EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Reissue of RFA-DA-18-004
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity
February 16, 2022 - Notice of NIDA Participation in NOT-MH-21-105, "Notice of Special Interest: Advancing Health Communication Research on HIV Prevention, Treatment and Cure". See Notice NOT-DA-21-079
October 28, 2021 - Reminder: FORMS-G Grant Application Forms & Instructions Must be Used for Due Dates On or After January 25, 2022 - New Grant Application Instructions Now Available. See Notice NOT-OD-22-018.
September 13, 2021 - Updates to the Non-Discrimination Legal Requirements for NIH Recipients. See Notice NOT-OD-21-181.
August 5, 2021 - New NIH "FORMS-G" Grant Application Forms and Instructions Coming for Due Dates on or after January 25, 2022. See Notice NOT-OD-21-169.
August 5, 2021 - Update: Notification of Upcoming Change in Federal-wide Unique Entity Identifier Requirements. See Notice NOT-OD-21-170
April 20, 2021 - Expanding Requirement for eRA Commons IDs to All Senior/Key Personnel. See Notice NOT-OD-21-109
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity.
PAR-20-221; DP1 NIH Director’s Pioneer Award (NDPA)
93.279
Avenir means future in French, and the Avenir Award Program for research on Substance Use Disorders (SUD) and HIV/AIDS looks towards the future by supporting early stage investigators (ESI) proposing highly innovative studies that address NIH HIV/AIDS Research Priorities https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-20-018.html. The Avenir Award Program will support creative individuals who wish to pursue innovative research at the nexus of SUD and HIV/AIDS. The purpose of this program is to support broad spectrum of approaches spanning both basic and clinical research that have the potential to benefit substance using populations with or at risk for HIV/AIDS by reducing HIV incidence, optimizing therapies for HIV and SUD, reducing the impact of comorbid conditions, and ultimately, eradicating HIV. Applications responding to this FOA must clearly describe the intersection of substance use disorders with HIV/AIDS.
30 days prior to the application due date
Only accepting applications for the AIDS Application Due Date(s) listed below
August 13, 2020, August 13, 2021, August 15, 2022 by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
November 2020, November 2021, November 2022
January 2021, January 2022, January 2023
April 2021, April 2022, April 2023
Not Applicable
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.
Avenir means future in French, and this award looks towards the future by supporting early stage investigators (ESI) proposing highly innovative studies at the nexus of Substance Use Disorders and HIV/AIDS. Applications responding to this FOA should clearly describe the nexus with SUD. This award is designed to support creative individuals who wish to pursue innovative research approaches that support NIH HIV/AIDS Research Priorities https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-20-018.html and have the potential to benefit substance using populations with or at risk for HIV/AIDS. The Avenir Award Program for research on the intersection of SUD and HIV/AIDS will support research approaches, both basic and clinical, focused on improving therapies for HIV, preventing HIV transmission, reducing the impact of comorbid conditions, and ultimately, eradicating HIV. Examples of studies of relevance to drug abuse include: studies using populations with significant numbers of people who use drugs (PWUD) or samples from drug using populations; studies using in vitro systems and/or animal models that test the effects of addictive substances on HIV pathogenesis, disease progression, or treatment; and studies to develop interventions or treatments that are tailored to people who use drugs. The award will support investigators in early stage of their careers who may lack the preliminary data required for an R01 grant, nonetheless propose high priority, high impact research, and show promise of being tomorrow's leaders in the field.
NIDA has supported highly innovative investigators, often in advanced career stages, proposing potentially transformative research through a companion award, the Avant-Garde Award Program for HIV/AIDS and Drug Use Research (DP1). The Avenir award is designed to complement the NIDA Avant-Garde award by focusing on early stage investigators. Avenir applicants may propose research in any area of high priority HIV/AIDS research that has the potential to open new areas of HIV/AIDS research and/or lead to new avenues for treatment and prevention of HIV/AIDS among substance users.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
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.
Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Application budgets are limited to $375,000 in Direct Costs each year for up to four years, plus applicable Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs to be determined at the time of award.
