National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Reissue of PAR-16-276
May 12, 2020 - Notice of Correction to Application Types Allowed for PAR-20-053. See Notice NOT-CA-20-067.
April 9, 2020 - Notice of Special Interest (NOSI): Single-Cell Proteomics for Interrogating Premalignant and Early Malignant Lesions. See Notice NOT-CA-20-044.
March 10, 2020 - Reminder: FORMS-F Grant Application Forms & Instructions Must be Used for Due Dates On or After May 25, 2020- New Grant Application Instructions Now Available. See Notice NOT-OD-20-077.July 26, 2019- Changes to NIH Requirements Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-128
August 23, 2019- Clarifying Competing Application Instructions and Notice of Publication of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-137
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) encourages research projects that focus on innovative research in the isolation and characterization of extracellular vesicles (EVs) and their cargo for discovery of predictive biomarkers for risk assessment, detection, diagnosis and prognosis of early cancer. This FOA will promote rigor and reproducibility research in both the isolation of EVs as well as the computational analysis of the cargo carried in these vesicles.
November 12, 2019
Standard dates apply.
The first standard due date for this FOA is February 05, 2020
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on the listed date(s).
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.
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.
The purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to encourage innovative research into the rigor and reproducibility of isolation and characterization of extracellular vesicles (EVs) and their cargo for the discovery of predictive biomarkers for risk assessment, detection, diagnosis and prognosis of early cancer. This FOA will promote research in both the isolation of EVs as well as the computational analysis of the cargo carried in these vesicles.
This FOA will utilize the Research Project Grant (R01) mechanism and is suitable for projects where proof-of-principle of the proposed technology or methodology has already been established and supportive preliminary data are available.
Applicants may take advantage of the option to designate multiple Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs), each of whom would contribute unique expertise and scientific insights toward the successful completion of the proposed research.
EV-Derived Analytes Mirror Cancer Cells
The trafficking of biological analytes (e.g., proteins, metabolites, nucleotides) across the cell membrane is part of any normal cell homeostasis. In a vesicular transport mechanism, the analytes are transported across the cell membrane via EVs. In pathological states such as cancer, the circulating EVs-derived analytes may mirror the altered state (e.g., over- or under-expressed key proteins and microRNAs) of the cell of origin, and therefore, can be of substantial diagnostic value. Over the past decade, a number of studies have implicated EVs in major tumor-related pathways such as hypoxia-driven epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, cancer stemness, angiogenesis, malignant formation, metastasis, and drug resistance. However, the findings have been inconsistent and variable.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are membrane-enclosed vesicles that are secreted by all cells, circulated in the blood and are readily accessible in most body fluids. The cargo of these vesicles includes RNA, DNA, proteins, metabolites, and lipids that are reflective of the cell of origin making EVs appealing for biomarker development. EVs are categorized into exosomes, microvesicles, apoptotic bodies, and Golgi vesicles. Exosomes are formed when multivesicular endosome (MVE) fuse to the plasma membrane. Once secreted into the extracellular environment exosomes can function as mediators of intercellular signaling, can modulate the stroma and endothelial tissue, and can regulate inflammatory and immune responses. Cancer cells release more exosomes than normal cells and exosomes secreted from tumor cells can promote tumor progression, survival, invasion and angiogenesis. The analysis of exosomes and other EVs isolated from blood or other body fluids could provide insight into cancer cell biology and predictive biomarkers for early detection, progression, and metastasis.
Extracellular Vesicles for Cancer Detection
EVs, may have great potential for the development of non-invasive markers for early detection of various cancers due to their unique properties, including their stability in biological fluids and their potential to be efficiently isolated. Although work in several different laboratories centered on the analysis of EVs and their components isolated from normal and cancer cell lines, and isolation from biological fluids of cancer patients is ongoing, more research including case-control and prospective studies are needed to be conducted to develop new biomarkers for early detection, diagnosis, and prognosis. In addition, EVs, as well as the molecules contained in EVs, may have the potential to be multiplexed with other molecular markers or screening modalities (e.g., imaging) to develop integrated molecular-based computational tools for the early detection of cancer. Therefore, the development of biologically relevant sensitive biomarker-based assays that accurately detect cancer at an early stage will increase the effectiveness of intervention strategies.
EVs contain a diversity of membrane markers specific to the cells of origin on their outer surface, which can be used to distinguish cancer-derived EVs from EVs secreted by normal cells. EVs can also be isolated based on their size and density using ultracentrifugation, density gradient centrifugation, differential centrifugation, chromatography, affinity isolation, polymeric precipitation and microfluidic devices. Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages.
