Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
and Human Services (HHS)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
P50 Specialized Center
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity
The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) invites applications for Clinical Research Center Grants designed to advance the diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and amelioration of human communication disorders. For this announcement, Clinical Research is defined as research involving individuals with communication disorders or data/tissues from individuals with a communication disorder. Examples of such research include but are not limited to, studies of the prevention, pathogenesis, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, management or epidemiology of a disease or disorder of hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech, or language.
Applications may propose a low risk clinical trial but are not required to (optional).
30 days prior to the application due date.
Dates in bold and italics reflect changes per NOT-DC-24-036
| Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
| February 08, 2022 | February 08, 2022 | Not Applicable | July 2022 | October 2022 | December 2022 |
| June 07, 2022 | June 07, 2022 | Not Applicable | November 2022 | January 2023 | April 2023 |
| October 06, 2022 | October 06, 2022 | Not Applicable | March 2023 | May 2023 | July 2023 |
| February 07, 2023 | February 07, 2023 | Not Applicable | July 2023 | October 2023 | December 2023 |
| June 06, 2023 | June 06, 2023 | Not Applicable | November 2023 | January 2024 | April 2024 |
| October 06, 2023 | October 06, 2023 | Not Applicable | March 2024 | May 2024 | July 2024 |
| February 06, 2024 | February 06, 2024 | Not Applicable | July 2024 | October 2024 | December 2024 |
| June 06, 2024 | June 06, 2024 | Not Applicable | November 2024 | January 2025 | April 2025 |
| October 09, 2024 | October 09, 2024 | Not Applicable | March 2025 | May 2025 | July 2025 |
| February 06, 2025 | February 06, 2025 | Not Applicable | July 2025 | October 2025 | December 2025 |
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.
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
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 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invites new or competing applications for Clinical Research Center Grants (P50). This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) targets applicant institutions with demonstrated ability to conduct clinical research in human communication disorders. Applications are encouraged in the seven scientific programs of the NIDCD: hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech and language. The Clinical Research Center Grant (P50) supports a research program in which an interdisciplinary team of investigators works in a clearly defined central theme of mutual scientific interest. This mechanism facilitates economy of effort, space, and equipment, and accelerates the acquisition of knowledge by stimulating cooperation among clinical investigators whose projects are directed toward a common goal. For this announcement, Clinical Research is defined as research involving individuals with communication disorders or data/tissues from individuals with a communication disorder. Examples include (but are not limited to) studies of prevention, pathogenesis, pathophysiology, detection, diagnoses or epidemiology of a disease or disorder of hearing, balance, smell, taste, voice, speech, or language.
A Center must be an identifiable organizational unit with an administrative structure and clear lines of authority in order to facilitate coordination among Center personnel and to assure maximum accountability and efficiency in Center operations.
Each proposed Center must have an external advisory committee. The advisory committee will provide oversight of scientific progress of the Center and guide the research plan when appropriate.
The current NIDCD strategic plan has identified 4 research priority areas: understanding normal systems of human communication, understanding diseases and disorders of human communication, improving diagnosis, treatment and prevention of human communication disorders and improving health outcomes of human communication https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/about/strategic-plan/2017-2021-nidcd-strategic-plan. Investigators are encouraged to research topics in these priority areas and other areas of clinical research.
The NIDCD P50 must meet 4 essential criteria listed below to be supported:
1. The research to be conducted must be clinical as defined above.
2. The P50 must have a well-defined central unifying theme consisting of three or more research projects. The P50 may include 1 or more supporting cores as appropriate. Cores are not required or essential criteria, however, the core may be administrative or scientific. If an administrative core is proposed, the lead of the Administrative Core is also the Director of the Center who is responsible for the organization and overall operation of the Center.
3. Each research project must be unambiguously related to the central unifying theme. Synergistic and substantial interactions among the projects should be evident.
4. The overall P50 must provide multidisciplinary approaches to the central theme, defined as having research projects representing different disciplines, approaches and expertise.
Studies with normal human subjects (e.g., those without a communication disorder) may be included in the research only when data from normal controls are essential for interpretation of the results.
Non-human research will be supported on rare occasions. Non-human research will generally be limited to one project and only if translational or serves as a platform for translational research. Only one project may be exclusively non-human to be considered for funding.
Core support can be requested as part of a P50 application to provide essential resources required by multiple projects, for example, patient management or speech processing technical support etc. A core must serve at least two or more projects. Requests must be carefully justified and not be used to acquire additional support that duplicates existing resources already at the institution. Research activity is to be conducted in the research projects and is not allowed in the cores; the cores are to serve as infrastructure/support.
