Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov
The policies, guidelines, terms, and conditions of the HHS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated in this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) might differ from those used by the HHS National Institutes of Health (NIH). If written guidance for completing this application is not available on the CDC website, then CDC will direct applicants elsewhere for that information.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Occupational Safety and Health Education and Research Centers (42)
Reissue of PAR-10-217
Only one application per institution is allowed, as defined in Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), invites grant applications for funding Education and Research Centers (ERCs) that are focused on occupational safety and health training, research training, education and outreach. NIOSH is mandated to provide an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the ERCs are one of the principal means for meeting this mandate. ERCs are academic institutions that provide high-quality interdisciplinary graduate training, research training, continuing education, and outreach in the core occupational safety and health disciplines of industrial hygiene (IH), occupational health nursing (OHN), occupational medicine residency (OMR), and occupational safety (OS), as well as closely related allied disciplines. Research and research training are integral components of ERCs, with ERC faculty and NIOSH trainees conducting research on issues related to the NIOSH National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). The ERCs also serve as regional resources for industry, labor, government, and the public.
July 21, 2015
October 13, 2015
October 2, 2015; August 15, 2016; August 14, 2017; August 13, 2018; August 16, 2019
December 3, 2015, October 12, 2016, October 13, 2017 (renewal or revision only), October 11, 2018, October 18, 2019 by 5:00 PM EST.
February 2016, February 2017, February 2018, February 2019, February 2020
May 2016, May 2017, May 2018, May 2019, May 2020
July 1, 2016, July 1, 2017, July 1, 2018, July 1, 2019, July 1, 2020
October 21, 2019
Required Application Instructions
NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted in paper format. Application materials may be obtained from Grants.gov. PHS 398 application forms and instructions (revised 8/2012) must be used. Download the application forms and instructions from https://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms.htm. In addition to the PHS 398 forms, applications must include tables using the NIOSH instructions available at:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/funding.html#train. See Part 2. Section IV.
A registration process is necessary before submission, and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least four (4) weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Part II, Section IV. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
|Note: A new version of the paper PHS 398 application form and instructions (revised 8/2012) must now be used. Download the new application form and instructions from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms.htm.|
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
The United States Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving nationwide improvements in health for a society in which all people live long, healthy lives. The vision, mission, and goals are found in Healthy People 2020, a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas to achieve better health in the United States by the year 2020. This FOA is closely linked to several overarching goals of Healthy People 2020, with the intent to prevent diseases, injuries, and deaths due to working conditions.
Work-related injuries and illnesses have a significant public health impact, and part of NIOSH’s mission is to train the next generation of occupational safety and health (OSH) practitioners and researchers. The National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce (released in 2011) documents a significant shortfall in the supply of trained OSH professionals to meet current and future demand in the United States. The report provides evidence of the continued need to support OSH training and education in the core and allied OSH disciplines.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 mandates that NIOSH provide an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. NIOSH ERCs have a key role in helping meet this mandate and contribute to the Institute’s core mission of providing national and world leadership to prevent workplace injuries and illnesses.
The purpose of this program is to support NIOSH ERCs to address the burden of OSH in the United States by providing state-of-the-art interdisciplinary training for the next generation of OSH practitioners and researchers. ERCs play a significant role in preparing the future OSH workforce to respond to new challenges posed by the changing nature of work. These changes are the result of technological advances, globalization, new and emerging risks, occupational health disparities associated with the changing demographics of the US workforce, and a myriad of other factors. NIOSH’s network of ERCs across the United States helps address these challenges and provide the next generation of OSH leadership to protect workers and ensure a healthier national workforce. The ERCs provide well-trained graduates to meet the demand for a professional OSH workforce for federal, state, and local government agencies; not-for-profit agencies; industry; academia; business; healthcare; and labor organizations. ERCs help meet our nation’s need for skilled, knowledgeable practitioners and researchers in OSH and enhance the diversity of the safety and health workforce.
NIOSH ERCs help translate scientific discoveries into practice through effective education, training, and outreach. ERC trainees and key personnel collaborate with stakeholders to develop innovative approaches to improving workplace safety and health, by the translation of research to practice and prevention through design. Links to the ERCs currently funded by NIOSH are provided on NIOSH’s website at NIOSH ERC.gov.
ERCs are located in accredited academic institutions across the country and provide graduate degree and academic certificate training in core and allied disciplines of OSH. ERCs also provide interdisciplinary research training to identify, assess, address, and improve OSH. ERCs conduct outreach to help improve knowledge and awareness of work-related safety and health issues, and they provide continuing education for OSH professionals. Through comprehensive, integrated programs, ERCs improve the safety and health of our nation’s workers.
Needs Assessment. ERCs must document that their proposed academic, research training, outreach, and continuing education programs meet specific regional or national workforce needs and demands. Surveys of employers, alumni, and other stakeholders in OSH may be used to document these needs. Applicants are requested to consider the supply and demand findings in the National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce (2011). Evidence of meeting these needs should include a discussion of how the proposed programs will assist their OSH graduates with successful placement in leadership positions as practitioners or researchers in OSH after completion of training.
Regional Presence. ERCs should demonstrate collaborative efforts by working with a diverse and broad range of organizations to enhance worker safety and health in their region. Collaboration with other institutions should be considered, including historically black colleges and universities; businesses; federal, state, or local public health and regulatory agencies; and labor and professional associations. As centers of excellence in OSH training, education, and research, ERCs can serve as valuable regional and national resources. ERCs are strongly encouraged to engage diverse partners in their region and to facilitate synergistic approaches to OSH. Applicants must identify other ERCs and NIOSH supported Training Project Grant (TPG) recipients in their HHS Federal Health Region, and describe how they will address any overlap in activities between the ERC and TPGs.
ERC Components. ERCs are comprised of three required core components and one optional core component. Required core components are (1) a Planning and Evaluation Core, (2) an Academic Training Core, and (3) an Outreach Core. A Research Training Core is optional and may include Pilot Project Research Training, Targeted Research Training, or both. All components and programs are described in detail under Descriptions of ERC Components and Programs.
The following table lists the required and optional ERC components and budget allowances.
Planning and Evaluation Core (Required)
Center Administration, Planning and Evaluation
Up to $250,000 direct costs/year
Up to $30,000 direct costs/year
Developmental Program Support (Optional)
Up to $50,000 direct costs/year
Academic Training Core (Required)
There is a required minimum of 3 Academic Training Programs. At least 2 academic training programs must be from the core disciplines of IH, OHN, OMR, or OS. Additional academic programs may be in either a core or a closely related allied discipline. Applicants may request support for allied disciplines which they determine are, and justify as being, closely related and relevant to their regional or national OSH training needs. No minimum number of trainees is required for any one academic program. Applicants must fully justify the need for all programs and their capacity to meet training demand.
Applicants may request trainee support for academic certificate training programs in approved core and allied disciplines. Trainee support for academic certificate programs is limited to tuition and fees, and is included in the minimum 70% allocation toward direct Trainee Costs. Academic certificate trainees should be clearly identified in academic training program budgets.
There are no budget limits for individual academic training programs. Applicants must stay within the total $1.8 million per year request in total costs (direct and indirect costs).
A minimum of 70% of the Academic Training Core budget must go to Trainee Costs that provide stipends, tuition and fees, and travel. A maximum of 30% of the Academic Training Core budget may go to support training-related expenses that include salary support for faculty and staff, supplies, equipment, and non-trainee travel. This 70/30 allocation of funding may be applied across all academic training programs in aggregate (core, allied and certificate programs) and need not be applied to each individual academic training program. This 70/30 allocation applies to direct costs.
Research Training Core (Optional)
Pilot Project Research Training (PPRT) supports pilot projects of new investigators from the applicant institution or other research institutions in the ERC’s region.
Up to $100,000 direct costs/year.
Each funded pilot project may receive up to $20,000 for a project period of 12 -18 months.
Targeted Research Training (TRT) supports the research training needs of NIOSH trainees and students from other disciplines who receive NIOSH support during their academic training program. TRT funds may also be used to support post-doctoral training in an OSH core or closely related allied field.
Up to $300,000 direct costs/year.
A minimum of 70% of requested funds must go to support Trainee Costs that provide stipends, tuition and fees, and travel; post-doctoral support is limited to stipends and travel. A maximum of 30% may go toward training-related expenses that include salary support for faculty and staff, supplies, equipment, and non-trainee travel.
Outreach Core (Required)
Outreach in Occupational Safety and Health
Support for activities with businesses, community groups, agencies, or other institutions within the region to implement innovative strategies that meet area needs and impact the practitioner environment.
Up to $75,000 direct costs/year.
Continuing Education (Optional, but strongly encouraged)
While this component is optional, ERCs are strongly encouraged to have a needs based continuing education training program for safety and health practitioners, and allied disciplines, to have a positive impact on workplace practices and policies. Absence of a continuing education program must be explained.
Up to $150,000 direct costs/year.
Budget Information. An applicant may request up to $1.8 million each year in total costs for an ERC. More information on a complete application is provided in Part II, Section IV. To help ensure the stability of the ERC, the Center Director, Deputy Director, and Program Directors must be full-time faculty or administrative staff. NIOSH funds may be used to defray the costs of salary support of faculty and staff directly related to the management of the ERC programs. Faculty salary support may not exceed 50% (.50 FTE) for any one faculty member. The CE Program Director may be faculty or administrative staff and may receive up to 75% salary support (.75 FTE). Salary support for administrative personnel is not limited, but should be clearly justified and within the 70/30 distribution where applicable.
Travel for ERC Leadership. ERC leadership should plan to attend annual meetings. Center Directors should budget travel support for one meeting per year in the Center Administration budget. Core Academic Program Directors and Continuing Education directors should include travel support for one meeting per year in their individual program budgets. For planning purposes, applicants should budget for the meeting to be held in Washington, DC, although location and dates will vary from year to year.
Budgets for the Planning and Evaluation Core may request up to $250,000 direct costs to support Center planning, evaluation and administrative activities, required meetings, Advisory Board meetings, and interdisciplinary activities. Within the Planning and Evaluation Core, ERCs may request an additional $30,000 direct costs to support Interdisciplinary Activities required within the ERC programs, and an additional $50,000 direct costs for Developmental Program Support for new initiatives or expanded support for the ERC components at the direction and discretion of the Center Director.
The Academic Training Core budgets should clearly describe Trainee Costs and Training-Related Expenses. Trainee Costs directly support the students and include stipends, tuition and fees, and travel for NIOSH trainees. Training-Related Expenses help defray the costs of salary support for key personnel, consultants, equipment, supplies, and non-trainee travel.
