and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
|
Participating Organization(s)
|
National Institutes of Health (NIH) |
|
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) |
|
|
Funding Opportunity Title
|
NIMH Research Education Mentoring Programs for HIV/AIDS Researchers (R25) |
|
Activity Code
|
R25 Education Projects |
|
Announcement Type
|
Reissue of PAR-11-002 |
|
Related Notices |
|
|
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
|
PAR-12-273 |
|
Companion Funding Opportunity
|
PAR-12-264,
R25
Education Projects |
|
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)
|
93.242 |
|
Funding Opportunity Purpose
|
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) issued by the National Institute of Mental Health encourages Research Education Grant (R25) applications from Institutions/Organizations that propose to develop, implement, and evaluate creative and innovative research education mentoring programs that will facilitate the development of a cadre of investigators in requisite scientific research areas to advance the mental health-related objectives of the Office of AIDS Research (OAR) Annual Strategic Plan and program priorities of the NIMH Division of AIDS Research (DAR). This funding opportunity encourages applications proposing mentoring programs that include either a special institute (with didactic and research components) or a national mentoring network. Participants are limited to undergraduates, graduate/medical students, medical residents, postdoctoral fellows, and/or early-career faculty. These mentoring programs are expected to enhance the professional development of the participating individuals and foster their career trajectory towards independent research in the mental health of HIV/AIDS. For non-AIDS-related NIMH research education program FOAs, see PAR-12-264, PAR-12-263, or PAR-12-262. |
|
Posted Date
|
August 28, 2012 |
|
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
|
December 7, 2012 |
|
Letter of Intent Due Date
|
December 7, 2012; December 7, 2013; and December 7, 2014 |
|
Application Due Date(s)
|
Not Applicable. |
|
AIDS Application Due Date(s)
|
January 7, 2013; January 7, 2014; and January 7, 2015; by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. |
|
Scientific Merit Review
|
March 2013, March 2014, and March 2015 |
|
Advisory Council Review
|
May 2013, May 2014, and May 2015 |
|
Earliest Start Date(s)
|
July 1, 2013; July 1, 2014; and July 1, 2015 |
|
Expiration Date
|
January 8, 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
The purpose of the NIH Research Education Programs (R25) is to support research education activities in the mission areas of the NIH. The goal of the NIMH R25 Program is to augment the education and training of the scientific workforce to meet the nation s biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research needs in the mission areas of the NIMH. The NIMH R25 Program currently provides four thematic funding opportunities: 1) short courses for mental health-related research education (PAR-12-262), 2) research education programs supporting psychiatric residents (PAR-12-263), 3) mentoring networks for mental health-related research education (PAR-12-264), and 4) research education mentoring programs for HIV/AIDS researchers (PAR-12-273). Note that NIMH R25 applications in the area of HIV/AIDS research education will only be accepted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).
This FOA issued by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) encourages Research Education Grant (R25) applications from Institutions/Organizations that propose to develop, implement, and evaluate creative and innovative research education mentoring programs that will facilitate the development of a cadre of investigators in requisite scientific research areas to advance the mental health-related objectives of the Office of AIDS Research (OAR) Annual Strategic Plan. Applications are expected to support the development of innovative mentoring programs, relevant to the mission of the NIMH AIDS research program (see Program Scope, below), and that fulfill one or more of the objectives below:
Preparing the next generation of basic and clinical research scientists requires research education and career development experiences in highly interdisciplinary and collaborative HIV/AIDS research settings. These experiences will require access to multiple scientific disciplines and methodologies, the involvement of mentors from more than one discipline, and the opportunity for individually tailored research education programs. Due to the likely breadth of the science involved, these experiences will frequently require facilitation and coordination across departments, schools, centers, and institutions; and dedicated time of interdisciplinary faculty. In today s research climate, having junior and senior faculty with different, but complementary expertise (crossing basic, clinical and services disciplines) serve as co-mentors would be potentially advantageous. Such co-mentoring could provide guidance on cutting-edge as well as established research to help ensure research success. Such co-mentoring would also be likely to facilitate interdisciplinary and translational approaches to HIV/AIDS research.
Just as there is no universally accepted definition of scientific mentoring, there is no single model for successful mentoring. Therefore, applicants should propose a program/network that includes mentoring, resources, and interactive opportunities in a specific scientific content area as the framework for the proposed mentoring program/network. The rationale for the mentoring model and the scientific content area chosen, as well as the relationship of the scientific content area to the mission of the OAR Annual Strategic Plan and to the research programs of the NIMH Division of AIDS Research (DAR) should be described in the application. Recent NIMH/DAR FOAs in the behavioral (PA-11-271; PA-11-275) and biological (PA-11-014) arenas highlight scientific priorities relevant to proposed mentoring networks/programs.
