The NIH Research Education Program (R25) supports research educational
activities that complement other formal training programs in the mission areas
of the NIH Institutes and Centers. The over-arching goals of the NIH R25
program are to: (1) complement and/or enhance the training of a workforce to
meet the nation’s biomedical, behavioral and clinical research needs; (2) enhance
the diversity of the biomedical, behavioral and clinical research workforce;
(3) help recruit individuals with specific specialty or disciplinary backgrounds
to research careers in biomedical, behavioral and clinical sciences; and (4) foster
a better understanding of biomedical, behavioral and clinical research and its
implications. All applications must provide a plan for the recruitment and
participation of individuals from underrepresented backgrounds in the
program. This requirement applies to participants and program faculty
(preceptors/mentors). See, NIH Interest in Diversity, NOT-OD-15-053,
and Diversity Recruitment Plan, under Section IV, below.
The over-arching goal of this NCI R25 program is to
support educational activities that complement and/or enhance the training of
a workforce to meet the nation’s biomedical, behavioral and clinical research
needs. Applications are encouraged that propose innovative, state-of-the-art
programs that address the cause, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of
cancer, rehabilitation from cancer, and the continuing care of cancer patients
and the families of cancer patients, in accordance with the overall mission of the NCI To accomplish the stated over-arching goal, this FOA will support creative
educational activities with a primary focus on:
This R25 FOA is intended to support innovative,
state-of-the-art curriculum or methods development projects. It does not
support (i) research projects, including educational research projects, which
can be funded through RPG mechanisms, (ii) education projects that adapt
curricula or methods currently available through the existing core curricula at
colleges, graduate schools, medical schools, or resident training programs,
(iii) education projects that adapt a current or previous R25 funded curriculum
or method to focus on a different target population, or (iv) projects to disseminate
a current or previous R25 funded curriculum or method.
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 participants are considered a regular
part of an individual's academic duties, then any costs associated with the
mentoring and other interactions with participants are not allowable
costs from grant funds).
Other Program-Related Expenses
Consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel for key
persons, and other program-related expenses , such as costs for testing of
the curriculum or methods developed, may be included in the proposed budget. These
expenses must be justified as specifically required by the proposed program
and must not duplicate items generally available at the applicant
institution.
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.
Section III. Eligibility
Information
1. Eligible Applicants
Eligible Organizations
Higher Education Institutions
-
Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
- Private Institutions of Higher Education
The following types of Higher Education Institutions
are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private
Institutions of Higher Education:
- Hispanic-Serving
Institutions
- Historically
Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
- Tribally
Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
- Alaska
Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
- Asian
American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
-
Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of
Higher Education)
- Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions
of Higher Education)
For-Profit Organizations
- Small Businesses
- For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)
Governments
- State Governments
-
County Governments
-
City or Township Governments
- Special District Governments
-
Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
- Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally
Recognized)
- U.S. Territory or Possession
-
Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
Other
-
Independent School Districts
- Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
-
Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally
recognized tribal governments)
- Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
- Regional Organizations
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 federal support. In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed
research education program will complement ongoing research training occurring
at the applicant institution.
Foreign Institutions
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.
Required Registrations
Applicant
Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the
following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide
to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be
completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6
weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as
possible. The NIH
Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to
complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a
late submission.
- Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants
be issued a DUNS number. After obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin
both SAM and eRA Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for
all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
- System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly CCR) Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least
annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the
initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial
and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not
already been assigned a CAGE Code.
- eRA Commons - Applicants
must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the
eRA Commons registration. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as
they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration. eRA Commons
requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at
least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to
submit an application.
- Grants.gov Applicants
must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the
Grants.gov registration.
Program
Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account.
PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either
create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant
organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing
Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role.
Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal
Investigator)
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research education program 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 PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple
Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key
Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
The PD/PI should be an established investigator at the rank of Associate
Professor or above (or equivalent) 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.
PD(s)/PI(s) with a currently funded NCI R25 award may submit an additional
application in response to this FOA only if a new and innovative curriculum or
methods development project that is distinctly different from their currently funded
project is proposed..
2. Cost Sharing
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.
3. Additional Information on Eligibility
Number of Applications
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application,
provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping
applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will
not accept:
-
A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the
summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission
(A1) application.