The NIH defines a clinical trial as a research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioral outcomes. See (https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/definition.htm).
This FOA supports only low risk clinical trials.
For the purposes of this FOA, low risk clinical trials must not require FDA oversight, are not intended to formally establish efficacy and have low risks to potentially cause physical or psychological harm.
For the purposes of this FOA, high risk clinical trials are those that require FDA oversight or are intended to formally establish efficacy (NIH-defined Phase III clinical trial) or where the risks to participants are higher than encountered in routine medical or behavioral care or procedures (potential to cause physical or psychological harm). Applicants considering to conduct high risk clinical trial must use the NIDCD Clinical Trial FOA PAR-21-064 and contact the NIDCD medical officers.
All P50 applicants, whether conducting clinical trials or not, are encouraged to contact the P50 Coordinator or the relevant scientific program officer found at the end of this FOA. Applicants are urged to do so as early in the process of preparing an application as possible especially when considering including a clinical trial to determine the level of risk. An allowable proposed low risk clinical trial in the P50:
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.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
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.
Budgets for new applications are limited to $1,500,000.00/per year direct costs (DC), exclusive of consortium facilities and administrative costs. Renewal (type 2) grant applications may request budgets (DC) that are not greater than 10% above the budget of the last year of the existing award or $2,000,000.00 whichever is less; this is also exclusive of consortium, facilities and administrative costs. Salary levels in all years are limited to the NIH maximum rate. Revision applications requesting an additional research component to an existing P50 may not exceed the duration of the parent award or the budgetary caps as described above. Future year amounts will depend on annual appropriations.
The maximum project period is 5 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
Local Governments
Federal 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.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Number of Applications
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, per 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
Renewal applications:
Renewals must be submitted only after a minimum of 4 years of the project have been completed. Applications submitted before 4 years of funding have been completed will be withdrawn and not reviewed.
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST or an institutional system-to-system solution. A button to apply using ASSIST is available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise and where instructions in the Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
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:
Lana Shekim, Ph.D.
Telephone: 301-496-5061
Fax: 301-402-0390
Email: [email protected]
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
| Component | Component Type for Submission | Page Limit | Required/Optional | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | Overall | 12 | Required | 1 | 1 |
| Admin Core | Admin Core | 6 | Optional | 0 | 1 |
| Core | Core | 12 | Optional | 0 | 2 |
| Project | Project | 12 | Required | 3 | 6 |
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, and should be used for preparing a multi-component application.
Revision applications must include an Overall component and the components that are affected by the revision. Therefore, the component requirements listed below may not apply to the revision application.
The application should consist of the following components:
Advisory Committee
For new applications and resubmission of a new application, in order not to restrict the pool of available scientific peer reviewers, you should not invite or name in your application potential members of your Advisory Committee.
When preparing your application, use Component Type Overall .
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete entire form.
Note: Human Embryonic Stem Cell lines from other components should be repeated in cell line table in Overall component.
Follow standard instructions.
Enter primary site only.
A summary of Project/Performance Sites in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Include only the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) and any multi-PDs/PIs (if applicable to this FOA) for the entire application.
A summary of Senior/Key Persons followed by their Biographical Sketches in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons will be generated upon submission.
The only budget information included in the Overall component is the Estimated Project Funding section of the SF424 (R&R) Cover.
A budget summary in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from detailed budget data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing (DMS) Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment of the Overall Component in FORMS-H and subsequent application forms packages. For due dates on or before January 24, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan GDS) will continue to be attached in the Resource Sharing Plan attachment in FORMS-G application forms packages.
All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by NIH) that results in the generation of scientific data are required to comply with the instructions for the Data Management and Sharing Plan. All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, must address a Data Management and Sharing Plan. The Data Management and Sharing (DMS) Plan must be provided in the Overall component.
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is required in the Overall component.
Specific Aims: Specific Aims are required. Provide an overview of the entire research program and describe the defined central theme and goals of the Clinical Research Center (P50). Provide the rationale for the proposed research program. Include potential impact, any areas of special interest, and any research ideas, disease entities, and target populations to be studied. Explain the research plan for achieving the objective(s) of the overall research program and how each research project and core relates to that overall plan.
Research Strategy: Explain how this Clinical Research Center Grant (P50) application supports an investigator-initiated research program in which a multidisciplinary team of investigators works in a clearly defined central theme of mutual scientific interest. Describe how this effort facilitates economy of effort, space, and equipment, and accelerates the acquisition of knowledge by stimulating cooperation among clinical investigators whose projects are directed toward a common goal. Describe how this overall Research Center will provide a whole that will have an impact beyond simply the sum of its parts. Describe how the research focuses on individuals with communication disorders or data/tissues from individuals with a communication disorder. Indicate any prior collaborative arrangements between investigators in the group; emphasizing the events that led to the current application; predict the anticipated advantages that would be gained by including the research in the proposed program; describe the overall theme of the Center and how research subprojects are related to the theme; and describe the multidisciplinary nature of the proposed research.