The scope of a mentoring program should be broad enough to accomplish a set of goals rather than a single goal. For example, the program could advance the broad career goals of participants; facilitate scholarly writing and grantsmanship; provide access to a group of skilled mentors who are outstanding researchers but not otherwise available at the home institution of the participant; promote successful transitions from one career stage to another; provide leadership development; facilitate
potential collaborations; and help establish interdisciplinary or translational research approaches. The content area should be of sufficient breadth to provide reasonable assurance of the ability to recruit a high-quality pool of potential participants annually and to ensure that a critical mass of mentors and participants in the mentoring program. It is expected that an over-arching goal of any mentoring program is to facilitate the professional success of participants as independent researchers and members of the research community.
Successful mentoring and capacity development require a sustained commitment and ongoing effort and must be done in the context of infrastructure development and partnering between institutions/organizations and the communities served. It will be important for proposed programs to identify and link to existing institutional infrastructure and resources to carry out mentoring effectively.
It is recommended that applicants propose innovative mentoring programs including one of the below options.
Research education programs other than an institute or a network will be accepted as long as mentoring activities are the cornerstone and the program fulfills one or more of the stated objectives. For all proposed programs, consultation with the scientific program officer is strongly advised.
Essential Program Features for Research Mentoring Institutes
The major intent of this type of Research Education Program (R25) is to establish long-term mentoring that will enable participants to develop a research program and obtain NIH funding. A multidisciplinary mentoring program should be developed in an HIV/AIDS field that has thematic concentration such as NeuroAIDS, neuropsychiatry, disparities, therapeutics, prevention, dissemination/implementation (see NIMH Division of AIDS Research (DAR) programs). Mentoring activities should be the cornerstone of this program and these mentoring activities should be embedded in both academic and research educational activities that include the components listed below.
(1) Academic program component. The academic program component might include seminars or didactic instruction to provide an introduction to a particular field of research relevant to HIV/AIDS. This should include information relevant to state of the art research methods, recent developments and research findings, particularly those relevant to underrepresented groups (as defined in Section IV.2, Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan). Didactic instruction should provide the background and basis of individual tutorials and/or small group seminars on research planning to help elaborate and clarify new research questions and develop a preliminary research plan. Regardless of the scientific theme selected, cross-cutting topic areas such as networking/career development and grantsmanship should be addressed.
(2) Research program component. The research program component should involve research career development-related activities and mentoring (in-person, telephonic or virtual) in the context of the participant’s original research studies (including preliminary pilot work). Research should involve preliminary pilot studies and conduct of the research itself as well as the subsequent development of research grant applications for NIH submission. Pilot research projects are for new participants and are limited to $20,000 for up to two years, as detailed in Section II. Other Program-Related Expenses. An application may request up to $20,000, for up to two years, for pilot research projects. Applications that request funds for pilot research projects must clearly describe the process by which the proposed projects will be reviewed and monitored to ensure effective use of pilot project funds.
(3) Local mentoring network. A critical mass of faculty/research mentors with ongoing funded research projects is necessary to implement the proposed specialized, intensive institute academic and research program components. This local network should oversee the following three tasks: (i) the process for matching mentor with participant; (ii) the education proposed, as well as the standardization of mentoring activities; and (iii) the regularly occurring workshops/meetings whose purpose is to pair mentor(s) with participants so that they may work together on the design of research projects and development of research applications for NIMH grant submission.
(4) Institute Administrative Coordination. When there are multiple sites and/or collaborative partnerships for the research mentoring institute, one site should be identified as primary for the purpose of logistical and administrative coordination. This site should provide a resource for overall management, coordination and supervision of the institute mentoring program. This should ensure satisfactory ongoing management of an integrated set of sites with fiscal accountability and evidence of a strong collaborative environment for the institute mentoring program.
(5) Institute Workshops/Meetings. Since a major aspect of the research mentoring institute is participants' pilot research projects, every attempt should be made for these workshops/meetings to serve as a forum for participants' research presentations and critiques. During these workshops, concept papers could be reviewed, major trends in HIV/AIDS research discussed, and opportunities provided to interact with mentors, experts and federal program officials. These workshops should also provide a forum for appropriate didactic instruction and plenaries by senior investigators.
