It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information

Purpose

The goal of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to encourage research grant applications on the development and testing of behavioral and integrative treatments for drug and alcohol use, abuse and dependence. This FOA reaffirms the continued commitment of NIDA, NIAAA and OBSSR to major programs of research on behavioral and integrative treatments. The term "behavioral treatments" is used here in a broad sense and includes but is not limited to: psychotherapies, cognitive, relapse prevention, remediative, rehabilitative, skills training, counseling, family, and exercise therapies. Screening, brief, computerized, adherence, prevention interventions for HIV risk behaviors, and interventions that target therapist training and fidelity also are included. Integrative refers to combinations with other treatments, including pharmacotherapies or other complementary approaches. The development and testing of putative targets and mechanisms of behavior change, as well as the use and development of valid and reliable assessment tools are crucial to the three stages of treatment research supported under this initiative:

Stage I (treatment generation, refinement) encompasses all activities related to the creation of a new behavioral intervention. This stage also includes the modification, adaptation, or refinement of an existing intervention (Stage IA). Stage I culminates in feasibility and pilot testing (Stage 1B). For example, one can conduct Stage I studies in research settings, with research therapists and research subjects; or in community settings with community providers.

Stage II ( Efficacy ) research consists of experimental testing of promising behavioral interventions in research settings, with research-based therapists/providers.

Stage III ( Efficacy in Real-World ) research consists of experimental testing of promising behavioral interventions in community settings, with community-based therapists/providers and patients, while maintaining a high level of control necessary to establish internal validity.

Stages I, II, and III all include a focus on theory-derived, targets/putative moderators, mediators, and change mechanisms that underlie the treatment, and studies that optimize combined, sequential, or integrated behavioral/pharmacological treatments.

Significance

Behavioral treatments play a critical role in most evidence-based substance abuse interventions, and often constitute the entire treatment. This FOA (in conjunction with the companion FOA, PAR-19-212, using the R01) will support Stage I behavioral and integrative intervention research with the goal to advance science, including treatments and interventions that are intended to be more efficient, better tailored to individuals, or more readily transported to the community. Over the past two decades, numerous evidence-based behavioral and integrative treatments for addiction have been created. With advances in neuroscience and pharmacology, it is evident that to improve clinical outcomes, more needs to be done to incorporate new scientific discoveries into behavioral treatment and intervention development. In addition, as more information is elucidated about how treatments work and for whom, and new technologies become available, more can be done to make treatments more easily transportable to community settings. The Behavioral and Integrative Treatment Development Program seeks to achieve these goals.

For alcohol abuse and dependence, most of the treatments available in the U.S. have been behavioral in nature. A large number of clinical trials demonstrated effectiveness for several types of behavioral therapies, including cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational enhancement therapy, marital family therapy, brief interventions, and the community reinforcement approach. Although progress has been made in a broad range of behavioral interventions to treat alcohol abuse and dependence, many alcohol-dependent individuals do not respond adequately to currently available behavioral therapies. For alcohol abuse and dependence, this FOA supports research to develop new innovative behavioral therapies or modify existing treatments to improve their effectiveness and devise ways to improve the engagement, retention, adherence, and outcome of alcoholism treatment across various populations of alcohol dependent and abuse subjects.

The Stage Model describes behavioral intervention development as composed of six stages: basic science (Stage 0), intervention generation, refinement, modification, and adaptation and pilot testing (Stage I); traditional efficacy testing (Stage II); efficacy testing with real-world providers (Stage III); effectiveness research (Stage IV) and; dissemination and implementation research (Stage V). Under this FOA, only stages I, II and III are supported. Intervention development with the stages should be viewed as iterative, recursive, and bidirectional.

Stage I: Stage I encompasses all activities related to the creation of a new behavioral intervention, or the modification, adaptation, or refinement of an existing intervention (Stage IA), as well as feasibility and pilot testing (Stage 1B). Stage I may involve translational basic to applied (sometimes referred to as T1 ) research. Stage I also may involve the modification or adaptation of interventions for ease of implementation in real-world settings. For example, projects can be conducted in: research settings with research therapists/providers, but they also can be conducted in real world or community settings with community therapists/providers. One goal of a Stage I project is to provide necessary materials and information to proceed to a later phase Stage I, Stage II or Stage III project. An equally important goal is to obtain scientific knowledge of the processes that lead to behavior change (i.e., behavioral, cognitive, social or biological change mechanism at multiple levels of analysis).

Stage I research is iterative and may involve: 1) identifying promising basic or clinical scientific findings relevant to the development or refinement of an intervention; 2) generating/ formulating theories relevant to intervention development and putative change mechanisms; 3) operationally defining, and standardizing new or modified principle-driven interventions; 4) initial or pilot testing of the intervention; 5) experimentally testing the mechanisms and principles of behavior change of the intervention; and 6) as necessary, further refining the intervention.

