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:
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). Total allowable personnel (including consultants)
cost is proportional to the number of participants in the program. For each
participant, up to $3,500 (Direct Cost) is allowed for personnel (including
consultant) costs per year. All personnel and consultant costs must be
adequately justified.
Participant Costs
Participants are those individuals who receive the
hands-on research experiences offered through the R25 program. Participant
costs must be itemized in the Participant/Trainee Support Costs section of
the requested budget and sufficient justification must be provided. A given
individual can receive support to participate in this R25 program for only
one full-time, 10- to 15-week period. Participant costs are restricted and
cannot be rebudgeted.
Allowable participant
costs include:
-
One round-trip to and from the R25 program site for non-local
participants.
-
Up to $1,000 per participant is allowed for research education-related
expenses, such as lab supplies, poster production costs, books, tuition, etc.
-
Subsistence is allowed, with the amount depending on the
educational level/career status of the participants and the number of full-time
weeks (10-15) of their participation in the research experiences.
- For
undergraduate students, $6,000 is allowed for a full-time (40-hour a week),
15-week program and is prorated for fewer weeks of participation.
- For
graduate and health professional students, $7,200 is allowed for a full-time
(40-hour a week), 15-week program and is prorated for fewer weeks of
participation.
- A housing allowance can be requested by the program each year. The
average cost for the housing allowance may not exceed $1,000 per participant.
Unallowable
participant costs include:
- Salary and fringe benefits
- Stipends
-
Health insurance
- Meals and local transportation costs
- Gifts, such as hats, t-shirts, key rings, tote bags, etc.
-
Social functions without an associated R25 program educational
activity
-
Dues to professional organizations, outside of registration to
attend and present research at a professional meeting
Individuals supported by NIH training and career
development mechanisms (K, T, or F awards) may receive, and indeed are
encouraged to receive, educational experiences supported by an R25 program,
as participants, but may not receive salary or stipend supplementation from a
research education program.
Because the R25 program is not intended as a substitute for an NRSA
institutional training program (e.g.,T32), costs to support full-time
participants (supported for 40 hours/week for a continuous, 12-month period)
are not allowable.
Other Program-Related Expenses
Consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel for key
persons, and other program-related expenses 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. Note that consultant costs are capped, depending on
the personnel costs and the number of participants in the research
experiences program. See Personnel Costs section above for details.
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
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 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 researcheducation 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 new and innovative research
experiences that are distinctly different from their currently funded project are
proposed. An application that proposes to adapt a current or previously funded
research experiences program to focus on a different target population is not
considered to be new and innovative.
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).
Program Faculty
Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and
ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to
participate as preceptors/mentors. Mentors should have research expertise and
experience relevant to the proposed program. Mentors must be committed to
continue their involvement throughout the total period of the mentee s
participation in this award.
Participants
Participants in R25 programs supported through this FOA may
include medical, dental, nursing, and other health professional students; and
graduate and undergraduate students. 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 and permanent residents.
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.
-
Use the section on Participant/Trainee Support Costs to include
all allowable categories of funds requested to support participants in the
program.
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
- Program
Participants
- Institutional
Environment and Commitment
- Diversity
Recruitment Plan
- Plan for
Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research
- Evaluation
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. The description
should include the educational and/or career level(s) of the planned
participants.
Clearly state the goals and objectives of the
proposed research experiences program and how they advance the mission of the
NCI. Provide the underlying rationale and evidence supporting the need for the
program. Describe the importance of the research experiences in meeting the
needs of the intended participants and the likelihood of improving their
knowledge and/or skills. Describe innovative aspects and explain the
significance of the research experiences program. 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 research experiences 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 research
experiences program extends beyond that of adapting of any of the current or
previously supported NCI R25 awards of the PI(s)/PD(s) to focus on a different target
population.
For Renewalsinclude a description of how the proposed
program content and/or methodologies have been updated since the previous
application.
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, mentor, evaluate, consult, etc., in the proposed
research experiences program as Key Personnel and provide their biographical
sketches. Describe the experience of the participating faculty in mentoring
students and teaching science, as well as their ability to serve as good role
models for the participants by virtue of their own scientific accomplishments.
Program
Participants. Applications must describe the intended
participants, and the eligibility criteria and/or specific educational
background characteristics that are essential for participation in the proposed
research education program. Identify the career levels for which the proposed program
is planned.
Provide details about the pool of expected
participants in the research experiences program and the sources of the
applicant pool.