(6) Optional Short Courses. Innovative and interactive short courses (their development, implementation, evaluation) may be included as a component of the proposed mentoring institute. These courses are for scientists interested in learning state-of-the-art tools, methods, knowledge and skills needed to conduct research on topics that are well aligned with the mission of the NIMH. They are expected to reflect one or more aspects of the mental health research priorities of the Office of AIDS Research (OAR) Annual Strategic Plan and the program priorities of the NIMH Division of AIDS Research (DAR). Since this FOA is intended to target the national level, the short courses (or workshops) should benefit the entire research community, not primarily the host institution. As such, a selection process should be put in place that allows for participation from both within and outside the host institution while maintaining the focus on research mentoring.
Essential Program Features for National Research Mentoring Networks
The major intent of a national research mentoring network is to build a qualified pool of HIV/AIDS research scientists who will serve as a central resource of mentors to facilitate the transition of participants to the next level of career development. A multidisciplinary mentoring network should be developed in an HIV/AIDS field that has thematic concentration such as NeuroAIDS, neuropsychiatry, disparities, therapeutics, prevention, dissemination/implementation (see DAR programs). Mentoring networks may propose to mentor only participants from a single career stage or may propose a mentoring network to bridge several career stages (i.e., post baccalaureate through the transition to research independence). Applicants should provide a rationale for the proposed career stage(s) of the participants to be mentored within the network. An applicant organization may wish to partner with scientific professional organizations or other partnering organizations to develop a national mentoring network. The national mentoring network should include the components listed below.
(1) Mentor-Participant matching process. Applicants must clearly define and justify the mentoring approach that is proposed for the levels of participants who will be targeted. This would require matching and tailoring mentors to participants based on interests, needs, personality, and other relevant characteristics.
(2) Mentor training and standardization of mentoring activities. Since applicant institutions are free to choose different delivery modes (e.g., online, peer-based, team-based) for the proposed mentoring activities, it will be important to ensure a process for specific mentorship training, both in general and program-specific activities. After training of mentors is established, standardized participant outcomes should be used to assess the success of mentoring activities.
(3) Participant research activity. While we do not propose a specific research activity for the participant as part of the network, the research activity is expected to encompass issues related to research design, execution and analysis and/or grantsmanship itself ranging from concept development to grant application submission. The proposed national mentoring network should provide a framework for an integrated, high-quality research infrastructure addressing any of these research aspects through innovative mentoring networks that cover research topics, didactic content and mentoring expertise that reflects research interests of NIMH/DAR. While any of a number of methods might be used (e.g., recurring webinars, one-on-one, small group discussions), the ultimate goal should be to promote the participant career development working towards research excellence and successful grant competition.
(4) Network Administrative Coordination. One coordinating center should be identified as a clearinghouse for logistical, administrative and infrastructure support. A process for administrative coordination should be described to provide a resource for overall management, coordination and supervision of the national mentoring network. This should ensure satisfactory ongoing management of an integrated network across several sites with fiscal accountability and evidence of a strong, collaborative environment for the network.
(5) Network Connecting Workshops/Meetings. During these network workshops/meetings, there should be attempts to integrate and bring together aspects of the national network since such a broad network has the potential of being diffuse and spread out over the country. For example, bidirectional exchange might occur where participants learn more about the research university environment and staff learns more about the needs and perceptions of participants. These meetings might also serve as a forum for contextual mentoring where participants communicate with mentors in the network other than their primary mentor as well as with the community and stakeholders.
(6) Optional Short Courses. Innovative and interactive short courses (their development, implementation, evaluation) may be included as a component of the proposed mentoring network. These courses are for scientists interested in learning state-of-the-art tools, methods , knowledge and skills needed to conduct research on topics that are well aligned with the mission of the NIMH. They are expected to reflect one or more aspects of the mental health research priorities of the Office of AIDS Research (OAR) Annual Strategic Plan and the program priorities of the NIMH Division of AIDS Research (DAR). Since this FOA is intended to target the national level, the short courses (or workshops) should benefit the entire research community, not primarily the host institution. As such, a selection process should be put in place that allows for participation from both within and outside the host institution while maintaining the focus on research mentoring.
All programs are expected to incorporate training opportunities that will help individuals move a step forward towards productive careers as HIV/AIDS research scientists. These opportunities might include individualized long-term mentoring; networking interactions; experience in grant writing, preparing presentations, and writing research papers for publication; reviewing manuscripts; participating in mock grant application reviews; having access to state of the art methodology; and traveling to scientific meetings.