This Stage Model presumes that intervention development is incomplete if no materials and methods are available to ensure faithful administration of an intervention. Therefore, therapist/provider training and fidelity assessment and enhancement methods are an integral part of behavioral intervention development.

Stage I research can be conducted to generate, modify, refine, adapt, or pilot-test: 1) behavioral treatment interventions; 2) HIV prevention interventions; 3) medication adherence interventions; 4) components of a behavioral intervention; 5) therapist/provider training and supervision interventions; 6) interventions to ensure maintenance of the fidelity of intervention. The proposed study can be conducted prior to taking the intervention to an efficacy study, or after an intervention has proven efficacious.

Stage II: Stage II research consists of the testing of promising behavioral interventions in research settings, with research therapists/providers while maintaining a high level of control necessary to establish internal validity. This treatment stage also involves examining mechanisms of behavior change. Stage II does not specify a particular research design. Testing of interventions may be done in randomized clinical trials, but may also be conducted using other methodologies as appropriate (e.g., adaptive designs, multiple baseline single-case designs, A-B-A designs, etc.). Stage II studies may include exploration of intervention components, dose-response, and theory-derived moderators.

Proceeding from Stage I to Stage II (or Stage III in the case of an intervention developed in or ready for a community setting) presumes that promising pilot data exist. If sufficiently strong evidence of promise does not exist, but if there is a good rationale for additional modification of the intervention, such modification can be proposed in a subsequent Stage I study.

Information obtained from Stage II studies may be used to inform future Stage I studies. For example, if it is shown that an intervention works for some people, but not for others, especially if such a moderator effect makes conceptual sense, a Stage II study may lay the groundwork for a Stage I application aimed at developing an intervention (or modifying the intervention) for people who were unresponsive to the initial intervention.

Stage III: Stage III research determines efficacy in community settings, with community therapists/providers. Although Stage III occurs in real-world settings, investigators should maintain a high level of control to establish internal validity. Proceeding directly from Stage I to Stage III requires Stage I research to be promising and requires the existence of methods to ensure fidelity of delivery of an intervention, along with therapist training materials (as required by the intervention).

Stage III does not specify a particular research design. Testing of interventions may be done in randomized clinical trials but may also be conducted using other methodologies (e.g., adaptive designs, multiple baseline single-case designs, A-B-A designs, etc.). Stage III studies may include examinations of intervention components, dose-response, and theory-derived moderators.

Information obtained from Stage III or Stage II studies may be used to inform future Stage I studies. For example, if it is shown in Stage III that an intervention works for some people, but not for others, a Stage III study may lay the groundwork for a Stage I application aimed at developing an intervention (or modifying the intervention) for people who were unresponsive to the initial intervention.

Examination of the mechanism of action of interventions is considered to be an integral part of all Stages of intervention development research.

The objective of this announcement and its companion funding opportunity is to ensure sufficient emphasis and support for Stage I behavioral and integrative treatment research. The supported studies will support translation of scientific knowledge into more efficient behavioral, combined behavioral and pharmacological, integrative and complementary treatments so that they ultimately can be effectively transported from research to the community.

Specific Areas of Research Interest

The overarching goal of this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) is to produce maximally efficacious behavioral interventions (individual and group) to treat substance abuse drug abuse, promote medication/treatment adherence, and prevent HIV that take advantage of new knowledge in neuroscience, new technologies and pharmacotherapies that may improve tangible outcomes of behavioral interventions (e.g., improving cognitive function). This FOA underscores the importance of fostering research aimed at boosting intervention effects to produce targeted treatments for different types of substance abusing populations (including pregnant women, populations with comorbid psychiatric disorders, and prisoners) or populations with pain. Stages of treatment development will include Stage I, Stage II and Stage III efficacy studies (randomized clinical trials, adaptive designs, SMART designs, experimental therapeutics approach) of behavioral, combined, or integrated treatment interventions, adherence interventions, and prevention interventions for HIV risk behaviors. This includes treatment dose-response studies, and studies of the optimal sequencing of treatment, adherence, and HIV prevention interventions. Research on the treatment of any substance of abuse, including illicit drugs, prescription medications, nicotine (including e-cigarette cessation), alcohol and multiple drugs is encouraged. Of particular interest are studies that seek to determine basic mechanisms of behavior change, within the context of behavioral treatment research. Therefore, applicants are strongly encouraged to include (and if necessary develop) measures of proposed mediators, moderators, and mechanisms of behavior change relevant to their intervention. This may include, for example, behavioral, cognitive, social, affective, and/or neurobiological targets. Grant applications submitted under this PAR should indicate and make explicit the stage of treatment development, as described above (hybrid studies are acceptable).