Total direct Trainee Costs must be at least 70% of the overall Academic Training Core Budget. Applicants should prepare a separate budget and justification for each academic training program requested. The 70% trainee cost allocation must be met across the combined total budgets of all academic programs (includes core, allied and certificate programs) and need not be applied to each individual training program. Applicants may request trainee support for Academic Certificate Training programs in core or allied disciplines of OSH. Trainee support for certificate programs is limited to tuition and fees, and is included in the minimum 70% allocation of direct Trainee Costs. The number and support requested for certificate trainees should be clearly identified separately from support requested for graduate degree trainees in the academic training program budgets.
The Research Training Core may request support for Pilot Project Research Training and/or Targeted Research Training in separate budgets. These program budgets are described below.
Pilot Project Research Training (PPRT) may request up to $100,000 direct costs and should include a detailed request for support of research pilot projects. The PPRT budget should provide support for new investigators and/or research trainees from the applicant institution or other research institutions in the ERC’s region. Individual PPRT pilot projects may be funded for up to $20,000 each for a performance period of 12 – 18 months.
Targeted Research Training (TRT) may request up to $300,000 direct costs and should include support for Trainee Costs (which may include stipends, tuition and fees, and travel) and Training-Related Expenses to help defray the costs of salary support for faculty and staff, consultants, equipment, supplies, and non-trainee travel. Total direct Trainee Costs must be at least 70% of the overall TRT Budget. Trainees supported in the TRT program may be degree-seeking students from OSH or non-OSH core or allied disciplines, and post-doctoral trainees in an OSH core or closely allied program area. Trainee research training must be directed or mentored by an ERC faculty member in a core or allied OSH discipline.
The Outreach Core should request a budget for Outreach in Occupational Safety and Health and include support for activities that will have a positive impact on worker safety and health, including reaching underserved and underrepresented groups, meeting a regional or local need, and plans to evaluate the impact of these activities. Applicants may request up to $75,000 direct costs to support outreach activities.
Applicants who request support for a Continuing Education Program (CE) should include a separate CE budget in the Outreach Core. While a CE Program is optional, it is strongly encouraged and the absence a CE program must be explained in the application. Applicants may request up to $150,000 direct costs to support their CE program.
The Planning and Evaluation Core includes both required and optional programs. Required programs are Center Administration, Planning and Evaluation (including: Executive Committee, Advisory Board, and Center’s Directors Meeting) and Interdisciplinary Activities. The ERC Developmental Program support is optional and under the direction and discretion of the ERC Director to support new initiatives, emerging issues, and provide just in time support for ongoing activities. The applicant must clearly describe the Planning and Evaluation Core activities and the integration of all the ERC components. The applicant should detail an evaluation plan of outputs, outcomes, and impact for each ERC component and program.
Center Administration, Planning and Evaluation: An ERC must have a strong leader committed to the success of the ERC and its components. Elements of an effective Planning and Evaluation Core include (1) the coordination and integration of ERC components and activities; (2) a program logic model and an evaluation plan that uses the input of key stakeholders and needs assessment data in forming the overall ERC strategic plan, defines metrics that will be used to measure and track outputs and outcomes, and describes the intended long-term goals and potential impact of the ERC and each ERC program component; (3) the organization and input of an external Advisory Board; and (4) a plan for interactions with other NIOSH-supported training programs in the region, including ERCs, TPGs, and other appropriate groups or organizations. The Planning and Evaluation Core should have a strategic plan complete with a vision, mission, and goals, detailing how the Center will implement and evaluate this strategic plan specifically during the proposed project period. An organizational chart may be included to illustrate the structure, interactions, and key personnel of the Center.
Executive Committee: This committee should include the ERC Director, Deputy Director, Academic Training Program Directors, Research Training Program Directors (if applicable), Outreach Program Director, and Continuing Education Program Director (if applicable). The Executive Committee may include others if the ERC Director determines they are needed for the successful operation of the ERC.
Advisory Board: The ERC should establish an external Advisory Board of stakeholders in OSH and should include recognized leaders across sectors representing labor, industry, business, government agencies, academic institutions, and professional associations. The Advisory Board may include alumni of the ERC. The Board should meet at least annually and provide counsel to the ERC’s Executive Committee on setting and reaching goals and ensuring that the ERC is progressive, dynamic, and meeting local, regional and national OSH workforce needs.
Centers Directors Meeting: This required annual meeting provides an opportunity for ERC Directors and NIOSH Program Officials to discuss developing and emerging issues in worker safety and health and to nurture a spirit of collaboration in addressing challenges and advances in the field.
Interdisciplinary Activities: ERCs should plan interdisciplinary activities to enhance NIOSH trainees’ skills and knowledge across disciplines. This plan should include a comprehensive listing of courses and activities, including field experiences and clinical rotations, which promote interdisciplinary interactions among ERC trainees and faculty, as well as an evaluation of effectiveness. NIOSH trainees and ERC faculty should be fully engaged in these activities to support an understanding and awareness of the interdisciplinary nature of OSH professional practice.
ERC Developmental Support (Optional): This optional component provides the ERC Director with discretionary support to enable rapid responses for new initiatives, emerging issues, critical needs, or provide just-in-time support for ongoing activities for progress and success of the ERC. The use of these funds must be clearly justified and fully comply with all applicable HHS/CDC/NIOSH policies.
Our nation’s workforce and workplaces are dynamic, with challenges that require solutions to eliminating and preventing work-related injuries and illnesses. State-of-the-art approaches to training and education are encouraged to ensure that ERC graduates are well-equipped to respond to the ever-changing needs for protecting our nation’s workforce. NIOSH ERCs should provide high-quality graduate training in a minimum of three academic programs. At least two academic training programs must be for a core discipline of IH, OHN, OMR, or OS. The other academic training programs may be for core disciplines or for allied disciplines relevant to the field of OSH.
NIOSH is committed to increasing the participation of individuals from underserved and underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, and persons with disabilities, in OSH research and practice. Applications must include a comprehensive plan to recruit, matriculate, train, and successfully graduate students from underserved and underrepresented groups. NIOSH encourages applicants to develop innovative approaches toward collaborating with academic institutions reaching underserved and underrepresented populations, such as tribal colleges and universities, historically black colleges and universities, and Hispanic-serving institutions. Applicants should include an evaluation plan for the effectiveness and impact of reaching underserved and underrepresented populations for each component and program.
For each academic training program, the applicant should thoroughly describe
Core Disciplines: The core disciplines in OSH are IH, OHN, OMR, and OS.
NIOSH funding may be used to support OMR training in the following pathways, as described by the American Board of Preventive Medicine under Certification Requirements (www.theabpm.org/requirements.cfm):
Physicians in the Complementary and Special Pathways are eligible for NIOSH support to encourage more qualified physicians to enter the field of occupational medicine. The Complementary and Special Pathways must be administered by an OMR Program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (https://www.acgme.org/acgmeweb/).
Allied Disciplines: Allied disciplines are important and relevant to the OSH field and in preventing work-related injury and illnesses. As with core disciplines, training programs in allied disciplines should be approved plans of study by the applicant institution. These may include, but are not limited to, ergonomics, industrial toxicology and biomarkers, construction safety and health, occupational injury prevention, occupational epidemiology, occupational health psychology, occupational health services research, occupational health physics, mining, and agricultural safety and health. Applicants may request support for allied disciplines which they determine are, and justify as being, closely related and relevant to their regional or national OSH training needs.
Essential Components: Academic training programs should have a history of attracting highly qualified and motivated applicants and of maintaining a critical mass of students for a viable, sustainable program. Academic programs should have highly qualified faculty with a strong teaching record and history of independent research support or occupational health practice.
The academic training program curriculum should be comprehensive and fully prepare trainees to advance the OSH field. OMR programs must be fully accredited by the ACGME. Accreditation of other training programs is not required but is encouraged if appropriate to the field (for example, ABET accreditation for engineering and industrial hygiene programs).
An ERC may provide training in as many core or allied OSH programs for which needs are documented and available resources allow. Each academic program should provide trainees with core competencies to be successful in their field of study. Clinical rotations and field experiences across settings are encouraged to provide trainees with a broad understanding of the working environment. Applicants are also encouraged to consider non-discipline specific competencies (leadership, management, and communication) recommended in the National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce .
NIOSH funding may be used to support graduate training in core and allied disciplines for advanced degrees at the masters and doctoral level in relevant academic programs, including, but not limited to: MSN, MOH, MSPH, MPH, MS, DrPH, ScD, PhD, and DNP. NIOSH funding may also be used to support students in academic certificate programs in approved core and allied disciplines of OSH. Undergraduate degrees and non-academic certificate programs are not authorized under this program.
Required Academic Content: Trainees must be instructed in the responsible conduct of research. NIOSH follows the NIH policies for this requirement (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html). Topics should include scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, policies for handling misconduct, data management, data sharing, and policies regarding the use of human and animal subjects. For scientific integrity, it is beneficial to discuss the relationship and the specific responsibilities of the institution and the student.
Academic Certificate Programs. Academic certificate programs in approved core and allied disciplines may use NIOSH funds to provide trainee support for tuition and fees only. NIOSH certificate trainees must meet the admission requirements for the academic certificate program of the institution. NIOSH funds may not be used for stipends, travel, or other non-tuition expenses. The certificate program must described and recognized as a formal academic program by the applicant institution, with courses and experiences to enhance professionals’ skills, knowledge, and practice in OSH. The need for academic certificate training must be fully documented.
Research training is considered fundamental to sustaining the high quality, breadth, and dynamics of OSH research to reduce work-related fatalities, injuries and illnesses and occupational health disparities in the United States. NIOSH is encouraging applications from qualified institutions that will conduct high-quality research training relevant to the NORA. Research training support is available through the Pilot Project Research Training program and the Targeted Research Training program. Both of these programs are optional. Post-doctoral training support is available through the Targeted Research Training program.
Pilot Project Research Training (PPRT): This program is optional and supports projects relevant to the NORA. PPRT programs are intended to explore and develop new and creative prevention, intervention, and translation projects, and they are considered an important and integral part of the support provided to an ERC. Applicants receiving support from this program should be junior faculty, new faculty investigators, or mentored students. The research projects should be of short duration (12-18 months) and not more than $20,000 direct costs. The research plan should include a mentoring plan and identify the mentor(s) who will be supporting and advising the research trainee. The PPRT Program Director should have the qualifications to effectively manage and support the goals of the PPRT.
This program will enable investigators to collect sufficient data to pursue subsequent support through other funding mechanisms. Examples of pilot projects include the following:
The applicant should have goals that are relevant to the NIOSH NORA and should provide a description that includes these elements:
Targeted Research Training (TRT). Through this component, ERCs are encouraged to provide research training that is responsive to the NIOSH NORA and generate new knowledge in the field of OSH. The research training is expected to clearly enhance an individual’s potential to develop into productive, independent researchers to address challenges in protecting workers’ health and safety and to advance research findings into the workplace.