This FOA is intended to support new mentoring networks or renewals of currently funded NIMH mentoring networks. The proposed research education program may complement ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, but the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those research training and research education programs currently receiving federal support. The R25 is not a substitute for an institutional research training program (T32) and cannot be used to circumvent or supplement Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) mechanisms.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact NIMH program staff for current information about priorities and policies before preparing an application (see Section VII).
|
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
|
Application budgets may not exceed $250,000 in direct costs annually and are expected to reflect actual needs of the proposed project. |
|
Award Project Period
|
The total project period for an application submitted in response to this FOA may not exceed five years. |
|
Personnel Costs
|
Individuals designing, directing, and implementing the research education program may request salary and fringe benefits appropriate for the person months devoted to the program. Salaries requested may not exceed the levels commensurate with the institution's policy for similar positions and may not exceed the congressionally mandated cap. (If mentoring interactions and other activities with students/participants are considered a regular part of an individual's academic duties, then any costs associated with the mentoring and other interactions with students/participants are not allowable costs from grant funds). Personnel costs (including administrative and clerical costs) associated with directing, coordinating, administering, and implementing the program may not exceed 35% of the direct costs in any year of the project period. |
|
|
Participants may be paid if specifically required for the
proposed research education program and sufficiently justified. Participant
costs must be itemized in the proposed budget. |
|
Applications that request funds for pilot research projects must clearly describe the process by which the proposed projects will be reviewed and monitored to ensure effective use of pilot project funds. |
|
|
Indirect Costs
|
Indirect Costs (also known as Facilities & Administrative [F&A] Costs) are reimbursed at 8% of modified total direct costs (exclusive of tuition and fees and expenditures for equipment), rather than on the basis of a negotiated rate agreement. |
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
All Program
Directors/Principal Investigators (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.
The sponsoring institution must assure support for
the proposed program. Appropriate institutional commitment to the program
includes the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources
that can contribute to the planned program.
Institutions with existing Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service
Award (NRSA) institutional training grants (e.g., T32) or other Federally
funded training programs may apply for a research education grant provided that
the proposed educational experiences are distinct from those training programs
receiving NIH support. In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed research
education program will complement ongoing research training occurring at the
applicant institution.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
noteligible 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.
Justification for a foreign component: If the research education project includes a foreign component, the application must provide a justification including the special resources or characteristics of the project necessitating a foreign component, the availability (or lack thereof) of this resource in the United States, and the need for additional research education projects in this area. For a definition of a substantial foreign component, see Part III: Policies, Assurances, Definitions, and Other Information in the SF424(R&R) Application Guide.
If multiple sites are involved in the research education program, the applicant institution must be one of these sites for the program. The need for and use of multiple sites must be justified.
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 diverse backgrounds,
including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with
disabilities, and women 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.
The PD/PI should be an established investigator in the scientific area in which
the application is targeted and capable of providing both administrative and
scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed
program. The PD/PI will be expected to monitor and assess the program and
submit all documents and reports as required.
The PD/PI should have a strong track record as a mentor in an area relevant to
the scientific focus of the mentoring institute/network.
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.
The application must have a strong research program in the area(s) proposed for research education and should include a letter explaining the institutional commitment to the proposed research education program.
The application should describe the anticipated number of mentors who will participate in the mentoring network and their desired qualifications. Describe the planned recruitment process for mentors as well as eligibility, selection, evaluation, and removal criteria. Describe the responsibilities of mentors. Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to participate as mentors. Mentors should have research expertise and experience relevant to the proposed program, a track record of mentoring individuals at the career stage(s) proposed in the application, and a record of leadership related to training and career development programs or activities. Mentors must be committed to continue their involvement throughout the total period of the participation by participant(s) assigned to them during the course of this award, and for a period of no less than one year.
Applications must describe the intended participants, and the eligibility and/or specific education background characteristics that are essential for participation in the proposed research education program. Noting that this FOA can support the development and implementation of educational activities targeting individuals at the career stage of undergraduates, graduate/medical students, medical residents, postdoctoral fellows, and/or early-career faculty, identify the career levels of participants in the planned program and the rationale for the selected career levels. Describe the pool from which participants will be selected regionally and/or nationally (including the anticipated size of the pool and qualifications of the applicants) and criteria for participant eligibility and selection. Describe planned methods for reviewing the progress of participants and for identifying and addressing any problems. Describe strategies that will be used to advertise the mentoring institute/network to this pool, recruitment strategies, and retention strategies.
Unless strongly justified on the basis of exceptional relevance to NIH, research education programs should be used primarily for the education of U.S. citizens.
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.
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
NIMH Referral Office
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
Email: [email protected]
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 the instructions in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.