Specific areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Research to elucidate purported mechanism of action and targets of behavioral interventions at multiple levels of analysis. This includes determination of underlying biological and/or neurobiological mechanisms (e.g., as measured by imaging methodologies, skin conductance, or other biological/physiological indices) of the interventions associated with the behavioral, cognitive, affective, or social mechanisms of interventions.
• Research that uses innovative technologies (digital therapeutics, including mobile applications and other platforms, virtual reality, wireless monitoring and biofeedback, imaging tools for biofeedback) to develop, improve and systematically measure behavioral interventions including the use of imaging methods to predict outcomes from behavioral interventions. Additionally, neuromodulation devices to augment behavior therapies.
• Research that incorporates of genetic/epigenetic methodologies to help understand the variability in outcomes as result of therapeutic interventions.
• Research that evaluates the use of medications to improve the efficacy of behavioral interventions.
• Research on the essential components of a behavioral treatment, adherence or therapist training intervention
• Stage I treatment development research aimed at facilitating the implementation of an intervention, testing behavioral interventions within primary care settings
• Research to promote adherence to pharmacotherapies, such as buprenorphine, methadone, depot naltrexone, lofexidine, naloxone, or HAART, in substance abuse treatment populations.
• Studies that develop safe and effective psychosocial interventions to improve the outcomes of pharmacotherapies for SUDs including OUD and overdose reversal.
• Research on tobacco harm reduction strategies such as switching from combustibles to e-cigarettes.
• Research to adapt or modify scientifically supported substance abuse treatments, adherence interventions, or HIV prevention interventions for drug and alcohol users to enhance the application of and boosting treatment potency among health disparities populations.

Special Considerations

National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse Recommended Guidelines for the Administration of Drugs to Human Subjects: The National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (NACDA) recognizes the importance of research involving the administration of drugs with abuse potential, and dependence or addiction liability, to human subjects. Potential applicants are encouraged to obtain and review these recommendations of Council before submitting an application that will administer compounds to human subjects. The guidelines are available on NIDA's Web site at http://www.drugabuse.gov/funding/clinical-research/nacda-guidelines-administration-drugs-to-human-subjects.

Applications under this FOA are encouraged, but not required, to apply approaches and tools developed under the NIH Common Fund’s Science of Behavior Change (SOBC) Program. These include: use-inspired research on mechanisms of change at multiple levels of analysis; assays for self-regulation, interpersonal processes and stress that have evidence as malleable targets for behavior change (see https://osf.io/zp7b4) developed under the SOBC program; and an experimental medicine approach which requires a clear a priori specification of the intended mechanistic target(s) of an intervention, and methods that test the degree to which an experimental manipulation or intervention engages those targets. For more information about the SOBC program, please see: https://commonfund.nih.gov/behaviorchange.

Points to Consider Regarding Tobacco Industry Funding of NIDA Applicants: The National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (NACDA) encourages NIDA and its grantees to consider the points it has set forth with regard to existing or prospective sponsored research agreements with tobacco companies or their related entities and the impact of acceptance of tobacco industry funding on NIDA's credibility and reputation within the scientific community. Please see (http://www.drugabuse.gov/about-nida/advisory-boards-groups/national-advisory-council-drug-abuse-nacda/council-statements/points-to-consider-regarding-) for details.

Data Harmonization for Substance Abuse and Addiction via the PhenX Toolkit: NIDA strongly encourages investigators involved in human-subjects studies to employ a common set of tools and resources that will promote the collection of comparable data across studies and to do so by incorporating the measures from the Core and Specialty collections, which are available in the Substance Abuse and Addiction Collection of the PhenX Toolkit (www.phenxtoolkit.org). Please see NOT-DA-12-008 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-DA-12-008.html) for further details

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this FOA.

Higher Education Institutions

• Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
• Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

o Hispanic-serving Institutions

o Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)

o Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)

o Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions

o Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

• Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
• Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

• Small Businesses
• For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Governments

• State Governments
• County Governments
• City or Township Governments
• Special District Governments
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)
• Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
• U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

• Independent School Districts
• Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
• Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
• Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
• Regional Organizations
• Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions)

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.

Applicant Organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.

• Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants be issued a DUNS number. After obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin both SAM and eRA Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
• System for Award Management (SAM) Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
• NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
• eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number to register in eRA Commons. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration, but all registrations must be in place by time of submission. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
• Grants.gov Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))

All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:

• A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
• A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
• An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NOT-OD-11-101).

The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

• Descriptive title of proposed activity
• Name(s), address(es), and telephone number(s) of the PD(s)/PI(s)
• Names of other key personnel
• Participating institution(s)
• Number and title of this funding opportunity

The letter of intent should be sent to: NIDALetterofIntent@mail.nih.gov

Applicants are encouraged to send the letter of intent by email address above but as an alternative the letter also may be sent to:

Office of Extramural Policy and Review
National Institute on Drug Abuse/NIH/DHHS
6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 4243, MSC 9550
Bethesda, MD 20892-9550

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Research Strategy: Applications should detail at least one of the following:

1) Identify and/or outline how the intervention moves forward through the stages of treatment development.

