants 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.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
Not Applicable.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A final progress report, 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.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
Grants.gov
Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and
submission, downloading or navigating forms)
Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Telephone 301-710-0267
TTY 301-451-5936
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov
eRA Commons Help Desk (Questions regarding eRA Commons
registration, tracking application status, post submission issues)
Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
TTY: 301-451-5939
Email: commons@od.nih.gov
Christine M. Hunter, Ph.D. (for psychological or behavioral
research in diabetes and obesity)
Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Disease
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 594-4728
Fax: (301) 480-0475
Email: ch514c@nih.gov
Myrlene Staten, M.D. (for adult medical research)
Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 402-7886
Fax: (301) 480-3503
E-mail: ms808k@nih.gov
Sanford Garfield, Ph.D (for American Indian/prevention
research)
Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 594-8803
E-mail: sg50o@nih.gov
Barbara Linder, M.D., Ph.D. (for pediatric medical research)
Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 594-0021
E-mail: bl99n@nih.gov
Robert Kuczmarski, Ph.D (for obesity trial research)
Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 451-8354
E-mail: rk191r@nih.gov
Mary Horlick, M.D. (for pediatric obesity research in
clinical settings)
Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 594-4726
E-mail:mh559n@nih.gov
Susan Azrin, PhD (for research targeting people with severe mental
illness)
Division of Services and Intervention Research
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Telephone: (301) 443-3267
E-mail: susan.azrin@nih.gov
Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D.
Deputy Chief, Review Branch
Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: (301) 594-8898
Email: mb316j@nih.gov
David Armstrong, Ph.D.
Chief, Extramural Review Branch
National Institute of Mental Health
Telephone: (301) 443-3534
Email: armstrda@mail.nih.gov
Natasha Loveless, MBA
Grants Management Specialist
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney
Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-8853
Email: Natasha.Loveless@nih.gov
Rebecca Claycamp
Chief, Grants Management Officer
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Telephone: (301) 443-2811
E-mail: rclaycam@mail.nih.gov
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 Parts 74 and 92.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||