National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
Reissue of RFA-GM-14-013
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) encourages applications that propose research designed to test training, mentoring, and networking interventions intended to enhance research-oriented individuals' interest, motivation, persistence and preparedness for careers in the biomedical research workforce. Funded projects are expected to produce research findings that will guide the design and implementation of interventions in a variety of academic settings and career levels to enhance the diversity of the biomedical research workforce.
June 7, 2019
30 days prior to the application due date
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
New Date June 28, 2021 per issuance of PAR-21-269. (Original Expiration Date: January 8, 2022)
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in 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 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.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
Purpose and Background Information
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) recognizes the need to diversify the scientific workforce by enhancing the participation of individuals from groups identified as underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences (collectively termed "biomedical") research workforce. Diversity at all levels—from the kinds of science to the regions in which it is conducted to the backgrounds of the people conducting it— contributes to excellence in research training environments and strengthens the research enterprise. Research shows that diverse teams working together and capitalizing on innovative ideas and distinct perspectives outperform homogenous teams. Scientists and trainees from diverse backgrounds and life experiences bring different perspectives, creativity, and individual interests to address complex scientific problems. There are many benefits that flow from a diverse NIH-supported scientific workforce, including fostering scientific innovation, enhancing global competitiveness, contributing to robust learning environments, improving the quality of research, enhancing public trust, and increasing the likelihood that health disparities and the needs of underserved populations are addressed in biomedical research.
Promoting diversity in the extramural scientific workforce is critical to the success of the NIGMS mission and is consistent with the mandates of the 21st Century Cures Act. While scientific workforce diversity supports the NIGMS mission, expanding the pool of investigators from nationally underrepresented backgrounds in the biomedical research workforce has remained an elusive goal. NIGMS has a longstanding commitment to training the next generation of biomedical scientists and supporting training of students from diverse backgrounds, including individuals from groups underrepresented in biomedical research, through a variety of fellowships, career development awards, and institutional training and student development programs. In spite of recent advances, individuals from certain groups and backgrounds are underrepresented in the biomedical sciences research workforce as described in the Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity. The severity of the underrepresentation of these groups increases throughout the training stages. For example, students from certain racial and ethnic groups, including Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos/Latinas, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders comprise ~39 percent of the college age population (Census Bureau data), but earn only ~17 percent of bachelor’s degrees and ~13 percent of Ph.D. degrees in the life sciences (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics). Additionally, while the United States has seen a significant increase in the number of Ph.D. degrees in the biomedical sciences earned by scientists from historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the biomedical research workforce, a corresponding increase in the ranks of the faculty in basic science departments has not occurred ( Gibbs, et al., eLife 2016; Valantine, Lund & Gammie, CBE-Life Sciences Education, 2016). Similarly, women have earned a majority of biomedical Ph.Ds. since 2008 (NSF data), but approximately one third of NIH-funded principal investigators are women (NIH Databook).
NIGMS strives to ensure that future generations of researchers will be drawn from the entire pool of talented individuals, bringing different aptitudes, perspectives, interests, and experiences to address complex scientific problems. NIGMS seeks to enhance the diversity of the biomedical research workforce by supporting individuals from a variety of backgrounds at multiple training and career stages in a variety of institutions and educational settings across the country.
NIGMS supports a variety of training programs designed to develop a diverse pool of scientists with the skills and motivation to transition into the biomedical research workforce. NIGMS encourages the use of evidence-based practices and recognizes that there is need for more hypothesis-driven research to test biomedical training, mentoring and networking interventions for efficacy and replicability across career stages and at a range of institution types and to provide insights into the factors contributing to success. Through this funding announcement, NIGMS intends to enhance the evidence base for effective, high-impact, scalable interventions, and to improve our understanding of the factors contributing to success, including the social and behavioral factors involved in the advancement of individuals pursuing independent academic biomedical research careers.
Projects are expected to include the use of robust experimental designs, including randomized control trial approaches, case controls, matched pair design or other rigorous designs appropriate to the research questions. The research results are expected to move beyond participant satisfaction, self-reporting of perceived skills gained, or self-reporting of effectiveness. Accordingly, the training, mentoring, and networking interventions are to be centered not only on psychosocial factors, but also on outcomes so that the results will inform the biomedical community regarding the factors and mechanisms that are most likely to influence and foster a sustained career in the biomedical research workforce.
As appropriate, the proposed studies should inform the field about the effectiveness of the duration, frequency, and intensity of the intervention and whether those effects can be enhanced by reinforcement sessions. The proposed projects should provide the scientific community with sound evidence of short, medium, and long-term effects of the intervention's efficacy. The interventions should be cost-effective, practical, realistic, scalable and sustainable at a broad range of institutions. A primary goal of the FOA is to identify principles that would inform practice, in or outside the classroom, laboratory and institution.