2) Describe how the proposed intervention is novel or builds substantially upon pre-existing behavioral intervention.

3) For integrative treatments, the study should include a strong rationale for the synergistic interaction between the modalities.

Study Timeline

Specific to applications proposing clinical trials

Study should include a detailed timeline that considers start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment. Projected timeline should be feasible and well justified. Project should incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate.

Potential challenges and corresponding solutions should be discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls).

Project should include a strong design to allow for the validation or rejection of the neural or behavioral target and/or intervention being tested. Project should include a rationale to justify the proposed stage of testing. Additionally, the proposed intervention should have a strong, well-supported rationale that is ready for testing.

Application should include sufficient evidence that the investigators can work as a team. Investigative team should have sufficient methodological and statistical expertise to evaluate clinical trials, brain functional effects and functional outcomes (e.g., association of these different measures, handling repeated measures designs, missing data, effect size), as appropriate.

Strong benchmarks to indicate initial safety, feasibility, or acceptability that can be achieved in the 3-year period of the R34 grant should be included. In addition, the R34 grant application should provide a compelling design that will move the intervention appropriately forward to the larger grant, for example, R01. Research strategy should utilize reliable, objective and valid measures to test the intervention's ability to change or maintain behavior.

In addition, for clinical trials, applications should adequately address the following, if applicable:

Study Design

Study design should be justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested. Scientific rationale/premise of the study should be based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research. Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, study design should adequately test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses and provide interpretable results. Trial must be appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently. Study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, should be appropriate and well-justified.

Potential ethical issues should be adequately addressed. Application should include a process for obtaining informed consent or assent, as appropriate. Moreover, include plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection. Planned recruitment timelines should be feasible and include a plan to monitor accrual. Also, when appropriate, include the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed. Differences should be addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity.

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

Applications should include planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions. Procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories should be included, as applicable. Additionally, methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control should be addressed. There should include a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award.

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults); justification in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy should be proposed.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

• All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.

Appendix:

Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

When involving NIH-defined human subjects research, clinical research, and/or clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions.

See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.

The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete or non-compliant will not be reviewed.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.

Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

Research Strategy: Applications should detail at least one of the following:

1) Evaluate how the intervention moves forward through the stages of treatment development.

2) Describe how the proposed intervention is novel or builds substantially upon pre-existing behavioral intervention.

3) For integrative treatments, describe whether the study includes a strong rationale for the synergistic interaction between the modalities.

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials:

A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.

For this particular announcement, note the following:

The R34 planning grant for behavioral therapy development supports investigation of novel scientific ideas or new/existing/adapted interventions, model systems, tools, or technologies that have the potential for significant impact on biomedical or behavioral and social sciences research. A R34 grant application need not have preliminary data, extensive background material or preliminary information; however, they may be included if available.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

Is there sufficient evidence that the investigators can work as a team? Does the investigative team have sufficient methodological and statistical expertise to evaluate clinical trials, brain functional effects and functional outcomes (e.g., association of these different measures, handling repeated measures designs, missing data, effect size)?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet study timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?

Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable

Study Design

Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately to test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?

Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?

Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address

1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and

2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?

Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?

If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?

Is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.

Study Timeline

Specific to applications involving clinical trials

Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?

Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.

Not Applicable

For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.

Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: (1) Data Sharing Plan; (2) Sharing Model Organisms; and (3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS).

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by CSR, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:

• May undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
• Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications . Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.

Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.

ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm

Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that the application as well as all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the awardee must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols. Data and Safety

Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).

Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).

All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.

Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.

For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/section-1557/index.html; and https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.

In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Not Applicable

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

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, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)

Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov

Will M. Aklin, Ph.D.
National Institutes on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone:301-827-5909
Email: aklinwm@mail.nih.gov

Brett Hagman, Ph.D.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse Alcoholism (NIAAA)
Telephone: 301-443-0638
Email: brett.hagman@nih.gov

William Elwood, Ph.D
Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (OBSSR)
Telephone: 301-402-0116
Email: william.elwood@nih.gov

Weijia Ni, Ph.D.
Center for Scientific Review
Telephone: 301-594-3292
Email: niw@csr.nih.gov.

Ericka Wells
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-443-6710
Email: ddudley@nida.nih.gov

Judy Fox
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
Telephone: 301-443-4704
Email: jfox@mail.nih.gov

Jaclyn Crouch
Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (OBSSR)
Telephone: 301-451-3975
Email: jaclyn.crouch@nih.gov

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.