Awards are multi-year funded, with all funds being disbursed in the first year of the award. Awards will be up to $1,500,000 in direct costs (the equivalent of $375,000 in Direct Costs each year for four years) plus applicable Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs to be determined at the time of award.The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period. The maximum project period allowed is 4 years.
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
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
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
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.
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.
For the purpose of this FOA, multiple PD(s)/PI(s) are not allowed. The Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) is the only individual who can be listed on the SF424 form.
Applicants must meet the definition of an Early Stage Investigator (ESI) at the time of submission. An ESI is a new investigator (defined as a PD/PI who has not completed successfully for a significant NIH independent research award) who is within 10 years of completing his/her terminal research degree or is within 10 years of completing medical residency (or the equivalent). A complete list of NIH grants that do not disqualify a PD/PI as a new investigator can be found at: https://grants.nih.gov/policy/early-investigators/index.htm.
Frequently Asked Questions about the NIH Early Stage Investigator (ESI) Policy can be found at https://grants.nih.gov/policy/early-investigators/index.htm/.
An extension to the 10-year period may be granted under special circumstances (e.g., family care responsibilities, extended periods of clinical training, disability or illness, etc.). See NOT-OD-19-125 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-19-125.html) for instructions on applying for an ESI extension.
Applicants are responsible for reviewing and/or updating their degree information in their eRA Commons account in a timely fashion. Applicants should allow several weeks for an extension request to be processed. NOTE: If an applicant is not identified as an ESI in the eRA Commons, it may result in the application not being reviewed.
Applicants also must hold an independent research position at a domestic (U.S.) institution as of September 1 of the fiscal year of the competition (Federal Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30). For the purpose of this FOA, independent research position means a position that automatically confers eligibility, by the applicant’s institutional policy, for an investigator to apply for R01 grants, with an appropriate commitment of facilities to be used for the conduct of the proposed research. Investigators still in training or mentored status (postdoctoral fellows) may apply if, by the receipt date, they have a written commitment of an independent faculty position as of September 1 of the fiscal year of the competition.
Applicants may submit or have an R01 (or other equivalent) grant application pending concurrently with their Avenir Award application. If the applicant receives an R01 before the Avenir can be awarded, then the investigator is no longer eligible for an Avenir award. Please see section 3, below, for more information about limitations on overlapping applications.
Awardees are required to commit at 3 person months (25%) out of a 12 month calendar year each year to activities supported by the Avenir Award.
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.
Letter of Intent
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: NIDALetterofIntent@mail.nih.gov
Applicants are encouraged to send the letter of intent by email to the email address above but as an alternative the letter may also be sent to:
Office of Extramural Policy and Review
National Institute on Drug Abuse
DER/OEPR
3WFN 9th Floor, MSC 6021
301 North Stonestreet Ave
Bethesda, MD 20892
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.
Agency Routing Identifier: Enter N/A .
Type of Application: Must be New .
Proposed Project: Start date April 1st
Total Federal Funds Requested: Enter $1,500,000. Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds: Enter $1,500,000 (See note below). Only the four year-total $1.5 million
Total Non-Federal Funds: Enter $0.
Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds: Enter $1,500,000. (See note below.)
Estimated Program Income: Enter $0.
Note: The Budget Request is entered only in the fields for "Total Federal Funds Requested" and "Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds" as described above. Funds may be requested for personnel (including collaborators), supplies, equipment, sub-contracts, and other allowable costs. Only the four year-total $1.5 million -- should be entered in the fields for "Total Federal Funds Requested" and "Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds" Lines 15a and c. Applicable Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs will be determined at the time of award and should not be included in the budget request. A detailed budget is not requested and will not be accepted.
Cover Letter: Provide names and affiliations of significant collaborators for the Avenir Award project. Biosketches of collaborators are not allowed. Provision of names here is only to help exclude conflicts during reviewer assignment. Information regarding any collaborators may be included in the Essay.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Project Summary/Abstract: Attach an abstract describing the goals of the project and relevance to HIV/AIDS and substance abuse. Text only no figures, animations, or web links are allowed.
Project Narrative: In 2-3 sentences written in plain language describe how the proposed research can positively impact HIV/AIDS treatment or prevention among drug abusers.