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 research experiences program.
If multiple sites are participating, describe how this will enhance the quality
of the research experiences provided, as well as how activities will be
coordinated and effective communication maintained among the multiple sites.
Recruitment
Plan to Enhance Diversity. Fostering diversity in the
scientific research workforce is a key component of the NIH strategy to
identify, develop, support and maintain the quality of our scientific human
capital (NOT-OD-15-053).
Every facet of the United States scientific research
enterprise from basic laboratory research to clinical and translational
research to policy formation requires superior intellect, creativity and a wide
range of skill sets and viewpoints. NIH’s ability to help ensure that the
nation remains a global leader in scientific discovery and innovation is
dependent upon a pool of highly talented scientists from diverse backgrounds
who will help to further NIH's mission.
Research shows that diverse teams working together
and capitalizing on innovative ideas and distinct perspectives outperform
homogenous teams. Scientists and trainees from diverse backgrounds and life
experiences bring different perspectives, creativity, and individual enterprise
to address complex scientific problems. There are many benefits that flow from
a diverse NIH-supported scientific workforce, including: fostering scientific
innovation, enhancing global competitiveness, contributing to robust learning
environments, improving the quality of the researchers, advancing the
likelihood that underserved or health disparity populations participate in, and
benefit from health research, and enhancing public trust.
In spite of tremendous advancements in scientific research, information,
educational and research opportunities are not equally available to all. NIH
encourages institutions to diversify their student and faculty populations to
enhance the participation of individuals from groups identified as
underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences,
such as:
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 report 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: Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos,
American Indians or Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians and other Pacific
Islanders.
B. Individuals with disabilities, who are defined as
those with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or
more major life activities, as described in the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990, as amended. See NSF data at, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/2013/pdf/tab7-5_updated_2014_10.pdf.
C. Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds,
defined as:
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 http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/index.shtml.
2. Individuals who come from an educational
environment such as that found in certain rural or inner-city environments that
has demonstrably and directly inhibited the individual from obtaining the
knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to develop and participate in a
research career.
The disadvantaged
background category (C1 and C2) is applicable to programs focused on high
school and undergraduate candidates.
Literature shows that women from the above
backgrounds (categories A, B, and C) face particular challenges at the graduate
level and beyond in scientific fields. (See, e.g., Inside the Double
Bind, A Synthesis of Empirical Research on
Undergraduate and Graduate Women of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering,
and mathematics http://her.hepg.org/content/t022245n7x4752v2/fulltext.pdf).
New applications must include a description of plans
to enhance recruitment, including the strategies that will be used to enhance
the recruitment of trainees from underrepresented backgrounds 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:
- Individuals
who applied for admission to the research education program,
- Individuals
who were offered admission to the research education program,
- Individuals
who participated in the research education program.
For those individuals who participated in the
research education program, the report should include information about the
duration of education and aggregate information on the number of individuals
who finished the program in good standing. Additional information on the
required Recruitment Plan to Enhance Diversity is available at Frequently Asked
Questions: Recruitment Plan to Enhance Diversity (Diversity
FAQs).
Applications lacking a diversity recruitment plan will not be reviewed.
Plan
for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. All
applications must include a plan to fulfill NIH requirements for instruction in
the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR). For programs
involving participants for more than 6 months, the plan must
address the five, required instructional components outlined in the NIH policy:
1) Format
- the required format of instruction, i.e., face-to-face lectures, coursework,
and/or real-time discussion groups (a plan with only on-line instruction is not
acceptable); 2) Subject Matter
- the breadth of subject matter, e.g., conflict of interest, authorship, data
management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research
misconduct, research ethics; 3) Faculty
Participation - the role of the program faculty in the instruction;
4) Duration of Instruction
- the number of contact hours of instruction, taking into consideration the
duration of the program; and 5) Frequency
of Instruction instruction must occur during each career stage and
at least once every four years. See also NOT-OD-10-019.
The plan should be appropriate and reasonable for the nature and duration of the
proposed program. For programs involving participants for 6
months or less, see the subsection on "Short-term training and research
education programs" within the section on "Special Considerations by
Type of Award" in NOT-OD-10-019. Renewal (Type 2) applications must, in
addition, describe any changes in formal instruction over the past project
period and plans to 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.