- A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance
of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
-
An application that has substantial overlap with another
application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NOT-OD-11-101).
Section IV. Application
and Submission Information
1. Requesting an
Application Package
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.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in
the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide, including Supplemental
Grant Application Instructions 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 will not be reviewed.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently
Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant
Applications.
Page Limitations
All page limitations described in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide and the Table of
Page Limits must be followed.
Instructions
for Application Submission
The following section supplements the instructions found in
the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an
application to this FOA.
SF424(R&R) Cover
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.
SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.
SF424 (R&R) Other Project Information Component
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide with the following additional 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.
SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile Expanded
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.
R&R Budget
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide with the following additional modifications:
- Include all personnel other than the PD(s)/PI(s) in the Other
Personnel section, including clerical and administrative staff.
PHS 398
Cover Page Supplement
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.
PHS 398 Research Plan Component
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide
must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Research Strategy
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
- Program
Director/Principal Investigator
- Program
Faculty
- Institutional
Environment and Commitment
- Evaluation
Plan
- Dissemination
Plan
Research Education Program Plan
Proposed
Research Education Program. 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
distinguish between the activities in the proposed research education program
and the research training supported by the training program.
Clearly state the goals and objectives of the
proposed curriculum or methods development program and how they advance the
mission of the NCI. Provide the underlying rationale and evidence supporting
the need for the program. Describe innovative aspects and explain the
significance of the curriculum or methods development program beyond the
applicant institution to a regional or national level. Describe the educational
concepts and principles on which the program is based and the overall strategy,
methodology, and analyses to be employed. Provide support for the feasibility
of the proposed activities and describe the benchmarks to be used to assess the
success of the curriculum or methods development program. Consider potential
problems that may be encountered and describe alternative strategies that could
be employed.
If applicable, explain how the scope of the proposed curriculum
or methods development project extends beyond that of adapting of any of the
current or previously supported NCI R25 awards of the PD(s)/PI(s) to focus on a
different target population.
Program
Director/Principal Investigator. Describe arrangements for
administration of the program. Provide evidence that the Program
Director/Principal Investigator is actively engaged in research and/or teaching
in an area related to the mission of NCI, and can organize, administer,
monitor, and evaluate the research education program. For programs proposing
multiple PDs/PIs, describe the complementary and integrated expertise of the
PDs/PIs; their leadership approach, and governance appropriate for the planned
project.
Provide evidence that an appropriate level of effort
will be devoted by the program leadership to ensure the program's intended goal
is accomplished.
Program
Faculty. Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial
and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to
participate as program faculty. Faculty should have research expertise and
experience relevant to the proposed program and demonstrate a history of, or
the potential for, their intended roles.
List Program Faculty whose role is to develop,
implement, direct, monitor, evaluate, disseminate, consult, etc., in the
proposed curriculum or methods development project as Key Personnel and provide
their biographical sketches. Describe the experience and expertise of the
participating faculty that are relevant to their roles in the proposed curriculum
or methods development project.
Institutional
Environment and Commitment. 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 (see below). Appropriate institutional commitment should include the
provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can
contribute to the planned research education program.
Where appropriate, describe any unique features of
the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements
that may be leveraged to the advantage of the proposed curriculum or methods
development project. If multiple sites are participating, describe how this
will enhance the quality of the curriculum or methods to be developed, as well
as how activities will be coordinated and effective communication maintained
among the multiple sites.
Evaluation
Plan. Applications must include a plan for evaluating the curriculum
or methods development activities supported by the award as well as a timeline
for conducting the evaluation. The application must specify baseline metrics
(e.g., educational levels and demographic characteristics of the intended
target population of the program), as well as measures to gauge the short or
long-term success of the curriculum or methods development program in achieving
its objectives.
Dissemination
Plan. A specific plan must be provided to disseminate
nationally the curricular materials or methods developed, e.g., sharing course
curricula and related materials via web postings, presentations at scientific
meetings, workshops. In particular, a clear description must be provided of how
the curricular content or methods developed will be readily adaptable and
widely deliverable to other organizations..
Letters of Support
A letter of institutional commitment must be attached
as part of Letters of Support (see section above: Institutional Environment and
Commitment.