This training program should allow trainees from various disciplines to acquire a strong set of skills in:
In addition to the core competencies in research, trainees should be knowledgeable in non-discipline specific competencies (leadership, management, communication), and have strong communication skills for applying research to practice.
As detailed under Academic Training Core, trainees must be instructed in the responsible conduct of research. NIOSH follows the NIH policies for this requirement (see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html). Topics should include scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, policies for handling misconduct, data management, data sharing, and policies regarding human and animal subjects for research. The role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), the assistance they provide to researchers, and research ethics are also important topics for research trainees.
This program should be under the direction of an experienced, highly qualified ERC investigator in OSH. Trainees supported in the TRT program may be degree-seeking students from OSH core or allied disciplines, or students from other disciplines interested in applying their knowledge and skills to a specific OSH research question. Research training must be directed by an ERC faculty member in a core or allied OSH discipline. For graduate students, support may include stipends, tuition and fees, and travel. The TRT program may also support post-doctoral trainees in a core OSH or allied field. Post-doctoral students may receive stipends, and travel. The prospective trainee must have completed a doctoral degree in a discipline relevant to OSH or a field that qualifies them to conduct mentored research in OSH. The proposed post-doctoral training will consist of 1-3 years of mentored research training in relevant topic area(s).
Post-doctoral Research Training: Prospective post-doctoral TRT trainees will apply and compete for these positions, and the successful candidate will be matched with a suitable mentor, and set up an advisory committee that consists of the primary mentor and one or more faculty advisors to guide progress.
The TRT program should plan to include underserved and underrepresented trainees to increase diversity in the field of OSH.
To demonstrate adequate faculty resources for mentoring, the ERC faculty should demonstrate sufficient expertise and experience to mentor post-doctoral candidates. Evidence for the latter should include a detailed description of the proposed core faculty mentor track record in training doctoral and post-doctoral trainees, and a record of where graduates now work. Mentors should have an established track record of research and research training in areas related to OSH, and be members of the ERC academic training core. Faculty active grant support, resources and environment for advanced research training should be described in the narrative. Resource faculty, who are not proposed primary mentors, but who bring added expertise (for example, biostatistics, toxicology, and behavioral science) may be included as members of trainee’s advisory committee. Supported trainees should participate in ERC interdisciplinary activities to fully understand the scope of occupational safety and health.
Although this essential component is broad in scope, one priority is to develop a strategy for an Outreach in Occupational Safety and Health Program that will have an impact on worker safety and health, including reaching underserved and underrepresented groups and meeting local, regional or national need, and to evaluate the success of these activities. Examples of successful ERC outreach activities include research-to-practice activities with other institutions, businesses, or agencies located within the same region; integration of OSH principles and concepts within curricula (Schools or Colleges of Business, Engineering, Architecture, Law, Medicine, and Arts and Sciences); a visiting faculty program involving labor and management leaders; cooperative and collaborative arrangements with professional societies, municipal and local governments, and scientific associations; and presentation of awareness seminars to undergraduate and secondary educational institutions (high school science fairs and career days), and labor, management, not-for-profit, or community associations.
Continuing Education (Optional, but strongly encouraged).
ERCs are strongly encouraged to develop innovative and collaborative Continuing Education (CE) programs of high quality and relevance to the professional disciplines they serve. While the CE program is not required, it is strongly encouraged and is regarded as a critical link between academic and research training and OSH practitioners. CE should be considered in those institutions that have the necessary infrastructure and support to sustain a robust program. ERCs which elect to have a CE program must have a qualified Program Director dedicated to this activity. The absence of a CE program must be explained in the application’s Outreach section.
CE programs may use a variety of modalities, including workshops, classroom instruction, online and other virtual teaching methods, to reach their targeted audience. Needs assessments should support the choice of topics, subject matter, course content, length of training and teaching methods. ERCs are encouraged to build partnerships with public and private institutions and agencies, non-profits and professional associations to support CE programs and provide new ways of delivering leading edge programs. CE programs should take advantage of the available expertise of ERC faculty and other collaborators. ERC faculty are expected to contribute to the CE program. Collaboration with OSH stakeholders and innovative and efficient approaches to CE are strongly encouraged, including options to support regional or national consortia or clearinghouses for CE for OSH professions.
While an ERC may provide CE content in any number of areas supported by a local, regional or national needs assessments, ERCs are no longer required to provide CE to all OSH disciplines. For example, an ERC that does not have an approved OMR academic training program is not required to provide CE or CME in occupational medicine. CE efforts should be based on the documented needs of OSH practitioners and employers in the ERC’s region and build on the strengths of the ERC.
CE programs should use effective training techniques, tools, and delivery modalities to engage the adult learner and to prepare skilled and knowledgeable practitioners in OSH. CE programs should be a mechanism for the transfer of knowledge into workplace practices and policies to improve worker safety and health.
A successful CE program should strive to have a broad reach through collaboration with other ERCs, TPGs, professional associations, federal/state/local agencies and municipalities, institutions, nonprofits and other stakeholders. Where appropriate, Continuing Education Units from approved providers should be awarded.
For policies related to this announcement, see Part II, Section VIII, Other Information—Required Federal Citations.
Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
Renewal Applications. Applicants may submit a renewal (formerly called a competing continuation) application for additional years of funding and must provide a Letter of Intent no later than 60 days prior to the pending application receipt date. Applicants funded under PAR-10-217 who decide to re-compete early are requested to inform NIOSH of their plans as soon as possible, but no later than 90 days before the pending receipt date.
Revision Applications. Applicants may submit a revision (formerly called a competing supplement) application to expand the scope of their currently funded project. The revision application, combined with the current grant award, shall not exceed the $1.8 million total costs threshold and shall not exceed the length of the current grant award. In addition, proposals for new academic programs must be for a period of at least two years. ERCs currently funded under PAR-10-217 may submit revision applications under this FOA as follows: 1) Academic degree, residency, or certificate programs, 2) Targeted Research Training and, 3) Continuing Education. Re-competing Center Administration (formerly called Center Wide Activities) requires re-competition of the entire ERC, and if funded, would be under the terms and conditions of this FOA for the period of performance awarded.
Resubmission Applications. Applicants may submit one resubmission (formerly called a revision or amended) application, but must include an Introduction addressing the previous peer review critique (Summary Statement).
The number of awards is contingent upon CDC/NIOSH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
CDC/NIOSH intends to commit $24 million in FY 2016 to fund 18-20 awards.
An applicant may request up to $1.8 million each year in total costs for an ERC. More information on a complete application is provided in Part II, Section IV.
Applicants submitting new applications may request a project period of up to 3 years and a total budget not to exceed $1.8 million per year in direct and indirect costs (total costs). Applicants submitting renewal applications may request a project period of up to 5 years and a total budget not to exceed $1.8 million per year in total costs.
Application Research Plan Component Length. Not Applicable
Eligible Institutions/Organizations. Institutions/organizations listed in Part II, Section III, are eligible to apply.
Eligible Project Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs). Individuals with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the functions of the proposed ERC are invited to work with their institution/ organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underserved and underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, as well as individuals with disabilities, are always encouraged to apply for CDC/NIOSH support such as this funding opportunity.
Number of PDs/PIs. Only one PD/PI may be designated on the application.
Number of Applications. Institutions may submit only one new application under this announcement.
Special Date(s). This FOA uses nonstandard due dates.
Application Materials. See Part II, Section IV for application materials.
Hearing Impaired. Telecommunications for the hearing impaired are available at TTY: 770-488-2783.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIOSH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Any individual with the
skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed training program as the Principal
Investigator (PI) is invited to work
with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals
from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities
are always encouraged to apply for HHS/CDC/NIOSH programs. PIs should
have the experience and expertise relevant to complex, interdisciplinary OSH
This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Only one application per institution (normally identified by having a unique DUNS number) is allowed.
NIOSH Trainee Citizenship. On or before the issue date of the award, the NIOSH trainee must be a citizen or a noncitizen national of the United States or have been lawfully admitted for permanent residence (that is, must possess a currently valid Permanent Resident Card USCIS Form I-551, or other legal verification of such status). Non-citizen nationals are generally persons born in outlying possessions of the United States (for example, American Samoa and Swains Island). Individuals on temporary or student visas are not eligible.
Post-doctoral trainees must meet the NIH guidelines for support under the National Research Service Award (T32) program. See the following web site for further information on the NIH guidelines: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-10-036.html.
Number of Applications. The FOA governs new, renewal, revision, and resubmission applications.
New. New applications are ones being submitted for the first time. Only one application per institution is allowed.
Renewal. Applicants may submit a renewal (formerly called a competing continuation) application for additional years of funding. Grantees funded under this FOA may submit a renewal (formerly called a competing continuation) application for additional years of funding and must provide a Letter of Intent no later than 60 days prior to the pending application receipt date. Applicants funded under PAR-10-217 who decide to re-compete early are requested to inform NIOSH of their plans as soon as possible, but no later than 90 days before the pending receipt date.
Revision. Applicants may submit a revision application (formerly called a competing supplement) to expand the scope of their current award. This revision application, combined with the current award, shall not exceed the $1.8 million total cost threshold and shall not exceed the length of the current award. In addition, proposals for new academic programs must be for a period of at least two years. ERCs currently funded under PAR-10-217 may submit revision applications under this FOA for the following programs: 1) Academic degree, residency, or certificate programs, 2) Targeted Research Training, and 3) Continuing Education. Re-competing Center Administration (formerly known as Center Wide Activities) requires re-competition of the entire ERC, and if funded, would be under the terms and conditions of this FOA for the period of performance awarded.
Resubmission. Applicants may submit one resubmission (formerly called a revision or amended) application, but must include an introduction addressing the previous peer review critique (Summary Statement).
All of these grant applications (new, renewals, revisions, or resubmissions) must follow the PHS 398 Instructions at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html.
Applicants must download the Grant Application PHS 398 for this funding opportunity announcement from Grants.gov.
For further assistance, contact the HHS/CDC Procurement and Grants Office Technical Information Management Section (PGO TIMS) staff at 770.488.2700 or email@example.com.
Telecommunication for the hearing impaired or disabled is available at TTY 1-888-232-6348.
Applicants must follow the instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide, except where instructed in this FOA to do otherwise, and conform to Application Guide requirements. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
The PHS 398 should include assurances and certifications required by the agency for a complete application. These forms can be downloaded from the following link: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms.htm.