Letters of Support: Include any letters of support for the proposed Center by appropriate institutional officials of each performance site. These letters should include commitments of space and other resources required by the Center. A letter of agreement from existing resources (such as the CTSA PD(s)/PI(s)) should be included here if collaborative linkages are being developed between the Center and the existing resources.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
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.
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, there must be at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record within the application. The study record(s) must be included in the component(s) where the work is being done, unless the same study spans multiple components. To avoid the creation of duplicate study records, a single study record with sufficient information for all involved components must be included in the Overall component when the same study spans multiple components.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
When preparing your application, use Component Type Administrative Core.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete only the following fields:
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
.
Specific Aims: Describe how the Administrative Core administration will coordinate and manage activities across the components of the Research Center.
Research Strategy: Describe the organizational framework for the management, direction and coordination of the Center to ensure that all proposed components and related activities will function in an optimal and synergistic manner. Include information on how this core will facilitate administration of the budget. This core should be described in sufficient detail to assure that all proposed components and related activities will function optimally. In addition, day-to-day operations involving procurement, finances, personnel, planning, and budgeting should be detailed in the description of this core.
Describe how the Administrative Core will enhance the overall research of the Center. The PD/PI provides scientific and administrative leadership for the Center, so the PD/PI must have a demonstrated ability to coordinate, integrate, and provide guidance in establishing multi-faceted research programs. Describe the administrative framework to manage the Research Center and each core, including the roles of the Research Center/Administrative Core Director and Research Projects and Scientific Core Directors, the lines of authority and relationship to appropriate institutional officials, how access and utilization of services will be prioritized, how potential disputes will be resolved, and how periodic evaluations will be used to improve the services. Describe how the proposed Administrative Core will foster close interactions among the various component Directors and other appropriate institutional administrative personnel.
The Advisory Committee should be actively involved in the evaluation and planning process of the Center. The Advisory Committee should meet formally at least annually to assist the Center Directors in evaluating the scientific progress and optimizing strategies to meet its overall research goals over the course of the grant award.
Letters of Support: Provide letters of support from outside consultants as needed. For new applications and resubmission of a new application, do not include letters for External Advisory Committee members as they will be named after an award is made. If these documents are included in the Overall component, please state so.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:
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.
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix.Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a 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.
Scientific Core (Optional)
When preparing your application, use Component Type Scientific Core.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
SF424 (R&R) Cover (Scientific Core)
Complete only the following fields:
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Scientific Core)
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Research & Related Other Project Information (Scientific Core)
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Scientific Core)
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Scientific Core)
In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of Other with Category of Project Lead and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field.
In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.
Budget (Scientific Core)
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
PHS 398 Research Plan (Scientific Core)
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
Specific Aims: Specific aims are required. Concisely describe how this Scientific Core will provide services to the various components in the Clinical Research Center. Describe how the scientific core will increase effectiveness by sharing expertise or centralizing labor-intensive tasks, how it will encourage and facilitate collaborative work, or promote public health advances. Research activity is to be conducted in the research projects and not in the cores; the cores are to serve as infastructure/support.
Research Strategy: Describe the services and resources to be provided to investigators. The description should include a discussion of the core's contributions to the research objectives of the Center. Relevant aspects of cost effectiveness, timesaving, and increased efficiency attributable to the existence of the cores should also be addressed. A core component should support two or more of the Center’s scientific research components.
Describe how the Scientific Core facilities or services will enhance research activities of the Clinical Research Center using this core, and add benefits to the research accomplishments; include the required significance, innovation and approach. Include how the Scientific Core will provide increased or innovative capabilities; facilitate increased productivity or effectiveness through sharing expertise or centralizing labor-intensive tasks; and/or foster collaborative or new research directions or attracting new investigators into an area. Describe each proposed technique or service in the Scientific Core, and its current status of staffing, space and equipment, in enough detail to allow a comprehensive evaluation. Describe briefly existing methodologies already in use at the institution; describe in more detail methodologies new to the institution with strategies for their successful implementation. Include any developmental methods for research or training, if proposed. If applicable, include sections on quality control. The ability to articulate user benefit is a critical factor in review. Include plans for administration, organization and proposed management of the individual Scientific Core.