The isolation of cancer-specific EVs could provide a source of biomarkers that are free of contaminating non-cancer EVs and other circulating contaminants. Purified EVs contain a molecular signature of the cancer cell of origin and the computational analysis of the RNA, DNA, proteins, metabolites, and lipids in theses vesicles may increase the sensitivity of the biomarkers for early detection, progression and metastasis. Advances in Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) allow the analysis of RNA (microRNA, long non-coding RNA, and mRNA) and DNA (mutated and modified) in increasing smaller volumes. A comprehensive characterization of the EVs cargo could be used to identify the cancer cell of origin and the genetic or epigenetic alteration of the cell. Knowing this information would be useful for early detection and staging of cancer as well as for detecting metastasis. This knowledge could also be useful for monitoring progress and therapeutic intervention.
Lack of Robust and Reproducible Methods
One of the major challenges emerging in the field of EV utilization for clinical use is the lack of robust and reproducible methods for the isolation of a pure vesicular population. There is a lack of clear consensus for an optimal method of isolation of a pure EV population that is devoid of contamination with similar-sized vesicles of different origins. This is a major hurdle for the utilization of EVs and its components for clinical use, early detection, and screening of cancer. In addition to population heterogeneity, many proteins and other biomolecules may bind or associate nonspecifically to the EV surface and confound the analysis of EV composition. Current methods for isolating EVs, including a combination of differential centrifugation and ultracentrifugation, filtration, concentration, and immuno-capture using beads, need to account for these confounding effects.
Methods that are used for the analysis of the EV-derived analyte isolation, sequencing library preparation, genomic, proteomic and metabolic analysis are highly diverse. Well-considered experimental setups, inter-laboratory comparisons and highly detailed descriptions of experimental designs are needed to ensure robust and reproducible methods.
Through this initiative, it is expected that successful applicants will not only critically evaluate and refine the existing methodologies, but will also agree to share their own methodological details to improve utilization of EVs in clinical use.
Specific Research Objectives
This initiative is intended to support research to (1) develop methods to isolate EVs and to characterize the cargo contained within these vesicles, (2) develop sets of standards for evaluating cargo isolated from EVs, (3) develop computational tools or new algorithms to integrate the data on the extracellular vesicle cargo, (4) develop and test biomarkers and imaging methods for improved detection of early stages of cancer, and (5) predict progression from preneoplastic lesions and to monitor interventions.
The quality of EVs used to conduct research is critical to the ability to reproduce the results. It is, therefore, expected the applicants will propose study designs to routinely authenticate to ensure EV identity and validity for use in the proposed studies. Applicants should transparently report on what they have done to authenticate EV approach, so that consensus can emerge. Built on these premises, applicants are encouraged to submit applications that will not only standardize the approach for isolation of EVs, but will also analyze its cargo for use in early detection.
Research topics may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this FOA.
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The maximum project period is 5 years.
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.
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:
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.
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:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Restricted Travel Expenses Budget: Applicants must budget for travel and per diem expenses for an annual PD/PI meeting.
Research Strategy: A clear statement on how statistical power is defined in multiple tests and what sample size is required to achieve this power is required. Examples of power definition: (a) the probability to detect at least one of possible true non-zero effects; (b) the probability to detect all non-zero effects; and (c) true discovery rate, etc. Also, in case-control designs, clear descriptions of whether matching is involved and what confounders are adjusted for and why, are required.
Applicants should describe the general strengths and weaknesses of the prior research being cited by either the investigator or others as crucial to support the application. It is expected that this consideration of general strengths and weaknesses could include attention to the rigor of the previous experimental designsResource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
The following modifications also apply:
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.
Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
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.
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 requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year (excluding consortium F&A) must contact a Scientific/ Research Contact at least 6 weeks before submitting the application and follow the Policy on the Acceptance for Review of Unsolicited Applications that Request $500,000 or More in Direct Costs as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
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: To be considered highly meritorious, an application does not have to be highly innovative when proposing to demonstrate rigor and reproducibility in an established protocol.
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?
Specific for this FOA:Is the statistical power sample size required to achieve this power defined? Does the project convey the challenges and issues in relation to rigor and reproducibility and redress them in their project design? Has the project discussed the previous attempts made elsewhere to redress them in the current application?
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 for this FOA: Do the PD(s)/PI(s) and collaborators have technical knowledge of principles and practices in standards for tools, technology and reagents, e.g., external standards, internal standards, etc. for rigor and reproducibility?
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?
Specific for this FOA:Have the PD(s)/PI(s) and collaborators demonstrated creativity by proposing innovative study designs, fail-safe protocols, and other tools and processes for maintaining the rigor and reproducibility?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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 the Center for Scientific Review (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:
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.
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that 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.
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.
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.
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
Sudhir Srivastava, Ph.D., M.P.H
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Matthew Young, Ph.D.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.