All page limitations described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide with the following modifications:
Facilities & Other Resources
Describe the educational environment, including the facilities, laboratories, participating departments, computer services, and any other resources to be used in the development and implementation of the proposed program. List all thematically related sources of support for research training and education following the format for Current and Pending Support.
Advisory Committee (Uploaded via the Other Attachments section)
An Advisory Committee is optional. If an advisory committee is to be convened, a plan must be provided. The plan should describe Advisory Committee responsibilities, frequency of meetings, and other relevant information should be included. Describe the composition of the Advisory Committee, identifying the role and the desired expertise of members. Describe how the Advisory Committee will function in providing oversight of the development, implementation and evaluation of recruitment strategies, the recruitment and retention of candidates, and the evaluation of overall effectiveness of the program. Note that proposed Advisory Committee members should not be named in the application, particularly if they include individuals from outside the institution. However, renewal applications with Advisory Committees should include names of existing advisors. Please name your file Advisory_Committee.pdf .
The filename provided for each Other Attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the electronic application in eRA Commons.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide with the following modifications:
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the additional instructions described below:
The Research Strategy section must be used to upload the Research Education Program Plan, which must include the following components described below: Proposed Research Education Program, Institutional Environment and Commitment, Program Director/Principal Investigator, Program Faculty/Staff, Program Participants, Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan, Plan for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research, Evaluation Plan, and Dissemination Plan.
Proposed Research Education Program (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
While the proposed research education program may complement ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those research training and research education programs currently receiving federal support. When research training programs are on-going in the same department, the applicant organization should clearly describe the distinction between the intended participants in the proposed research education program and the research training supported by the training program. The information should include a description of the education and/or career levels of the planned participants. The application should provide the rationale for the proposed mentoring institute/network including the scientific need and timeliness, how the mentoring institute/network complements existing training or didactic opportunities (as appropriate) and how training goals and objectives relate to the mission and current research priorities of the NIMH. The program plan should provide programmatic detail on the specific activities proposed (e.g., curricula, seminars, workshops, involvement in hands-on research activities) and how the accomplishment of objectives will be measured. The application should also describe expected processes for: (a) conducting and monitoring participant progress during the research education program, (b) planning research and educational activities, (c) recruiting and selecting participants, (d) matching mentors to participants, and (e) if applicable, coordinating among existing training or research activities available at a site or across multiple sites. Note that there should be a clear "value added" from the proposed, R25-supported mentoring institute/network. Organizations participating in joint applications should demonstrably be involved in the planning, implementation, and assessment of the mentoring institute/network. Describe how the mentoring institute/network may be modified over time depending upon the outcome of initial progress and participant feedback and/or new developments in the field, in order to ensure that the research education continues to be cutting edge.
A plan for program leadership must be provided. The plan should describe leadership team responsibilities, frequency of meetings, and other relevant information. Describe the composition of the program leadership team, identifying the role (e.g., PD(s)/PI(s), planning committee lead, education director, etc.) and the desired expertise of members. A plan for the leadership team's involvement in approval and selection of participants should be included. Describe how the leadership team will function in providing oversight of the development, implementation, and evaluation of recruitment strategies, the recruitment and retention of participants, and the evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the program. Key leadership team members, including PD(s)/PI(s) from each participating institution or organization, should be identified in the application; other leadership team members may be appointed at a later date. However, in renewal applications, leadership team members should be named.
For Renewal Applications, the Progress Report should describe the previously supported mentoring institute/network and its objectives, results of the outcomes measured, the number and characteristics of participants in the past project period, materials disseminated, and any changes in administration, mentoring program design/objectives, or targeted participant groups during the prior funding period. The description of the proposed mentoring program for the next funding period should highlight how the mentoring program continues to offer education at the scientific cutting-edge as well as any changes in activities that are planned to maintain the currency of the research education offered.
Institutional Environment and Commitment (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Describe the institutional environment, reiterating the availability of facilities and educational resources (described separately under Facilities & Other Resources ), that can contribute to the planned Research Education Program. Evidence of institutional commitment to the research educational program is required. A letter of institutional commitment must be attached as part of Letters of Support. Appropriate institutional commitment should include the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education program.
Program Director/Principal Investigator (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Describe arrangements for administration of the program, provide evidence that the Program Director is actively engaged in research and/or teaching in an area related to the mission of NIH, and can organize, administer, monitor, and evaluate the research education program, as well as evidence of institutional and community commitment and support for the proposed program. For multiple PD(s)/PI(s) Leadership Plan, see instructions for the Multiple PD(s)/PI(s) Leadership Plan section of the Research Plan. For this funding opportunity, provide evidence that the mentoring institute/network PD(s)/PI(s) is actively engaged in research in an area related to the mission of DAR. Describe the mentoring track record and leadership track record with respect to research training and career development programs or activities.