Information in the remainder of this section describes special content to be included, budget restrictions, items to be addressed for a complete application, and application organization.
Essential ERC Characteristics
As described in Section I, Funding Opportunity Description, NIOSH ERCs are university-based programs that provide interdisciplinary training, research, continuing education, and outreach in occupational safety and health. Applicants should provide an overall description of the ERC, addressing the burden of occupational injuries and illnesses within their region, the regional and national need for an ERC in their region, and the ERC’s impact or potential for impact to improve worker health and safety.
ERCs must have the following core components that cohesively address the stated needs and potential impact of the ERC.
The optional Research Training Core may include:
Applications which do not include a Planning and Evaluation Core, an Academic Training Core, and an Outreach Core will be considered non-responsive.
Letter of Intent
A non-binding letter of intent is due 60 days prior to the application receipt date and should include the (1) number and title of this Funding Opportunity Announcement, (2) the title of the proposed or existing ERC, (3) PI/Center Director, (4) applicant institution, and (5) program components that will be included in the application, including the specific academic and research training programs that will be offered.
An application must include tables using the NIOSH Tables available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/funding.html#train.
The information in the tables will be used by reviewers and NIOSH staff during peer review and in reaching funding decisions.
Table of Contents
The following is the expected format in preparing an application. Modify the Table of Contents in the PHS 398 Instructions (Form Page 3). Each individual core or program should constitute a complete, discrete narrative within the application, because they may be reviewed separately.
I. Face Page, PHS 398 Form Page 1
II. Project Summary, Relevance, Project / Performance Sites, and Personnel (PHS 398 Form Page 2, PHS Form Page 2 continued. Use PHS Project/Performance Site Format page and Continuation Format page, if needed.
III. Table of Contents, PHS 398 Form Page 3
IV. Detailed Budget for the Initial Budget period for the entire ERC, PHS 398 Form Page 4.
V. Budget for the proposed period of support for the entire ERC, PHS 398 Form Page 5.
a. NIOSH Table 4: Overall Budget Summary for Entire Budget Period
VI. Detailed Budget for each ERC Component Proposed for the Initial Budget Period
a. Planning and Evaluation Core
b. Academic Training Core (with each academic training program providing its own budget)
c. Research Training Core (with Pilot Project Research Training and / or Targeted Research Training, providing its own budget)
d. Outreach Core (with separate budgets for Outreach in OSH and Continuing Education Program)
If application includes sub-contracts include budgets as listed above.
Note: Each Academic Training Program and Targeted Research Training must use PHS 398 Budget Form Page 4 and NRSA Institutional Training Grant Additional Budget Page 2 (PHS 2590 Rev. 08/12) to justify Trainee Costs. Budget forms for Academic Training Program and Targeted Research Training should be cross-referenced and have the same total direct costs. See NIOSH instructions and sample budget pages at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/traininggrants.html.
VII. Biographical Sketches
a. Center Director
b. Key Personnel
c. NIOSH Table 5: All Personnel and Other Significant Contributors
VIII. Other Support
a. Center Director
b. Key Personnel
IX. Institutional Resources (1-page limit; use Resources Format Page)
X. Overall Description of the ERC (2-page limit)
XI. Past Performance/Accomplishments in Last Project Period for existing ERCs or Relevant to ERC Goals for New Applicants (5-page limit)
XII. Institutional Commitment to the ERC (2-page limit)
XIII. Planning and Evaluation Core (10-page limit)
a. Center Administration, Planning and Evaluation
b. Interdisciplinary Activities
c. ERC Developmental Program (optional)
XIV. Academic Training Core (15-page limit for each academic program)
Note: For each academic training program, provide a coversheet with the name of the academic training program and program director in the top right corner of each program cover sheet. Applications should include NIOSH Tables 1 and 2 for each academic program at the end of that section. Tables do not count toward page limits.
XV. Research Training Core (optional)
a. Pilot Project Research Training Description (optional, 10-page limit)
b. Targeted Research Training Description (optional, 15-page limit)
XVI. Outreach Core
a. Outreach in Occupational Safety and Health (5-page limit)
b. Continuing Education (optional, 10-page limit)
Note: Applications should include NIOSH Table 3 at the end of the Continuing Education section (if applicable). Tables do not count toward page limits.
XVII. Human Subjects, including summary table that lists all the projects and human subjects information (title, performance sites, Federal-Wide Assurance forms for protection of human subjects, IRB approval date/status if applicable)
XVIII. Vertebrate Animals
XIX. Literature Cited
XX. Consortium/Contractual Arrangements
XXI. Consultants and Collaborators, including NIOSH/CDC
Applications Involving a Single Institution
When all PDs/PIs are within a single institution, follow the instructions contained in this FOA.
Applications Involving Multiple Institutions
When multiple institutions are involved, designate a prime institution and request funding for the others through subcontracts to be administered by the prime institution. Submit a detailed budget for each institution on individual PHS 398 budget forms, and include them with the budget forms for the prime institution.
Applications should be prepared in accordance with this FOA. Applications which do not include a Planning and Evaluation Core, an Academic Training Core, or an Outreach Core, will be considered non-responsive. Applications with a budget request exceeding $1.8 million in total costs for any year in the project period will be considered non-responsive.
See Part I. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirements for obtaining a DUN and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number and for completing and maintaining and active System for Award Management (SAM) registration.
3. A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
Letters of intent are due 60 days prior to the application receipt date and should include the (1) title of the ERC, (2) PI/Center Director, (3) applicant institution, and (4) program components that will be included in the application.
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): October 2, 2015; August 15, 2016; August 14, 2017; August 13, 2018; August 16, 2019.
Application Due Date(s): December 3, 2015; October 12, 2016; October 13, 2017; October 11, 2018; October 18, 2019.
Peer Review Date(s): February 2016; February 2017; February 2018; February 2019; February 2020.
Council Review Date(s): May 2016; May 2017; May 2018; May 2019; May 2020.
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): July 1, 2016; July 1, 2017; July 1, 2018; July 1, 2019; July 1, 2020.
Expiration Date: October 21, 2019.
Applications to this FOA must be prepared with PHS 398 grant application forms and related instructions. Policy guidelines for the NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA) also provide a useful reference: https://grants.nih.gov/training/nrsa.htm.
3. B. Sending an Application
Submit a signed original of the application and three signed photocopies in one package to this address (do not include appendices):
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Suite 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 (for U.S. Postal Service express or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for other express or courier services)
Concurrently, submit two photocopies of the application and three CD ROM disks containing appendix materials to this address:
Michael Goldcamp, PhD
Scientific Review Officer
Office of Extramural Programs
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1095 Willowdale Road, MS 1808
Morgantown, WV 26505
NIOSH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one previously reviewed or currently pending initial merit review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. For applications that have been accepted and reviewed but not funded, NIOSH will accept one resubmission. All resubmissions must include an Introduction addressing critiques from the previous review.
The PI can check the status of an application in the electronic
Research Administration (eRA) Commons at http://era.nih.gov/.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All CDC/NIOSH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Funds will not be given for renovation of existing facilities or for purchasing substantial amounts of equipment. Requests for purchasing equipment must be justified in terms of the critical nature of the equipment for the success of the overall training objectives of the ERC program.
Indirect costs are limited to 8% of total direct costs (exclusive of tuition, fees, and equipment greater than $5,000 and subcontracts in excess of $25,000).
To help ensure the stability of the ERC, the Center Director, Deputy Director, and Program Directors must be full-time faculty or administrative staff. NIOSH funds may be used to defray the costs of faculty and staff salary support directly related to management of the ERC programs. Faculty support may not exceed 50% (.50 FTE) for any one faculty member. The only exception is for the CE Program Director, who may receive 75% salary support (.75 FTE). Salary support for administrative support personnel is not limited, but support should be clearly justified and fall within the other funding restrictions and allocations described in this FOA.
Applications for this announcement must use the PHS Budget Form pages 4 and 5 and NRSA Substitute Form pages 4 and 5. The facility and administrative costs for this program are limited to 8% of the total direct costs, exclusive of tuition and fees, equipment, and subcontracts. The NIOSH website provides additional tables needed for a complete application, at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/funding.html#train.
Trainees may receive up to 5 years of support at the predoctoral level and 3 years of support at the postdoctoral level. Any exception to the maximum period of support requires a waiver from NIOSH, based on review of its justification from the individual and the institution. Stipends are not allowed for part-time trainees or trainees enrolled in academic certificate programs.
NIOSH Trainee Stipends
Stipends are provided as subsistence allowances to help defray living expenses during training. They are not provided as a condition of employment with either the Federal Government or the awardee institution. Stipends may be paid to eligible NIOSH trainees but not those who are part-time or enrolled in academic certificate programs.
Academic Programs: Stipends may not exceed the NIH stipend levels, described at http://grants1.nih.gov/training/nrsa.htm, with applicants determining the most appropriate allocation of stipends based on local and regional need and competition. An exception is for OMR trainees. Stipends may be requested above the NIH NRSA guidelines if the applicant institution requires a higher postgraduate year (PGY) level for OMR trainees. These requests must be fully justified and must include documentation of the program requirements.
Tuition and Fees
The institution may request tuition and fees (including health insurance for the trainee only). These costs must be in line with the resident or nonresident tuition and fees charged to students who are not federally supported.
Other Trainee Costs
Travel, including attendance at scientific meetings that the institution determines to be necessary for training, is an allowable trainee expense. Additional support for travel to a training experience away from the institution may be permitted. Training experiences away from the parent institution must be justified considering the type of opportunities for training available, the manner in which these opportunities differ from and complement those offered at the parent institution, and the relationship of the proposed experience to the trainee's career stage and goals. This type of training requires prior approval from NIOSH. Correspondence requesting such training may be submitted to NIOSH at any time during the award period.
Expenses for foreign travel must be clearly justified and receive prior approval from NIOSH Scientific Program Official and CDC Grants Management Specialist.
For OMR training, applicants may request funds for other necessary costs for residency training, such as malpractice insurance and other required expenses for all residents at the institution.
Training-related expenses cannot exceed 30% of the total program budget for all academic programs. Funds may be requested to defray the cost of other training-related expenses such as salary support for faculty and staff, consultant costs, equipment, supplies, and travel expenses for non-trainees, ERC faculty and staff.
PD/PI Credential (Agency Log-in)
The HHS/CDC requires the PD or PI to fill in his or her Commons User ID in the “PROFILE – Project Director/Principal Investigator” section, in the “Credential” log-in field of the “Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile” component.
The applicant organization must include its Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in its Organization Profile in the eRA Commons. This DUNS number must match the DUNS number provided at CCR registration with Grants.gov.