NIGMS recognizes that most of the interventions and underlying assumptions are complex in nature and expects that their study will require multidisciplinary approaches. NIGMS strongly encourages a collaborative effort, when necessary, among biomedical researchers, program administrators, educators, psychologists, sociologists, statisticians, and/or economists, etc. as appropriate, who bring complementary and integrated expertise to ensure rigor, validity, generalizability, and integration of the research elements.
Applicants should note that this funding opportunity is not designed to support evaluation of an existing program(s), nor is it intended to support a training program disguised as an experiment. The purpose is to stimulate research on the mechanisms of effective training, mentoring, and networking interventions.
It is expected that the research findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and be accessible to the biomedical research community. Awardees are strongly encouraged to attend national meetings, such as the Understanding Interventions Conference, where their research findings can be shared, discussed and disseminated. Travel costs associated with attendance at such meetings may be requested in the budget.
The following are possible areas for focused research; however, applications describing other areas are also encouraged.
Training program related. As mentioned above, for many training, mentoring and networking activities, there are not robust data regarding the mechanisms contributing to success. NIGMS intends to support hypothesis-driven research that will provide evidence for the factors that enhance persistence and success in the biomedical research pathway. Research in this area will inform the community about why and how certain strategies and approaches have significant impacts on the academic and professional successes of individuals at various stages of training and career development.
Psychosocial factors. NIGMS recognizes the need for continued research into the mechanisms of how psychosocial factors influence persistence in the biomedical research workforce. The research in these areas should go beyond measuring psychosocial indicators of progress (e.g., science identity, a sense of belonging in the research community, and self-efficacy) and should be linked to measurable outcomes (e.g., academic success, entry into a biomedical degree program, degree attainment, and scholarly products such as publications, fellowships, grant awards).
Navigation of critical transition points. NIGMS recognizes the importance of supporting trainees through critical transition points (e.g., undergraduate to graduate school; graduate to post-doctoral training; post-doctoral training to early career faculty-level; early career faculty-level to tenure). Research in this area will inform the community about the underlying mechanisms that contribute to timely transitions and career progression.
Institutional factors that influence persistence. NIGMS recognizes the need to understand the underlying institutionally-based factors that influence persistence in the biomedical research career pathway. NIGMS encourages hypothesis-driven research into the institutional-level mechanisms that correct the disparities in career outcomes for individuals from underrepresented groups.
Applications that include the following are not appropriate for this FOA.
Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. The NIGMS expects to award 3-5 applications per fiscal year.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
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.
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.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
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.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Travel costs associated with attendance at meetings where research findings can be shared, discussed and disseminated may be included in the modular budget request.
Research Strategy: Applications should include the following:
The following modifications also apply:
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.
Applications are expected to include a software dissemination plan if support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested in the application. There is no prescribed single license for software produced. However, the software dissemination plan should address, as appropriate, the following goals:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
For this particular announcement, note the following:
Applications should seek to influence and/or change current practices by providing evidence for how the proposed intervention will enhance the successful progress and advancement of participants.
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?
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?
Specific to this FOA: Do the PDs/PIs have the time to commit sufficient effort to ensure the success of the research effort, given their other professional obligations?
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?
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?
Specific to this FOA: Does the application describe a robust scientific approach to test assumptions and hypotheses that provide an understanding of the factors that contribute to an effective intervention designed to increase and sustain the interest, motivation, and preparedness for careers in the biomedical research workforce of individuals from diverse backgrounds (e.g., individuals underrepresented in the biomedical research workforce)? Does the research include outcome measures beyond participant satisfaction, self-reporting of perceived skills gained, or self-reporting of effectiveness? Does the application describe a robust research plan that goes beyond an evaluation of a training or mentoring program? How likely is it that the proposed research will generate evidence that will lead to meaningful conclusions? Will the proposed project provide the scientific community with sound evidence of the immediate and long-term impact of intervention with respect to efficacy and sustainability?
If applicable, will the proposed studies inform the field about the duration, frequency, and intensity of intervention effects, and whether those effects can be enhanced by reinforcement sessions?
Is the intervention cost-effective, practical, realistic, scalable and sustainable in a broad range of settings or institutions?
If the proposed project will recruit participants and control/comparator groups, are the planned recruitment, retention, and follow-up activities adequate to ensure the intervention can be completed and assessed?
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?
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.
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).
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.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available 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.
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.
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.
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.htmlhttps://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.
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.
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)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Michael A. Sesma, Ph.D.
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
Sydella Blatch, Ph.D.
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
Stephanie Constant, Ph.D.
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
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.
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.