Program Faculty/Staff (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Describe the characteristics and responsibilities of the participating faculty; provide evidence that the participating faculty and preceptors are actively engaged in research or other scholarly activities related to the mission of NIH. Program faculty may have one or more roles, e.g., summer institute instructor only, or instructor and mentor, mentor only, etc. Program faculty serving as mentors should be actively engaged in research in an area related to the mission of NIMH DAR. In addition, they should have prior experience mentoring participants at the career stage(s) proposed in the application. Describe the criteria and processes used to select and remove participating faculty.
Program Participants (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Where the proposed program involves participants, provide details about the pool of expected participants, their qualifications, recruitment strategies and sources of applicant pool, etc. Describe the criteria that will be used to select individuals who will participate in the program. Describe plans for announcing and advertising the mentoring institute/network, recruiting participants regionally or nationally, application procedures, and criteria for evaluation and selection of participants. Participants selected for the program should have a clear interest in research relevant to the mission and strategic objectives of the NIMH.
Diversity Recruitment and Retention Plan (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to
promote diversity in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences
research workforce. The NIH expects efforts to diversify the workforce to lead
to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups; to improve
the quality of the educational and training environment; to balance and broaden
the perspective in setting research priorities; to improve the ability to
recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols; and
to improve the Nation's capacity to address and eliminate health disparities.
Accordingly, the NIH continues to encourage institutions to diversify their
student and faculty populations and thus to increase the participation of
individuals currently underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral,
and social sciences such as: individuals from underrepresented racial and
ethnic groups; individuals with disabilities; and individuals from socially,
culturally, economically, or educationally disadvantaged backgrounds that have
inhibited their ability to pursue a career in health-related research.
Institutions are encouraged to identify candidates who will increase diversity
on a national basis.
The NIH is particularly interested in encouraging the recruitment and retention
of the following classes of participants:
A. Individuals from racial and ethnic groups that have been shown by the National Science Foundation to be underrepresented in health-related sciences on a national basis (see data at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/showpub.cfm?TopID=2&SubID=27 and the most recent report on Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering). The following racial and ethnic groups have been shown to be underrepresented in biomedical research: African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, Hawaiian Natives, and natives of the U.S. Pacific Islands. It is recognized that underrepresentation can vary from setting to setting; individuals from racial or ethnic groups that can be convincingly demonstrated to be underrepresented by the grantee institution should be encouraged to participate in this program.
B. Individuals with disabilities, who are defined as those with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.
C. Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who are defined as:
1. 1. Individuals who come from a family with an annual income below established low-income thresholds. These thresholds are based on family size; published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census; adjusted annually for changes in the Consumer Price Index; and adjusted by the Secretary for use in all health professions programs. The Secretary periodically publishes these income levels at HHS - Poverty Guidelines, Research, and Measurement. For individuals from low income backgrounds, the institution must be able to demonstrate that such participants have qualified for Federal disadvantaged assistance or they have received any of the following student loans: Health Professions Student Loans (HPSL), Loans for Disadvantaged Student Program, or they have received scholarships from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Scholarship for Individuals with Exceptional Financial Need.
2. 2. Individuals who come from a social, cultural, or educational environment such as that found in certain rural or inner-city environments that have demonstrably and recently directly inhibited the individual from obtaining the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to develop and participate in a research career.
Recruitment and retention
plans related to a disadvantaged background (C1 and C2) are most applicable to
high school and perhaps to undergraduate candidates, but would be more
difficult to justify for individuals beyond that level of academic achievement.
Under extraordinary circumstances the PHS may, at its discretion, consider an
individual beyond the undergraduate level to be from a disadvantaged background.
Such decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis, based on appropriate
documentation.
New applications must include a description of plans to enhance recruitment of a diverse participant pool and may wish to include data in support of past accomplishments.
Renewal applications must include a detailed account of experiences in recruiting individuals from underrepresented groups during the previous funding period. Information must be included on successful and unsuccessful recruitment strategies including aggregate information on the distribution of:
For those individuals who were
enrolled in the program, the report should include information about the
duration of education and whether those individuals finished the program in
good standing. Additional information on the required Recruitment and Retention
Plan to Enhance Diversity is available at Frequently Asked Questions:
Recruitment and Retention Plan to Enhance Diversity (Diversity FAQs).