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of components. All applications must provide Appendix material on CDs. See Part II, Section IV.3.B for details on submission of five identical CDs. The appendices should be bookmarked and the CD memory size should not exceed 25 MB. Also see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-031.html.
As part of the CDC mission, all applications submitted to the CDC in support of public health activities are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIOSH peer review system. Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
Review criteria for Resubmission Applications, Renewal Applications, and Revision Applications can be found in Part II, Section V, 2.A, Additional Review Criteria.
Reviewers should carefully assess information provided throughout the application, to determine the strength, history, and sustainability of proposed programs. This includes narrative in the application and other supporting documentation (including data tables) and information provided in the Appendix.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score reflecting their assessment of the likelihood that the ERC will successfully meet stated goals and objectives and impact occupational safety and health, regionally or nationally, on the basis of the following criteria. Reviewers also will consider the Additional Review Criteria, described below.
Scored Review Criteria
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in determining scientific merit and give a separate score for each component of the ERC. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact.
Significance: Significance is evaluated by considering the impact the ERC has in meeting identified regional and national needs for occupational safety and health training. Does the creation or continuation of a particular center advance the field of occupational safety and health? Does the ERC have a robust history of training students to be practitioners and leaders in research to address challenging occupational safety and health issues in an interdisciplinary manner? Has the ERC established itself in its region as a resource in the field of OSH? Is there evidence of collaboration with a diverse and broad range of organizations to enhance worker safety and health in the ERC’s region? Does the ERC use critical partnerships or collaborations to create a regional presence and impact? Is there evidence of the applicant’s ability to track academic program graduates and postdoctorates after completion of the program? Does the ERC have a successful retention history for underserved and underrepresented trainees?
Key Personnel: Does the ERC Director and leadership team have experience in managing a complex, interdisciplinary training, outreach, and research center in OSH in an institutional environment? Does the ERC leadership have qualifications and experiences in OSH? Is the ERC faculty highly qualified, with a strong history of obtaining support through other mechanisms (federal, state, or private sector)? Is there evidence of high quality outputs, and outcomes through research or practice, from ERC faculty, which have contributed to improvements in worker health and safety? Is there evidence of past collaborations between the ERC faculty and NIOSH trainees across disciplines?
Innovation: Does the ERC propose innovative approaches to achieving and maintaining highly effective training, research, outreach, and translation of research to practice, all relevant to the OSH field? Does the ERC work to positively impact the safety and health of workers in their region? Is there an innovative approach in recruiting underserved and underrepresented individuals in all ERC programs?
Approach: Is there a well-described strategy for a successful, fully integrated, interdisciplinary ERC? Are there plans for recruiting high quality trainees in the different fields of occupational safety and health and specific plans for recruiting candidates from underrepresented groups? Is the proposed ERC more than the sum of its parts, and not just a collection of programs?
Does the ERC engage key stakeholders, and specifically the ERC’s Advisory Board, in its activities for a synergistic and regional approach? Are outputs, outcomes and measures of impact for the overall ERC and ERC components clearly defined? Are challenges in collaboration, recruitment, and retention clearly stated? Are benchmarks for the ERC’s success and progress clearly stated?
Environment: Will the training and research environment contribute to the probability of success for the ERC? Is there evidence of institutional commitment to support the goals of the ERC across programs? Will the ERC programs benefit from unique features of the academic and scientific environment, or collaborative arrangements? Are the facilities and equipment appropriate to support the described research training and education activities?
For new applications: In addition to the criteria above, will the proposed ERC be able to effectively train students to be practitioners and leaders in research to address challenging occupational safety and health issues in an interdisciplinary manner?
Significance: Does the proposed Planning and Evaluation Core have an appropriate and adequate administrative structure with an internal organization capable of planning, conducting, and evaluating Center activities? Does the Core clearly delineate procedures and plans for center administration, planning and evaluation? Is a strategic plan outlined which identifies the short-term and long-term goals of the Center, and a well-defined process for implementing the activities to achieve the goals set by the Center? Does the structure outline clear lines of authority to promote planning and evaluation activities as well as collaborations and interactions within, among and between programmatic elements of the Center in an efficient and effective manner? Does the administrative structure facilitate communication among the Center leaders and the Program Directors of the ERC?
For Renewal Centers: Is there sufficient information provided describing how the Center has achieved the goals of the previous funding period and how the goals of the future years build on the past successes, with a particular emphasis on the successful activities that have been accomplished that could not have been realized without the Center support? Are there plans to make changes to improve program performance and incorporate feedback from current and former trainees (e.g., new mentors changes in courses, recruitment strategies, etc.)?
Does the renewal application describe the program accomplishments to date, including information on trainee publications, degree completion, and post-training positions? Does the applicant describe an appropriate plan for ensuring and enhancing interdisciplinary coordination among the academic programs? Does the applicant provide evidence of past success in interdisciplinary coordination?
Approach: Does the application describe an evaluation plan to determine the impact, quality, and effectiveness of ERC activities, specifically, interdisciplinary activities, outreach, and diversity recruitment and retention? Are there plans to obtain feedback from stakeholders, including current and former NIOSH trainees? Are there plans to incorporate feedback and make changes to improve performance?
Key Personnel: Does the ERC leadership team have a successful track record in teaching, occupational health practice or research? Does the membership of the Advisory Board represent various stakeholders in occupational health and safety? Is there an active, qualified Executive Committee to assist the ERC Director with administrative activities, including recruitment and retention, outreach, evaluation, and resolving challenges?
Innovation: Does the applicant seek to have an impact on worker health and safety by using novel approaches for ERC activities (interdisciplinary activities, teaching, research, continuing education, diversity recruitment and retention, and outreach)?
Approach: Does the application describe an evaluation plan to review and determine the impact, quality, and effectiveness of the ERC activities, specifically, interdisciplinary activities, outreach, and diversity recruitment and retention? Are the plans for obtaining feedback from current and former trainees and monitoring trainees’ career development and progress adequate to measure the quality and effectiveness of the ERC training programs?
Are there adequate overall plans for administration and management of the ERC to support all facets of the operation of the Center? Is the Center Director adequately supported and is there adequate management depth to provide long-term continuity of Center leadership? Are the plans for day-to-day management, allocation of funds and cooperative arrangements designed to effectively achieve the goals of an ERC?
Are there plans for organizing and convening both an internal Executive Committee and an external Advisory Board to be actively engaged and provide appropriate and objective advice and evaluation regularly to the Center Director, and is an appropriate process proposed for responding to recommendations of the committee?
Are details provided on the expertise of the Executive Committee and Advisory Board? Are appropriate OSH constituents and collaborators engaged in ERC activities?
Has the applicant described appropriate plans for attracting underserved and underrepresented individuals to the academic training programs and, more generally, to the field of occupational health and safety through other Center activities?
Environment: Are institutional facilities and resources available to the ERC’s trainees and key personnel? Is there evidence of institutional commitment to the goals of the ERC? Does the combined training and research environment support high quality, multidisciplinary interaction among the ERC components? Will the environment contribute to the probability of success for the ERC?
Each academic program will be reviewed separately. The following review criteria are used to evaluate each academic training program and academic certificate program (if applicable): 1) Training Program and Environment, 2) Academic Training Program Director, 3) Academic Training Program Faculty, 4) Trainees, and 5) Training Record.
Training Program and Environment: Does the applicant clearly state a documented need for the academic program? Will the proposed academic training program fill a gap in a specific regional or national workforce need? Does the applicant reference the National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce (released 2011) or other sources in determining need for the academic training program in its region? Does the applicant describe the potential impact of the program in meeting the regional and national needs for occupational safety and health training? Do the objectives, design and direction of the proposed academic training program ensure outstanding, interdisciplinary OSH training? Is the proposed training program designed to prepare students for successful and productive careers in OSH practice and / or research? Does the training program, through courses, training experiences, interdisciplinary experiences and other activities promote participation by all NIOSH trainees in highly significant, high quality events? Does the academic program involve innovative approaches to training and education relevant to the OSH field?
Do the program faculty and key personnel have a record of providing the skills, knowledge, and experiences necessary for trainees to successfully compete for outstanding positions in business, industry, academia and other institutions or agencies?
Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the training program, including interdisciplinary activities? Are there plans to obtain and incorporate feedback from stakeholders, including current and former NIOSH trainees? Is there a formal plan to provide oversight of trainee progress and high quality mentoring for career guidance to provide the highest possible level of trainee success?
Does the academic training program have a successful retention history for underserved and underrepresented trainees? Does the training program’s past performance reflect successful recruitment and graduation of highly qualified and motivated trainees (success may be determined by the number of NIOSH trainees, trainee awards, presentations and publications, and employment history)?
Is there a critical mass of faculty and students to sustain the program? Does the training program address the distinct workplace characteristics and worker health needs in the ERC’s region or target area? Is the curriculum consistent with a high quality program? What is the accreditation status of the training program?
Are the training and research facilities and environment conducive to preparing trainees for successful careers as leaders in OHS practice or research? Is there evidence of an Institutional commitment to the training program’s goals?
In addition to the review criteria above, academic certificate programs should describe the unique needs the proposed program will address and how certificate trainees will use their training to advance their OSH practice. What training needs will the academic certificate meet? What special recruitment strategies have been developed to identify well-qualified, highly motivated trainees? Are the application, review and selection processes for academic certificate trainees clearly described? Will the academic certificate program be coordinated with the academic degree programs in the same specialty area to enhance trainee’s learning experience? Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the academic certificate program?
Academic Training Program Director: Does the Program Director have the scientific background, expertise, and administrative and training experience to provide strong leadership, direction, management, and administration of the proposed training program? Does the Program Director plan to commit sufficient effort to ensure the program’s success? Does the Program Director have a strong track record in successfully training and mentoring students?
In addition to the review criteria above, the academic certificate program should be under the leadership of a Program Director with the expertise to provide trainees with a learning experience that heightens their knowledge and skills in OSH practice. Does the Program Director have prior experience providing leadership for a dynamic, relevant academic certificate program?
Academic Training Program Faculty: Is the faculty highly qualified, with strong histories of teaching and obtaining support through other mechanisms (federal, state, or private sector)? Is the faculty accomplished OSH practitioners, or research investigators as evidenced by peer-reviewed publications?
Are sufficient numbers of experienced academic training program faculty, with appropriate expertise and funding, available to support the trainees proposed in the application? Does the ERC faculty have a strong record of training and mentoring at predoctorate or doctorate levels (if applicable)? Is there an appropriate mixture of junior and established faculty, and is there a mechanism by which junior faculty will obtain guidance from the program to ensure their successful training and mentoring of trainees?