Bibliography & References Cited: DO NOT USE. Reference citations are not required but may be included in the essay and are included in the page limit.
Facilities & Other Resources: Upload a brief statement (1-page maximum) of the facilities to be used for the conduct of the research.
Equipment: DO NOT USE.
Other Attachments: DO NOT USE.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Profile Project Director/Principal Investigator Field Attach Biographical Sketch: Attach the PD(s)/PI(s) biographical sketch using the sample format on the Biographical Sketch Format Page shown in the Application Guide, omitting Section A (Personal Statement) and Section D (Research Support). No biographical sketches of potential collaborators or other key personnel are to be submitted and will not be accepted.
Current and Pending Support: Attach a list of Current and Pending Support from all sources, including current year direct costs and percent effort devoted to each project.
Profile Senior Key Person 1: DO NOT USE. Submit information only for PD/PI. Information on collaborators or other key personnel is not required but may be included in the Essay.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) - Additional Senior/Key Person Profiles(s): DO NOT USE. Only the PD/PI may serve as senior/key personnel.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) - Additional Biographical Sketch(es): DO NOT USE. Only the PD/PI may submit a Biographical Sketch.
R&R Budget
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:
Specific Aims: Do not use.
Research Strategy: Upload Essay here.
Submit an essay that addresses: (1) the significance and potential impact of the project to expand understanding of the HIV infection, pathogenesis, and persistence in the context of substance use and misuse, and how the project would open up new avenues for treatment and prevention of HIV in PWUD; (2) what makes the approach(es) exceptionally innovative and what are the plans to mitigate risks and challenges; and (3) the qualifications of the PI for this award along with a clear description of the career trajectory leading up to the line of research proposed herein and the long-term goals. The description of the scientific plan should be written with a level of detail appropriate for reviewers who are broadly knowledgeable in HIV and SUD research, and may or may not be directly involved in the proposed area of research. Applicants are discouraged from structuring the essay in the format typically required for research grant applications. Instead, the essay should succinctly describe the research idea and its ingenuity, the impact of the proposed research on improving outcomes for HIV and HIV-related comorbidities in PWUD, and PI’s qualifications as they fit the proposed line of research. Preliminary data are allowed but not required. The essay should include the following sections within the page limit, in the following order, with the headings shown:
Project Description: Describe the scientific problem that you propose to address, its importance, and how solving this problem would have a major impact on the HIV/AIDS in PWUD. Why is the planned research uniquely suited to the Avenir Award program, rather than a traditional grant mechanism? How is this project distinct from other research that may be supported in your laboratory?
Innovativeness: The essay should describe the investigator's view of the major challenges in the field, to which he/she can make seminal contributions. State clearly and concisely what makes the project innovative and transformative. If the approaches entail a high degree of risk, what will you do if these approaches are not successful?
Investigator Qualifications: Provide evidence to support innovation and creativity in your research. For example, which personal qualities and experiences demonstrate your inclination to challenge paradigms and take intellectual risks, develop unique collaborations, integrate diverse sources of information, or develop novel approaches when new challenges or opportunities arise?
Note: Information on collaborations may be included in the essay. Bibliographic citations are not required but if included must fit within the page limit. Figures and illustrations may be included but must also fit within the page limit. Do not include links to websites to provide further information.
Letters of Support: Provide letters of support from significant collaborators for the Avenir Award project.
The following modifications also apply:
Appendix materials are not allowed
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.
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.
Letters of Reference:
Letters of reference are an important component of the application. Applicants must arrange to have three (and no more than three) letters of reference submitted on their behalf. Applications that are missing letters of reference will be considered incomplete and will not be reviewed. Late letters will not be accepted. Applicants are responsible for monitoring the submission of their letters to ensure that three letters have been submitted prior to the submission deadline. Applicants are encouraged to check the status of their letters in their Commons accounts.
Letters may be submitted beginning July 13th and must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. (local time of applicant organization), August 13th for 2020 and 2021 submissions. Letters must be received by August 15th for 2022 submissions.