Applications lacking a diversity recruitment and retention plan will not
be reviewed.
Plan for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Every participant supported by this Research Education grant must receive instruction in the responsible conduct of research. All applications must include a plan to provide such instruction. The plan must address five components (format; subject matter; faculty participation; duration of instruction; and frequency of instruction) as detailed in NOT-OD-10-019. Renewal (Type 2) applications must, in addition, describe changes in formal instruction over the past project period and plans for the future that address any weaknesses in the current instruction plan. All participating faculty who served as course directors, speakers, lecturers, and/or discussion leaders during the past project period must be named in the application.
Applications lacking a plan for instruction in
responsible conduct of research will not be reviewed.
The background, rationale and more detail about instruction in the responsible
conduct of research can be found in NOT-OD-10-019.
If such instruction is not appropriate for the proposed research education
program, then the PD/PI must provide a strong justification for its exclusion.
Evaluation Plan (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
Applications must include a plan for evaluating the activities supported by the award. The application must specify baseline metrics (e.g., numbers, educational levels, and demographic characteristics of participants), as well as measures to gauge the short or long-term success of the research education award in achieving its objectives. Wherever appropriate, applicants are encouraged to obtain feedback from participants to help identify weaknesses and to provide suggestions for improvements. The PD/PI should state clear and measurable objectives a priori, and specify the way in which such outcomes will be measured and how they will be considered in the evaluation of the program, overall.
Applications lacking an evaluation plan will not be reviewed.
Dissemination Plan (Component of Research Education Program Plan)
A specific plan must be provided to disseminate nationally any findings resulting from or materials developed under the auspices of the research education program, e.g., sample curricula, web postings, presentations at scientific meetings, workshops, etc.
Applications lacking a dissemination plan will not be reviewed.
Resource Sharing Plans
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, with the
following modifications:
Applications are expected to include a software dissemination plan if
support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested
in the application. There is no prescribed single license for software
produced. However, the software dissemination plan should address, as
appropriate, the following goals:
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 NIMH Referral Office by email at [email protected] when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD(s)/PI(s) name(s), 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.
For this particular announcement, note the following: applications should be
characterized by innovation, scholarship, and documentation of a strong need in
the research community for the proposed mentoring program. Renewal
applications should also demonstrate a continuing need for the existing mentoring
program to advance NIMH's goal of a well-trained pool of researchers with state-of-the-art
knowledge and skills essential for achieving the Institute's research
priorities..
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.
Significance
Does the proposed research education program address an important problem or critical question in research education or other critical issues? How will implementation of the proposed program advance the objectives of the proposed program? Does the proposed program address a key audience and an important aspect or important need in research education? To what extent will the implementation of the proposed program enhance the professional development of the participants and facilitate their progress towards research independence? Is the proposed program likely to stimulate additional mentored research on the mental health and/or central nervous system-related effects of HIV?
Investigator(s)
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers appropriately trained and well suited to the proposed research education program? Is the PD/PI an established investigator in the scientific area in which the application is targeted and capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed research education program? If Early Stage Investigator or New Investigator, or in the early stages of an independent career, does the PD/PI have appropriate experience to lead the program? 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? Is there evidence that an appropriate level of effort will be devoted by the program leadership to ensure the program's objectives? Is the caliber of the leadership team and participating faculty/mentors, in terms of their research interests, expertise, mentoring records and research education leadership in the area of the proposed program, appropriate for their roles on the project? Do the faculty/mentors adequately demonstrate their commitment to the participants?
Innovation
Is the proposed research education program characterized by innovation and scholarship? Does the proposed program challenge and seek to shift current research education paradigms or clinical practice, or address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Are the proposed concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies novel for this area? Does this proposed program duplicate, or overlap with, existing research education, training and/or career development activities currently supported at the applicant institution or available elsewhere? Adaptations of existing research education programs may be considered innovative under special circumstances, e.g., the addition of unique components and/or a proposal to determine portability of an existing program. Does the proposed program provide state-of-the-art educational opportunities? Does the applicant make a strong case for this program reaching participants in need of the program's offerings? Where appropriate, is the proposed program developing or utilizing innovative approaches to improve the knowledge and/or skills of the intended audience?