Evaluation
Plan. Applications must include a plan for evaluating the research
experiences program as well as a timeline for conducting the evaluation. 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 experiences program in achieving
its objectives. Wherever appropriate, applicants are encouraged to obtain
feedback from participants to help identify weaknesses and to provide
suggestions for improvements.
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:
- Retreats,
seminar series, and other program activity agendas, rosters, and schedules (for
the past one or two years only);
- Examples
of forms and questionnaires used to evaluate the program. (Do not submit forms
and/or questionnaires that have been completed by program participants);
- Examples
of materials used in recruitment to enhance diversity of the student pool.
Planned Enrollment Report
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions
for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R)
Application Guide.
PHS 398 Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions
for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424
(R&R) Application Guide.
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 Research Experiences. Applications should be characterized by a high
degree of creativity and scholarship and should provide documentation of a
strong need for the proposed research experiences program. Renewal applications
should also demonstrate a continuing need for the existing program in advancing
the NCI mission and include a description of how the proposed research
experiences program content and/or methodologies have been updated since the
previous application.
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 research experiences program are
achieved, will they 1) contribute to the development and education of highly
trained cancer scientists or health professionals in adequate numbers; and/or
2) provide a cancer research experience that is novel in content to the
participants?
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 applicable, are the
faculty good role models for the participants by nature of their scientific
accomplishments? 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 research experiences program
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 research experiences
program extend beyond that of adapting an existing program 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?
If the proposed program will recruit participants, are the planned recruitment,
retention, and follow-up (if applicable) activities adequate to ensure a highly
qualified participant pool?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned, feasible and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the
proposed research experiences program? Are potential problems, alternative
strategies, and benchmarks for success presented?
Cancer Focus: Is it clear that the goals of the
proposed R25 Research Experiences 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 experiences program? Is the process for
determining and evaluating outcomes clear?
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? Is there evidence that
the faculty have sufficient institutional support to create a sound educational
environment for the participants? 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 research experiences program? Will the program 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 research experiences to be provided? 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
For Renewals, the committee will consider the
progress made in the last funding period, and the success of the research
experiences program in attracting individuals from diverse populations,
including populations underrepresented in biomedical, behavioral and clinical
research on a national basis.
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 Plan to Enhance Diversity
Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the recruitment
plan to enhance diversity after the overall score has been determined.
Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the recruitment of
individuals from underrepresented groups. The review panel’s evaluation will be
included in the summary statement. Plans 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 proposed research education program and the level of participant
experience, the reviewers will evaluate the proposed RCR training plan. The
plan should be appropriate and reasonable for the nature and duration of the
proposed program. For programs involving participants for more than 6 months,
the reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed RCR training in
relation to the following five required components:
1) Format - the required
format of instruction, i.e., face-to-face lectures, coursework, and/or real-time
discussion groups (a plan with only on-line instruction is not acceptable); 2) Subject
Matter - the breadth of subject matter, e.g., conflict of interest,
authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety,
research misconduct, research ethics; 3) Faculty Participation -
the role of the program faculty in the instruction; 4) Duration of
Instruction - the number of contact hours of instruction, taking into
consideration the duration of the program; and 5) Frequency of Instruction
instruction must occur during each career stage and at least once
every four years. For programs involving participants for 6 months or
less, see the subsection on "Short-term training and research education
programs" within the section on "Special Considerations by Type of
Award" in NOT-OD-10-019.
The review panel’s evaluation will be
included in the summary statement. Plans
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
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, 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:
- Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as
determined by scientific peer review.
-
Availability of funds.
- Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
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. Programs that
involve participants should report on education in the responsible conduct of
research and complete a Training
Diversity Report, in accordance with the RPPR
Instruction Guide.
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.
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:
A.
For
Research Experience Programs Involving the Following Groups:
Undergraduate
Students:
- Aggregate
number and demographic characteristics of participants
- Subsequent
educational/career progress of participants, including:
Successful completion of an undergraduate degree
in a cancer-related field
Enrollment in an advanced degree program in a cancer-related
field
Graduate Students:
- Aggregate
number and demographic characteristics of participants
- Subsequent
educational/career progress of participants, including:
Successful completion of a cancer-related graduate
program
Subsequent participation in a formal research
training or career development program in a cancer-related field
Subsequent participation in cancer-related research
Subsequent employment in a cancer-related research
or research-related field
Subsequent authorship of cancer-related scientific
publications
Subsequent independent cancer-related research
grant support from NIH or another source
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)
Barbara A. Fisher
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Telephone: 301-631-3012
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®