To submit a letter of reference, the referee will need the following information:
Letters of reference are confidential. Applicants will not have access to the letters. Email confirmations will be sent to both the applicant and the referee. The confirmation sent to the applicant will include the referee’s name and the date and time the letter was submitted. The confirmation sent to the referee will include the referee and applicant’s names, a confirmation number, and the date and time the letter was submitted.
Note: Since email can be unreliable, it is the applicant’s responsibility to check the status of his/her letters of reference periodically in the Commons.
Instructions for Referees:
Letters may be submitted to the Commons at (https://public.era.nih.gov/commons/public/reference/submitReferenceLetter.do?mode=new) beginning beginning July 13th and must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. (local time of applicant organization), August 13th for 2020 and 2021 submissions. Letters must be received by August 15th for 2022 submissions.Late letters will not be accepted and applications with fewer than three letters will not be reviewed. Letters must be submitted electronically paper copies will not be accepted.
The applicant’s name should be placed at the top of the letter. Although signatures are not required, the letter must include a signature block with the referee’s full name, title, institution, and contact information.
In two pages or less, describe the applicant’s qualities that support the applicant’s claim to scientific innovativeness and creativity. When possible, give specific examples that illustrate these qualities. Address the likelihood that the applicant will conduct groundbreaking research in the proposed research area.
Note: The letter submission page can be accessed without signing into the Commons, and referees do not need to be registered in the Commons. Referees must provide the applicant’s Commons User Name (User ID) and the other information below:
REFEREE INFORMATION (the individual providing the letter of reference):
APPLICANT INFORMATION (applicants must send this information to their referees):
Email confirmations will be sent to both the applicant and the referee following submission of the letter. The email confirmation will include a Confirmation Number that will be required only when submitting a revised or changed/corrected letter. Please print the confirmation email for your records.
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:
The Avenir Award (DP2) grant supports innovative research that has the potential to produce a major impact on HIV/AIDS biomedical or behavioral research. A DP2 grant application does not have extensive background material, and the essay focuses on the goals of the Avenir Award program.
Preliminary data are not required but may be included. Accordingly, reviewers, in both review phases, will emphasize the following:
Applications that are complete will be reviewed in two phases by a multidisciplinary scientific review group of outside experts convened by The National Institute on Drug Abuse in accordance with NIH peer review procedures (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/peer/), using the stated review criteria . Applications will initially be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by outside reviewers. Overall impact scores and standard criterion scores will not be given. Subsequently, an editorial-style panel will consider the applications and the comments of the initial reviewers to select the most meritorious applications according to the review criteria stated in this FOA. Candidates selected by the panel will be invited to the Washington, D.C. area in November/December for interviews by a multidisciplinary scientific review group of outside experts. Final selection of awardees will be made by the Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, based on the outcome of the peer review, , concurrence of National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, and programmatic considerations. Final selections will be announced publicly.
Applications that are not selected for interview phase of review will be designated as Not Discussed and will not receive a numerical impact score. Applications selected for the second phase of review (interview) will receive summary statements with brief reviewer comments and a numerical impact score. Criterion scores will not be provided for any application.
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.
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?
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 milestones and 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
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 powered to answer the research question(s), 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?
If multi-sites/centers, 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?
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 thecategories 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.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
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.
Not Applicable
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 NIDA , 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.
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 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 laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex. This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/provider-obligations/index.html and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html.
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.
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.
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.
Not Applicable
Progress reports for multi-year funded awards are due annually on or before the anniversary of the budget/project period start date of award. The reporting period for multi-year funded award progress report is the calendar year preceding the anniversary date of the award. Information on the content of the progress report and instructions on how to submit the report using the RPPR are posted at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/myf.htm
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 agreementsare 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 threatensubmission 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: 301-637-3015
Grants.gov Customer Support(Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email:support@grants.gov
Redonna Chandler, Ph.D.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-402-1919
Email: redonna.chandler@nida.nih.gov
Vasundhara Varthakavi, DVM, PhD
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-443-2146
Email: vasundhara.varthakavi@nih.gov
Dharmendar Rathore, PhD
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-402-6965
Email: dharmendar.rathore@nih.gov
Pam Fleming
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-480-1159
Email: pfleming@mail.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.