In addition to the review criteria above, the academic certificate program should offer a course of study with coursework taught by experienced, qualified program faculty. Do the faculty have prior experience providing teaching and mentoring for certificate trainees? Is there evidence of program faculty’s successful involvement in teaching certificate trainees?
Trainees: Is there a recruitment plan with strategies to attract well-qualified, highly motivated candidates for the training program, including students from underrepresented and underserved populations? Is there a competitive applicant pool in sufficient numbers to warrant the proposed size of the training program? Does the application present a well-defined and transparent process, and set of criteria, for trainee selection?
Is there a sufficient strategy to monitor trainee progress to ensure the highest possible level of success for each trainee?
In addition to the review criteria above, academic certificate programs should clearly describe the applicant pool, eligibility requirements and admissions process for certificate trainees. Is there a strategy to monitor certificate trainee progress to ensure the highest possible level of success for each trainee?
Training Record: How successful are NIOSH trainees in obtaining careers that advance the field of OSH? Are the majority of students obtaining degrees within an appropriate timeframe? Does the program have an appropriate training record with regard to gender and diversity? How well does this program integrate with and complement other programs (academic training programs, interdisciplinary activities, outreach, and continuing education in the ERC)?
For trainees on a research path, is there evidence of career advancement and development, such as grants awarded, special honors or awards, a record of publications or patents?
In addition to the review criteria above for the academic training program and academic certificate program, the following review criteria are applicable: Are trainees instructed in the responsible conduct of research, including scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, data management, data sharing, and policies for handling misconduct and regarding the use of human and animal subjects? In addition to the review criteria above, academic certificate programs should clearly describe the process and requirements for successful completion to obtain the academic certificate. Is there a strategy to capture certificate trainee’s career advancement after successful completion?
The Research Training Core is optional and may include Pilot Project Research Training, Targeted Research Training, or both. Each program will be reviewed and scored separately using the following criteria: 1) Training Program and Environment, 2) Research Training Program Director, 3) Research Training Program Faculty, 4) Researcher Mentoring, and 5) Research Training Record.
Training Program and Environment: Are the goals for the Pilot Project Research Training (PPRT) program well-described and relevant to NORA? Is the plan to conduct the PPRT program adequate? This includes the adequacy of procedures for soliciting and accepting applications, the scientific review process, funding projects, and program quality assurance. Does the applicant encourage participation by other investigators interested in occupational safety and health either within the institution or regional institutions? Is the plan for announcing the PPRT Program funding adequate and include promoting the program to underserved and underrepresented students and faculty? Does the applicant provide a plan for retaining copies of all proposals, with documentation of their reviews, relative ranking, and final action? Is there a mechanism for tracking the results of each pilot project study (abstract, RO1/R21 submission, dissertation, etc.)?
Do the objectives, design, and direction of the proposed PPRT program indicate innovative and relevant research opportunities for junior faculty, new faculty investigators, or mentored students?
Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness and impact of the PPRT program? Is there a formal plan to provide oversight of research progress and as well as high quality mentoring to provide the highest possible level of investigator success? Are there plans to obtain and incorporate feedback on the program from stakeholders, including current and former NIOSH trainees?
For renewal applications, does the PPRT past performance reflect successful recruitment of highly qualified and motivated investigators (success may be determined by the number of new investigators funded, researcher awards, presentations and publications, and career development)? Does the PPRT program have a successful history for reaching underserved and underrepresented investigators?
Research Training Program Director: Does the Program Director have sufficient scientific background and expertise to provide strong leadership, direction, and management of the PPRT Program? Does the Program Director have sufficient experience and ability to fulfill the administrative and operational responsibilities of the proposed PPRT? Is the Program Director’s level of effort adequate to manage the diversity and complexity of the program?
Research Training Program Faculty: Are there a sufficient number of experienced research training program faculty, with appropriate expertise and funding, to support the breadth and depth of the PPRT Program proposed in the application? Is there evidence of a qualified pool of faculty to serve as mentors to the PPRT investigators? Do PPRT mentors have strong records as researchers, including successful competition for research support in areas directly related to the proposed PPRT program? For renewal applications, do program faculty and key personnel have a strong research, publication, and mentoring records? Is there clear evidence of fostering the development of independent investigators through the PPRT Program?
Researcher Mentoring: Is there evidence of an adequate plan to foster and develop research capacity for junior faculty, new investigators, and mentored students? Is there a recruitment plan with strategies to attract well-qualified, highly motivated candidates for the PPRT program, including faculty and students from underrepresented and underserved populations? Is there a competitive applicant pool in sufficient numbers to warrant the proposed size of the PPRT program? For renewal applications, is there evidence that researchers or new investigators have successfully competed for subsequent research funding? Is there evidence that mentored students have advanced in their research capacity?
Research Training Record: Are there adequate plans for monitoring and evaluating the completion of research projects in an appropriate timeframe? Are there adequate plans for fostering the development of mentored students as independent investigators? Does the program have an appropriate plan for recruiting or developing independent researchers with regard to gender and diversity?
For renewal applications, do the majority of researchers and new investigators complete pilot research projects in an appropriate timeframe? Do mentored students complete appropriate research training activities in a suitable timeframe? Is there evidence of productive research or practitioner careers, such as faculty advancement, investigator-initiated grants, special honors or awards, publications or patents, or promotion to scientific positions, for researchers, new investigators, or mentored students?
Are new investigators or mentored students appropriately instructed in the responsible conduct of research, including scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, data management, data sharing, and policies for handling misconduct and regarding the use of human and animal subjects?
Training Program and Environment: Do the objectives, design and direction of the proposed Targeted Research Training (TRT) program indicate innovative and relevant research training opportunities in OSH with a strong interdisciplinary approach? Is the proposed research training program designed to prepare students for successful and productive careers in OSH practice and / or research?
Is there a formal plan to provide oversight of research progress and appropriate mentoring in research career advancement to provide the highest possible level of trainee success? Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the quality, effectiveness and impact of the TRT program? Does the evaluation plan obtain and incorporate feedback from stakeholders, including current and former NIOSH trainees?
Do the program faculty and key personnel have a record of providing the skills, knowledge, education, and mentoring necessary for trainees to successfully compete for outstanding positions and career development in business, industry, academia and other institutions or agencies?
Does the TRT program have a successful retention history for underserved and underrepresented trainees? Does the research training program’s past performance reflect successful recruitment and graduation of highly qualified and motivated trainees (success may be determined by the number of NIOSH trainees, trainee awards, presentations and publications, and research career advancement and / or employment history)? Does the research training program address the distinct workplace characteristics and worker health needs in the ERC’s region or target area? For post-doctoral research training, is there a clear plan for matching trainees with suitable mentors, establishing advisory committees consisting of a primary mentor and one or more faculty advisors to guide progress, and monitoring trainee progress?
Research Training Program Director: Does the Program Director have the scientific background, expertise, and administrative and training experience to provide strong leadership, direction, management, and administration of the proposed research training program? Does the Program Director plan to commit sufficient effort to ensure the program’s success? Does the Program Director have a strong track record in successfully training and mentoring research trainees? For post-doctoral research training, does the Program Director have adequate experience to provide academic and research leadership for the proposed program? Is the Program Director’s level of effort adequate to manage the diversity and complexity of the program?
Research Training Program Faculty: Are sufficient numbers of experienced research training faculty, with appropriate expertise and funding, available to support the trainees proposed in the application? Are sufficient numbers of experienced preceptors/mentors, with appropriate expertise and funding, available to support the research trainees proposed in the application?
For post-doctoral research training, is the research training faculty part of the ERC? If not, does the faculty contribute specific expertise that enhances the opportunity for post-doctoral research training? Does the faculty have demonstrated experience with successful training of post-doctoral researchers in OSH? Is there sufficient other research support to leverage diverse and innovative post-doctoral OSH training?
Researcher Mentoring: Is there evidence of an adequate plan to foster and develop research capacity? Is there a recruitment plan with strategies to attract well-qualified, highly motivated candidates for the research training program, including faculty and students from underrepresented and underserved populations? Is there a competitive applicant pool in sufficient numbers to warrant the proposed size of the research training program?
Does the application present a well-defined and transparent process, and set of criteria, for research trainees? Is there a sufficient strategy to monitor trainee progress to ensure the highest possible level of success for each trainee?
Does post-doctoral training include matching trainees with suitable mentors, establishing advisory committees (primary mentor and one or more faculty advisors), and monitoring trainee progress? Does post-doctoral training include adequate opportunities for interdisciplinary activities and interactions?
Research Training Record: How successful are NIOSH trainees in completing the TRT program? How productive are trainees in terms of research accomplishments and in achieving productive scientific careers, as evidenced by successful completion for research grants, receipt of honors or awards, high-impact publications, receipt of patents, promotion to scientific leadership positions and or such other measures of success? For new applications, is there a record of past performance of students and fellows (if applicable) in similar training programs? Does the program have an appropriate training record with regard to gender and diversity?
How well does the TRT program integrate with and complement other ERC programs?
Are new investigators and mentored students appropriately instructed in the responsible conduct of research, including scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, data management, data sharing, and policies for handling misconduct and regarding the use of human and animal subjects?
For post-doctoral training, is there an adequate plan for monitoring the progress or advancement toward research independence? Do post-doctoral trainees complete research projects in an appropriate timeframe? Is there evidence of productive research or practitioner career advancement (such as faculty appointments or promotions, investigator-initiated grant awards, or publications or patents)?
The Outreach Core must include an Outreach in OSH Program and may include the optional Continuing Education (CE) Program. The Outreach Program and CE Program will be reviewed separately. If the application does not include a CE Program, the Outreach in OSH narrative should contain a justification for excluding CE. This justification should also indicate how OSH practitioners’ CE needs are currently being met in the region.
Significance: Does the program facilitate the translation of occupational safety and health findings into the work environment? Are appropriate occupational safety and health constituents engaged in the program? Will the proposed activities have an impact on the practitioner or ability to affect occupational safety and health?
Is there evidence that the Outreach Program is responsive to regional needs for worker safety and health? For renewal applications, does the Outreach Program have a successful history of activities that positively impact the OSH practitioner community? Does the program adequately describe activities that will impact other institutions or agencies located within the ERC region?
Key Personnel: Do the Outreach Program Director and staff have expertise in OSH, and in developing, managing, and evaluating an outreach program in an institutional setting? Is there adequate administrative support for an effective outreach program?
Innovation: Does the ERC propose new and innovative outreach approaches relevant to OSH? Does the plan include reaching underserved and underrepresented worker populations?
Approach: Is the program designed to have an impact on the OSH practitioner community? Has appropriate consideration been given to collaboration with OSH stakeholders in the region? Are ERC faculty and NIOSH trainees encouraged to participate in outreach activities? Is there evidence of an interdisciplinary approach to the proposed outreach activities?