Resource Sharing Plans
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions
for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application
Guide, with the following modification:
When relevant, 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:
-
Software source code should be freely available to biomedical
researchers and educators in the non-profit sector, such as institutions of
education, research institutions, and government laboratories. Users should be
permitted to modify the code and share their modifications with others.
-
The terms of software availability should permit the
commercialization of enhanced or customized versions of the software, or
incorporation of the software or pieces of it into other software packages.
- To preserve utility to the community, the software should be transferable
such that another individual or team can continue development in the event that
the original investigators are unwilling or unable to do so.
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 with the following modification:
The following additional material(s) is allowed in
the Appendix:
- Syllabi
for key courses. [Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the description of
course content or to submit full course manuals and/or materials];
- Examples
of forms and questionnaires used to evaluate the program.
3. Submission Dates and
Times
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications
before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application
corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants
across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission
process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants
administration.
Applicants are
responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA
Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time
submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
4. Intergovernmental Review
(E.O. 12372)
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.
6. Other Submission Requirements
and Information
Applications must be submitted electronically following the
instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations
before the application due date. Section
III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission
process, visit Applying
Electronically. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that
threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must
follow the Guidelines
for Applicants Experiencing System Issues.
Important
reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the
Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the
SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons
and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent
the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the
application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA
Commons and for the System for Award Management (SAM). Additional information
may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more
tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for
completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific
Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete or non-compliant will not be
reviewed.
Post Submission Materials
Applicants are required to follow our Post Submission Application Materials policy.
Section V. Application Review Information
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, behavioral, and
clinical research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the
NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following: The
goal of this R25 program is to support educational activities that complement
or enhance the training of a workforce to meet the nation's biomedical,
behavioral and clinical research needs. This FOA continues the long-standing
NCI Cancer Education Grants Program by supporting innovative cancer education
programs that translate the knowledge gained from research into public health
applications, consistent with the mission of the NCI. Specifically, this FOA
supports Curriculum or Methods Development. Applications should be
characterized by a high degree of creativity and scholarship and should provide
documentation of a strong need for the proposed curriculum or methods to be
developed.
Overall Impact
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect
their assessment of the likelihood for the project to strongly advance research
education by fulfilling the goal of this R25 Education Program, in
consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria,
as applicable for the project proposed.
Scored Review Criteria
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 program address a key audience and an
important aspect or important need in research education? Is there convincing
evidence in the application that the proposed program will significantly
advance the stated goal of the program?
If the aims of the curriculum or methods development program
are achieved, will they 1) contribute to the development and education of
highly trained cancer scientists or health professionals; and/or 2) provide a
cancer research education experience that is novel in content?
Investigator(s)
Is the PD/PI capable of providing both administrative
and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed
program? Is there evidence that an appropriate level of effort will be devoted
by the program leadership to ensure the program's intended goal is
accomplished? If applicable, is there evidence that the participating faculty have
experience in mentoring students and teaching science? If the project is
collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and
integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and
organizational structure appropriate for the project?
Innovation
Taking into consideration the nature of the proposed
research education program, does the applicant make a strong case for this
program effectively reaching an audience in need of the program’s offerings?
Where appropriate, is the proposed program developing or utilizing innovative
approaches and latest best practices to improve the knowledge and/or skills of
the intended audience?
Does the proposed curriculum or methods development project
duplicate, or overlap with, existing research education, training, and/or
career development activities currently supported at the applicant institution
or available elsewhere? Does the scope of the proposed curriculum or methods
development project extend beyond that of adapting of a current or previously
supported project to focus on a different target population?
Approach
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? Is there evidence that the program is based on a sound rationale, as
well as sound educational concepts and principles? Is the plan for evaluation
sound and likely to provide information on the effectiveness of the program?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned, feasible and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the
proposed research education program? Are potential problems, alternative
strategies, and benchmarks for success presented?
Cancer Focus: Is it clear that the goals of the proposed
R25 Curriculum or Methods Development program are consistent with the mission
of the NCI?
Evaluation Plan: Are the evaluation plan and timeline
for evaluation adequately described and likely to provide useful data on the
effectiveness of the research education program? Is the process for determining
and evaluating outcomes clear?
Dissemination Plan: Does the dissemination plan
adequately communicate and make available the curricular materials or methods
developed through appropriate means? Is there a clear description of how the curricular
materials or methods developed will be readily adaptable and widely deliverable
to other organizations?