Approach
Are the overall
strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish
the specific aims of the proposed research education program? Are
potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the program is in the early stages of development, will the
strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be
managed? Is there evidence that the program is based on sound research
concepts and educational principles? Is the approach feasible and
appropriate to achieve the stated research education goals? Are the
recruitment, retention, and follow-up activities adequate to ensure a highly
qualified and diverse participant pool? Does the proposed program clearly state
its goals and objectives, including the educational level of the audience to be
reached, the content to be conveyed, and the intended outcome(s)? Are the
methods and activities appropriate for the program objectives and the intended
audience? Does the program include the essential features identified in the FOA
for a either a special institute or a mentoring network and are the program
features adequately constructed (Part 2, Section I)? Is sufficient
interaction planned between faculty/mentors and participants? lf activities
target research-oriented physician-scientists during medical school and/or
residency, are they structured to facilitate the development of appropriate
scientific expertise, to encourage sustained interest in a career as a
physician-scientist, and to facilitate the transition of participants to the
next career stage? Are there specific plans to facilitate efficient and
effective communication among local and national network members, both mentors
and participants? Are there strong plans for program administration with any
partnering organizations? If applicable, are the nature and extent of the
partnerships explained? Where partnerships are proposed, are there plans to
monitor their effectiveness and to avoid duplication? Is the proposed plan for
evaluation sound and likely to provide data on the effectiveness of the program
in achieving its goals and objectives? Does the plan adequately describe how
outcomes will be determined and evaluated? Is there a well-defined plan to
disseminate program-generated materials to the broader scientific community?
If the program 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/educational environment in which the proposed research education program will be conducted contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional commitment and support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the program proposed? Will the program benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of appropriate collaboration among participating programs, departments, and institutions? If multiple sites are participating, is this adequately justified in terms of the research education experiences provided? Are adequate plans provided for coordination and communication between multiple sites (if appropriate)? Are there adequate plans to ensure coordination among other training or career development programs while ensuring that the proposed program is distinct from other extant programs (if applicable)? Is there a plan to take advantage of the environment to enhance the educational value of the program? Is there tangible evidence of institutional commitment?
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.
Protections for Human Subjects
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
Vertebrate Animals
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
Biohazards
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
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
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period, and the success of the program in attracting and retaining individuals from diverse populations, including populations underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral research. Has the program been innovative in the past and does it continue to demonstrate innovation? Has the program documented a strong need for continued support?
Revisions
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/priority score.
Recruitment & Retention Plan to Enhance Diversity
Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the recruitment and retention plan to enhance diversity after the overall score has been determined. Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the recruitment and retention of individuals from underrepresented groups. The review panel’s evaluation will be included in an administrative note in the summary statement. Plans and past record will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.
Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research
Taking into account the specific characteristics of the research education program, level of participant experience, and the particular circumstances of the participants, the reviewers will address the following questions. Does the plan satisfactorily address the format of instruction, e.g., lectures and/or real-time discussion groups? Do plans include a sufficiently broad selection of subject matter, such as conflict of interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety? Do the plans adequately describe how faculty will participate in the instruction? Do the plans ensure participants will receive instruction (or in the case of more senior level participants, provide instruction) for an appropriate amount of time given the length of the research education experience? Plans and past record will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.
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 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 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 Mental Health Council. 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.
The Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) and financial statements as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement are required annually. Continuation support will not be provided until the required forms are submitted and accepted.Programs that involve participants should report on education in the responsible conduct of research and complete a Training Diversity Report, in accordance with the PHS 2590 Additional Instructions for Preparing a Progress Report for an Institutional Research Training Grant, Including Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards.
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.
Failure by the grantee institution to submit required forms in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award.
As part of each Progress Report, programs should provide selected information (participant name, year(s) of participation, prior degree, home institution, current position, and any grant support obtained for each grant year) using Data Table 12A and/or Data Table 12B, as appropriate for the career stage of the participants, in accordance with the PHS 2590 Additional Instructions for Preparing a Progress Report for an Institutional Research Training Grant, Including Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards.
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.
In carrying out its stewardship of human resource-related programs, the NIH may request information essential to an assessment of the effectiveness of this program from databases and from participants themselves. Participants may be contacted after the completion of this award for periodic updates on various aspects of their employment history, publications, support from research grants or contracts, honors and awards, professional activities, and other information helpful in evaluating the impact of the program.
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: [email protected]
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Telephone 301-710-0267
TTY 301-451-5936
Email: [email protected]
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: [email protected]
David M. Stoff, Ph.D.
Division of AIDS Research
National Institute of Mental Health
Telephone: 240-627-3876
Email: [email protected]
David Armstrong, Ph.D.
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
Telephone: (301) 443-3534
Email: [email protected]
Rita Sisco
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Mental Health
Telephone: (301) 443-2805
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 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® |
||||||