If the Outreach Core does not include a Continuing Education (CE) Program, is the justification clearly stated? Is there evidence that OSH practitioners’ educational needs are being met without a viable CE Program within the ERC?
Is there an adequate evaluation plan to determine if the Outreach in OSH Program is having a positive impact on the practitioner community, and worker safety and health? Does the ERC Advisory Board provide evaluation input? Are there plans to incorporate feedback to improve outreach activities?
Environment: Are there sufficient resources for the successful delivery of high quality outreach efforts? Will the Outreach in OSH Program benefit from the environment in which the ERC is located? Is there evidence of an Institutional commitment to Outreach in OSH Program goals?
Significance: Is there evidence that the CE Program is successful in training OSH practitioners as indicated by the number of trainees and training courses for core OSH professions, the diversity of courses offered, and trainee course evaluations?
For renewal applications, does the CE Program’s past performance indicate a strong record of training OSH practitioners as evidenced by the breadth and quality of the completed courses, the number of trainees, and inclusion of courses for core occupational safety and health professions?
Key Personnel: Are the CE Program Director and staff qualified with respect to expertise in OSH and in developing, managing, and evaluating a CE program? Is there administrative support for an effective, sustainable CE Program?
Innovation: Does the ERC propose new and innovative approaches to continuing education relevant to the OSH field? Does the plan include new and innovative training modalities to meet educational needs of adult learners in the ERC’s region or target area?
Approach: Is the program well-designed and does it meet contemporary educational standards? Is appropriate consideration given to collaboration with other providers of OSH training within the ERC’s region? To what extent do ERC faculty participate in planning, developing, presenting, or evaluating CE courses? Does the CE Program encourage NIOSH ERC trainees to attend CE offerings relevant to their field of study? Is consideration given to unique training needs for the ERC’s region or target area? Is there an adequate plan for recruiting practitioners to the CE Program offerings, including practitioners from underrepresented groups?
Is there an adequate evaluation plan for the CE Program? Are there plans to incorporate feedback or improve CE offerings?
Does the applicant describe how the program establishes priorities for course offerings? How does the program solicit evaluation input to program plans? To what extent do ERC faculty participate in directing and/or presenting CE courses? Is there a critical mass of CE faculty to sustain the program?
Environment: Are there sufficient resources available to the CE program for successful delivery of high quality educational programs for the adult learner? Is there evidence of an Institutional commitment to CE program goals?
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.
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. The evaluation will be based on 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 HHS/CDC Requirements under AR-1 Human Subjects Requirements, available at http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/additional_req.shtm#ar1.
If your proposed research involves the use of human data and/or biological specimens, you must provide a justification for a claim that no human subjects are involved, in the Protection of Human Subjects section of the Research Plan.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children. When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the policy on the Inclusion of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities in Research, at http://isp-v-maso-apps.cdc.gov/Policy/Doc/policy17.pdf, and the policy on the Inclusion of persons under 21 in Research, at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/guidelines_general/Human_Subjects_Protection_and_Inclusion.pdf.
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, as well as the 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, at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/VASchecklist.pdf.
Biohazards. Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment and will, if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
Renewal Application. When reviewing a Renewal Application, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Revision Application. When reviewing a Revision Application, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project.
Resubmission Application. When reviewing a Resubmission Application, 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.
Budget and Period of Support. Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed training program.
Select Agent Research. Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including (1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research; (2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used; (3) the procedures for monitoring possession, use, and transfer of Select Agent(s); and (4) the plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans
HHS/CDC policy requires that recipients of grant awards make research resources and data readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication. Please see http://www.cdc.gov/maso/Policy/ReleasingData.pdf. Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a plan on sharing research resources and data.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific, technical, and educational merit by an appropriate peer review group, in accordance with CDC/NIOSH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria.
All applications that are responsive to this announcement and accepted for peer review will be discussed and assigned an overall impact/priority score. All applications will receive a written critique.
Following initial peer review, the NIOSH Secondary Review Council (SRC) will provide a second level of review for programmatic relevance and balance. Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications.
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) through eRA Commons.
If the application is under consideration for funding. HHS/CDC/NIOSH may request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the HHS 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 HHS Grants Policy Statement. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grant Policy Statement as part of the NoA.
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.
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.
The institution must submit a completed Statement of Appointment (PHS Form 2271) for each trainee appointed or reappointed to the training grant. Grantees must submit the PHS 2271 data electronically using the xTrain system. More information on xTrain is available at xTrain (eRA Commons). An appointment or reappointment may begin at any time during the budget period, but not before the budget period state date of the grant year.
In carrying out its stewardship of human resource-related programs, NIOSH may request information essential to an assessment of the effectiveness of this program from databases and from participants themselves. Participants may be contacted after the completion of this award for periodic updates on various aspects of their employment history, publications, support from research grants or contracts, honors and awards, professional activities, and other information helpful in evaluating the impact of the program.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
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
Elizabeth H. Maples, PhD
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
1600 Clifton Road, NE, Mailstop E74
Atlanta, GA 30333
Michael Goldcamp, PhD
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
1095 Willowdale Road, MS 1808
Morgantown, WV 26505
Mary Pat Shanahan
Grants Management Specialist
Office Of Extramural Programs
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Procurement and Grants Office
OD, Environmental, Occupational Health and Injury Prevention Services Branch -Team1
626 Cochrans Mill Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0070
Authority: This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency Review. Awards are made under the authorization of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Section 20(a) and 21(a) (29 USC 669(a) and 29 USC 670); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, Section 501(a), 30 USC 951(a); Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Parts 52 and 86 and 45 CFR Part 75. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Human Subjects Protection
Federal regulations (45 CFR Part 46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm). Additional HHS/CDC Requirements under AR-1 Human Subjects Requirements can be found on the Internet at the following address: http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.
Use of Animals in Research
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with the PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf) as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm), and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm) as applicable. Additional HHS/CDC Requirements under AR-3 Animal Subjects Requirements can be found at http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm.
Requirements for Inclusion of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities in Research
It is the policy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to ensure that individuals of both sexes and the various racial and ethnic groups will be included in CDC/ATSDR-supported research projects involving human subjects, whenever feasible and appropriate. Racial and ethnic groups are those defined in OMB Directive No. 15 and include American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. Applicants shall ensure that women, racial and ethnic minority populations are appropriately represented in applications for research involving human subjects. Where clear and compelling rationale exist that inclusion is inappropriate or not feasible, this situation must be explained as part of the application. This policy does not apply to research studies when the investigator cannot control the race, ethnicity, and/or sex of subjects. Further guidance to this policy is contained in the Federal Register, Vol. 60, No. 179, pages 47947-47951, and dated Friday, September 15, 1995.
Inclusion of Persons Under the Age of 21 in Research
The policy of CDC is that persons under the age of 21 must be included in all human subjects research that is conducted or supported by CDC, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them. This policy applies to all CDC-conducted or CDC-supported research involving human subjects, including research that is otherwise exempt in accordance with Sections 101(b) and 401(b) of 45 C.F.R. Part 46, HHS Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Therefore, proposals for research involving human subjects must include a description of plans for including persons under the age of 21. If persons under the age of 21 will be excluded from the research, the application or proposal must present an acceptable justification for the exclusion.
In an extramural research plan, the investigator should create a section titled "Participation of persons under the age of 21." This section should provide either a description of the plans to include persons under the age of 21 and a rationale for selecting or excluding a specific age range, or an explanation of the reason(s) for excluding persons under the age of 21 as participants in the research. When persons under the age of 21 are included, the plan must also include a description of the expertise of the investigative team for dealing with individuals at the ages included, the appropriateness of the available facilities to accommodate the included age groups, and the inclusion of a sufficient number of persons under the age of 21 to contribute to a meaningful analysis relative to the purpose of the study. Scientific review groups at CDC will assess each application as being acceptable or unacceptable in regard to the age-appropriate inclusion or exclusion of persons under the age of 21 in the research project, in addition to evaluating the plans for conducting the research in accordance with these provisions.
The inclusion of children (as defined by the applicable law of the jurisdiction in which the research will be conducted) as subjects in research must be in compliance with all applicable subparts of 45 C.F.R. Part 46, as well as with other pertinent federal laws and regulations.
The policy of inclusion of persons under the age of 21 in CDC-conducted or CDC-supported research activities in foreign countries (including collaborative activities) is the same as that for research conducted in the United States.
HIV/AIDS Confidentiality Provisions
Recipients must have confidentiality and security provisions to protect data collected through HIV/AIDS surveillance, including copies of local data release policies; employee training in confidentiality provisions; State laws, rules, or regulations pertaining to the protection or release of surveillance information; and physical security of hard copies and electronic files containing confidential surveillance information.
Describe laws, rules, regulations, or health department policies that require or permit the release of patient-identifying information collected under the HIV/AIDS surveillance system to entities outside the public health department; describe also the measures the health department has taken to ensure that persons reported to the surveillance system are protected from further or unlawful disclosure.
Some projects may require Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval or a certificate of confidentiality.
HIV Program Review Panel Requirements
Compliance with Content of AIDS-Related Written Materials, Pictorials, Audiovisuals, Questionnaires, Survey Instruments, and Educational Sessions (June 1992) is required.
To meet the requirements for a program review panel, you are encouraged to use an existing program review panel, such as the one created by the State health department's HIV/AIDS prevention program. If you form your own program review panel, at least one member must be an employee (or a designated representative) of a State or local health department. List the names of the review panel members on the Assurance of Compliance form, CDC 0.1113. Submit the program review panel's report that all materials have been approved.
If the proposed project involves hosting a conference, submit the program review panel's report stating that all materials, including the proposed conference agenda, have been approved. Submit a copy of the proposed agenda with the application.
Before funds are used to develop educational materials, determine whether suitable materials already exist in the CDC National Prevention Information Network (NPIN). The website can be found at; http://www.nchstp.cdc.gov/od/infocenter/npin.htm.
Ensure that all STD or HIV infected patients enrolled in the proposed project will be linked to an appropriate local care system that can address their specific needs, such as medical care, counseling, social services, and therapy.
Paperwork Reduction Act Requirements
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, projects that involve the collection of information from 10 or more individuals and funded by a grant or a cooperative agreement will be subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Smoke-Free Workplace Requirements
HHS/CDC strongly encourages all recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and to promote abstinence from all tobacco products. Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities that receive Federal funds in which education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children.