Environment
Will the scientific and educational environment of
the proposed program contribute to its intended goals? Is there a plan to take
advantage of this environment to enhance the educational value of the program?
Is there tangible evidence of institutional commitment?? Where appropriate, is
there evidence of collaboration and buy-in among participating programs,
departments, and institutions?
Are the institutional commitment and support,
equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate
for the proposed curriculum or methods development project? Will the project
benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject
populations, or collaborative arrangements? If multiple sites are
participating, is this adequately justified in terms of the curriculum or
methods to be developed? Are adequate plans described for coordination and
communication between multiple sites (if appropriate)?
Additional Review Criteria
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and
technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give
separate scores for these items.
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 Guidelines
for the Review of Human Subjects.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and
Children
When the proposed project involves human subjects
and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed
plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of
sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of
children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and
research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the
Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines
for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
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
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.
Additional Review Considerations
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will
consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items,
and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Recruitment & Retention Plan to
Enhance Diversity
Not Applicable
Training in the Responsible Conduct
of Research
Not Applicable
Applications from Foreign
Organizations
Not Applicable
Select Agent Research
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any
concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
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) Genomic
Data Sharing Plan. If support for development, maintenance, or enhancement
of software is requested in the application, the reviewers will comment on the
proposed software dissemination plan.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the
requested effort and period of support are fully justified and reasonable in
relation to the proposed research. In particular, reviewers will consider
whether the responsibilities of each of the study personnel are adequately
described and whether the effort requested in each year is appropriate for
these specific responsibilities.
2. Review and Selection
Process
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical
merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the National
Cancer Institute (NCI), in accordance with NIH peer
review policy and procedures, using the stated review
criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA
Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
-
May undergo a selection process in which only those applications
deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top
half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact
score.
- Will receive a written critique.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established
PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications
will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications . Following
initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of
review by the National Cancer Advisory Board. The following will be considered
in making funding decisions:
- cientific and technical merit of the proposed project as
determined by scientific peer review.
-
Availability of funds.
- Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
3. Anticipated Announcement
and Award Dates
After the peer review of the application is completed, the
PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique)
via the eRA
Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.
Section VI. Award
Administration Information
1. Award Notices
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH
will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as
described in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided
to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by
the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via
email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection
of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any
costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These
costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and
conditions found on the Award
Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any
recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this
website.
2. Administrative and
National Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH
Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award,
see the NIH
Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards,
Subpart A: General and Part II:
Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for
Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is
provided at Award
Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
3. Reporting
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required
to submit the Research
Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually. Continuation support will not
be provided until the required forms are submitted and accepted.
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.
A final progress report 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.
4. Evaluation
In carrying out its
stewardship of human resource-related programs, the NIH or its Institutes and
Centers will periodically evaluate their R25 research education programs,
employing the measures identified below. In assessing the effectiveness of its
research education investments, NIH may request information from databases,
PD/PIs, and from participants themselves. Where necessary, PD/PIs and
participants may be contacted after the completion of a research education
experience for periodic updates on participants subsequent educational or employment
history and professional activities.
Upon the completion of
a program evaluation, NIH and its ICs will determine whether to (a) continue a
program as currently configured, (b) continue a program with modifications, or
(c) discontinue a program.
In evaluating this research education program the NCI
expects to use the following evaluation measures:
For Programs Focusing on
Curriculum or Methods Development:
- Aggregate number and demographic characteristics of participants to
be targeted for exposure to the new curriculum or methods developed
-
General educational level of participants to be targeted
- Plans for evaluation of the effectiveness of the new curriculum
or methods developed, as assessed by skills/competencies gained compared to
existing curricula or methods
- Plans for dissemination and/or adoption of the new curriculum or
methods developed
Section VII. Agency Contacts
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
Application Submission Contacts
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system
problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Finding Help Online: https://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html
Email: [email protected]
Grants.gov
Customer Support (Questions
regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and
application packages)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573
Scientific/Research Contact(s)
Jeannette F. Korczak, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-5630
Email: [email protected]
Peer Review Contact(s)
Referral Officer
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-6390
Email: [email protected]
Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Alania Foster
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 240-276-5375
Email: [email protected]
Section VIII. Other
Information
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.
Authority and Regulations
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and
405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under
Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®