Healthy People 2020
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2020," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This FOA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2020" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Lobbying Restrictions Applicants should be aware of restrictions on the use of HHS funds for lobbying of Federal or State legislative bodies. Under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. Section 1352, recipients (and their sub-tier contractors) are prohibited from using appropriated Federal funds (other than profits from a Federal contract) for lobbying congress or any Federal agency in connection with the award of a particular contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or loan. This includes grants/cooperative agreements that, in whole or in part, involve conferences for which Federal funds cannot be used directly or indirectly to encourage participants to lobby or to instruct participants on how to lobby.
In addition no part of HHS/CDC appropriated funds, shall be used, other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, for the preparation, distribution, or use of any kit, pamphlet, booklet, publication, radio, television, or video presentation designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress or any State or local legislature, except in presentation to the Congress or any State or local legislature itself. No part of the appropriated funds shall be used to pay the salary or expenses of any grant or contract recipient, or agent acting for such recipient, related to any activity designed to influence legislation or appropriations pending before the Congress or any State or local legislature.
Any activity designed to influence action in regard to a particular piece of pending legislation would be considered "lobbying." That is lobbying for or against pending legislation, as well as indirect or "grass roots" lobbying efforts by award recipients that are directed at inducing members of the public to contact their elected representatives at the Federal or State levels to urge support of, or opposition to, pending legislative proposals is prohibited. As a matter of policy, HHS/CDC extends the prohibitions to lobbying with respect to local legislation and local legislative bodies.
The provisions are not intended to prohibit all interaction with the legislative branch, or to prohibit educational efforts pertaining to public health. Clearly there are circumstances when it is advisable and permissible to provide information to the legislative branch in order to foster implementation of prevention strategies to promote public health. However, it would not be permissible to influence, directly or indirectly, a specific piece of pending legislation. It remains permissible to use HHS/CDC funds to engage in activity to enhance prevention; collect and analyze data; publish and disseminate results of research and surveillance data; implement prevention strategies; conduct community outreach services; provide leadership and training, and foster safe and healthful environments.
Recipients of HHS/CDC grants and cooperative agreements need to be careful to prevent HHS/CDC funds from being used to influence or promote pending legislation. With respect to conferences, public events, publications, and "grassroots" activities that relate to specific legislation, recipients of HHS/CDC funds should give close attention to isolating and separating the appropriate use of HHS/CDC funds from non-CDC funds. HHS/CDC also cautions recipients of HHS/CDC funds to be careful not to give the appearance that HHS/CDC funds are being used to carry out activities in a manner that is prohibited under Federal law.
Prohibition on Use of HHS/CDC Funds for Certain Gun Control Activities
The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act specifies that: "None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."
Anti-Lobbying Act requirements prohibit lobbying Congress with appropriated Federal monies. Specifically, this Act prohibits the use of Federal funds for direct or indirect communications intended or designed to influence a member of Congress with regard to specific Federal legislation. This prohibition includes the funding and assistance of public grassroots campaigns intended or designed to influence members of Congress with regard to specific legislation or appropriation by Congress.
In addition to the restrictions in the Anti-Lobbying Act, HHS/CDC interprets the language in the HHS/CDC’s Appropriations Act to mean that HHS/CDC’s funds may not be spent on political action or other activities designed to affect the passage of specific Federal, State, or local legislation intended to restrict or control the purchase or use of firearms.
Accounting System Requirements
The services of a certified public accountant licensed by the State Board of Accountancy or the equivalent must be retained throughout the project as a part of the recipient's staff or as a consultant to the recipient's accounting personnel. These services may include the design, implementation, and maintenance of an accounting system that will record receipts and expenditures of Federal funds in accordance with accounting principles, Federal regulations, and terms of the cooperative agreement or grant.
It may be necessary to conduct an on-site evaluation of some applicant organization's financial management capabilities prior to or immediately following the award of the grant or cooperative agreement. Independent audit statements from a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) for the preceding two fiscal years may also be required.
Proof of Non-profit Status
Proof of nonprofit status must be submitted by private nonprofit organizations with the application. Any of the following is acceptable evidence of nonprofit status: (a) a reference to the applicant organization's listing in the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent list of tax-exempt organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code; (b) a copy of a currently valid IRS tax exemption certificate; (c) a statement from a State taxing body, State Attorney General, or other appropriate State Official certifying that the applicant organization has a nonprofit status and that none of the net earnings accrue to any private shareholders or individuals; (d) a certified copy of the organization's certificate of incorporation or similar document that clearly establishes nonprofit status; (e) any of the above proof for a State or national parent organization and a statement signed by the parent organization that the applicant organization is a local nonprofit affiliate.
Security Clearance Requirement
All individuals who will be performing work under a grant or cooperative agreement in a HHS/CDC-owned or leased facility (on-site facility) must receive a favorable security clearance, and meet all security requirements. This means that all awardees employees, fellows, visiting researchers, interns, etc., no matter the duration of their stay at HHS/CDC must undergo a security clearance process.
Small, Minority, And Women-owned Business
It is a national policy to place a fair share of purchases with small, minority and women-owned business firms. The Department of Health and Human Services is strongly committed to the objective of this policy and encourages all recipients of its grants and cooperative agreements to take affirmative steps to ensure such fairness. In particular, recipients should:
1. Place small, minority, women-owned business firms on bidders’ mailing lists.
2. Solicit these firms whenever they are potential sources of supplies, equipment, construction, or services.
3. Where feasible, divide total requirements into smaller needs, and set delivery schedules that will encourage participation by these firms.
4. Use the assistance of the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce, the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, DHHS, and similar state and local offices.
The signature of the institution official on the face page of the application submitted under this Funding Opportunity Announcement is certifying compliance with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regulations in Title 42 Part 93, Subparts A-E, entitled PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE POLICIES ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT.
The regulation places requirements on institutions receiving or applying for funds under the PHS Act that are monitored by the DHHS Office of Research Integrity (ORI) (http://ori.hhs.gov./policies/statutes.shtml).
Section 93.301 Institutional assurances. (a) General policy. An institution with PHS supported biomedical or behavioral research, research training or activities related to that research or research training must provide PHS with an assurance of compliance with this part, satisfactory to the Secretary. PHS funding components may authorize [[Page 28389]] funds for biomedical and behavioral research, research training, or activities related to that research or research training only to institutions that have approved assurances and required renewals on file with ORI. (b) Institutional Assurance. The responsible institutional official must assure on behalf of the institution that the institution-- (1) Has written policies and procedures in compliance with this part for inquiring into and investigating allegations of research misconduct; and (2) Complies with its own policies and procedures and the requirements of this part.
Compliance with Executive Order 13279
Faith-based organization are eligible to receive federal financial assistance, and their applications are evaluated in the same manner and using the same criteria as those for non-faith-based organizations in accordance with Executive Order 13279, Equal Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community Organizations. All applicants should, however, be aware of restrictions on the use of direct financial assistance from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for inherently religious activities. Under the provisions of Title 45, Parts 74, 87, 92 and 96, organizations that receive direct financial assistance from DHHS under any DHHS program may not engage in inherently religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization as a part of the programs or services funded with direct financial assistance from DHHS. If an organization engages in such activities, it must offer them separately, in time or location, from the programs or services funded with direct DHHS assistance, and participation must be voluntary for the beneficiaries of the programs or services funded with such assistance. A religious organization that participates in the DHHS funded programs or services will retain its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, and may continue to carry out its mission, including the definition, practice, and expression of its religious beliefs, provided that it does not use direct financial assistance from DHHS to support inherently religious activities such as those activities described above. A faith-based organization may, however, use space in its facilities to provide programs or services funded with financial assistance from DHHS without removing religious art, icons, scriptures, or other religious symbols. In addition, a religious organization that receives financial assistance from DHHS retains its authority over its internal governance, and it may retain religious terms in its organization=s name, select its board members on a religious basis, and include religious references in its organization=s mission statements and other governing documents in accordance with all program requirements, statutes, and other applicable requirements governing the conduct of DHHS funded activities. For further guidance on the use of DHHS direct financial assistance, see Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 87, and Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations, and visit the internet site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Requirements
Recipients of this grant award should note that pursuant to the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164) covered entities may disclose protected health information to public health authorities authorized by law to collect or receive such information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability, including, but not limited to, the reporting of disease, injury, vital events such as birth or death, and the conduct of public health surveillance, public health investigations, and public health interventions. The definition of a public health authority includes a person or entity acting under a grant of authority from or contract with such public agency. HHS/CDC considers this project a public health activity consistent with the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information and HHS/CDC will provide successful recipients a specific grant of public health authority for the purposes of this project.
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(Public Law 89-665, 80 Stat. 915)
The grantee’s signature on the grant application attests to their: (1) knowledge of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-665, 80 Stat. 915); and (2) intent to ensure all grant related activities are in compliance with referenced public law, as stated:
a. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) states:
The head of any Federal agency, having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or Federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent state agency having authority to license any undertaking, shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or is eligible for inclusion in the National Register. The head of any such Federal agency shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation established under Title II of this ACT a reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such undertaking.
b. Additionally, the NHPA also contains the following excerpt that forbids “anticipatory demolition:”
Each Federal agency shall ensure that the agency will not grant a loan, loan guarantee, permit, license, or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of Section 106 of this Act, has intentionally, significantly, adversely affected a historic property to which the grant would relate or, having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the agency, after consultation with the Council, determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant.
Conference Disclaimer and Use of Logos
Disclaimer: Where a conference is funded by a grant or cooperative agreement, a sub grant or a contract the recipient must include the following statement on conference materials, including promotional materials, agenda, and internet sites:
“Funding for this conference was made possible [in part] by [insert grant or cooperative agreement award number] from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). The views expressed in written conference materials or publications and by speakers and moderators do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the Department of Health and Human Services; nor does mention of trade names, commercial practices, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.”
Logos: Neither the HHS nor the CDC (“CDC” includes ATSDR) logo may be displayed if such display would cause confusion as to the source of the conference or give the false appearance of Government endorsement. A non-federal entity’s unauthorized use of the HHS name or logo is governed by U.S.C. § 1320b-10, which prohibits the misuse of the HHS name and emblem in written communication. The appropriate use of the HHS logo is subject to the review and approval of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (OASPA). Moreover, the Office of the Inspector General has authority to impose civil monetary penalties for violations (42 C.F.R. Part 1003). Neither the HHS nor the CDC logo can be used on conference materials under a grant, cooperative agreement, contract, or co-sponsorship agreement without the expressed, written consent of either the Project Officer or the Grants Management Officer. It is the responsibility of the grantee (or recipient of funds under a cooperative agreement) to request consent for the use of the logo in sufficient detail to assure a complete depiction and disclosure of all uses of the Government logos, and to assure that in all cases of the use of Government logos, the written consent of either the Project Officer or the Grants Management Officer has been received.
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.