Include plans to implement core services, to prioritize investigator use among projects competing for core use, and to resolve potential disputes. If the core is used to train investigators in special techniques, describe the nature and extent of this training and the qualifications of core personnel to provide and oversee this training.
Discuss the potential for budgetary overlap, whether minimal or extensive, between the Research Projects and the Scientific Core, including personnel effort as well as other categories. If appropriate, provide a strategy for reimbursement of core services. Describe the investigator and his/her established expertise relevant to the support or service to be provided.
Letters of Support: Provide letters of support from outside consultants as needed. If these documents are included in the Overall component, please state so.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
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.
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix.Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.
PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Scientific Core)
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a 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.
Research Project
When preparing your application, use Component Type Research Project.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
SF424 (R&R) Cover (Research Project)
Complete only the following fields:
Applicant Information
Type of Applicant (optional)
Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Research Project)
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Research & Related Other Project Information (Research Project)
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Complete a project narrative for the Research Project.
Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Research Project)
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Research Project)
In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of Other with Category of Project Lead and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field.
In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.
Budget (Research Project)
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
PHS 398 Research Plan (Research Project)
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
Specific Aims: The specific aims should provide a clear description of the major goals and objectives of the project and how it integrates with the other research components in relation to the overall Center program’s central theme. The hypotheses to be tested should be focused and fully detailed.
Research Strategy: The design and procedure should describe the strategies proposed to accomplish the specific aims and the innovative aspects of the approach should be highlighted. A description of the resources and working arrangements required to implement and conduct the proposed research should be fully elaborated with particular attention to a description of necessary resources, subjects, clinical populations, tissue resources, biological models, existing data sets, etc. in the proposed studies. The application should describe the project's Significance, Approach, and Innovation in sufficient detail for evaluation by reviewers.
Renewal applications:
Renewals must be submitted only after a minimum of 4 years of the project have been completed. Applications submitted before 4 years of funding have been completed will be withdrawn and not reviewed.
Letters of Support: Provide letters of support from outside consultants as needed. If these documents are included in the Overall component, please state so.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix.Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.
PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Research Project )
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record. If your Human Subjects proposed trial requires FDA oversight, or has a higher risk to potentially cause physical or psychological harm follow the High Risk-specific instructions in the Study Record below.
Determination of Low or High level of risk for the purposes of this FOA:
When conducting a clinical trial, the principal investigator must determine the level of risk and provide the required information. Only low risk clinical trials are allowed in the P50 application. Determination of the level of risk is defined in Section I.
This FOA (PAR-21-064) allows for a dedicated clinical trial application.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed with the following additional instructions:
Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics
2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan
Applications in response to this FOA are strongly encouraged to propose innovative and proactive recruitment strategies for involving underrepresented minority participants, as applicable and justified by the scientific goals. In addition to stating the demographic breakdown of the geographic area in which the science will be conducted to determine inclusion enrollment by race and ethnicity, a recruitment plan focused specifically on engaging underrepresented minority populations should be included. The following racial and ethnic groups have been shown to be underrepresented in biomedical research: Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders. NIDCD staff will review plans prior to award and will monitor these recruitment efforts closely.
2.7 Study Timeline
If an application proposes a clinical trial, it must include basic elements (see specific guidance below) of the study timeline and must also include a Milestones Plan, in addition to following the instructions in the Application Guide.
Milestones Plan
Applications must include a series of milestones for completion of the clinical trial and provide contingency plans should there be delays in attaining them. The milestones will undergo peer review and will be incorporated into the terms of award. Applicants are required to provide detailed project performance and timeline objectives. This plan must include a timeline for the following general milestones, as applicable:
Low Risk Clinical Trial Proposed Specific Instructions:
Section 3 - Protection and Monitoring Plans
Include the following additional information:
3.1 Protection of Human Subjects
3.1.1.b Study Procedures, Materials, and Potential Risks:
For risks identified from all sources and where feasible note the expected frequency, severity, and duration of the risk(s).
3.1.3 Potential Benefits of the Proposed Research to Research Participants and Others:
A discussion of studies that led to the proposed clinical trial and information or data from preliminary studies which address the need for and the feasibility of the trial as well as evidence of the safety and potential efficacy for each proposed intervention and dose selected.
3.5 Overall Structure of Study Team
Multisite clinical trials should describe the following, if applicable:
The organizational structure including details of the operations of the Study Chair, Clinical Coordinating Center, Data Coordinating Center, and Clinical Centers. The Clinical or Operational Coordinating Center and the Data Coordinating Center may be the same institution/organization in some circumstances.
Central resource centers such as a central laboratory, pharmacy or radiographic center.
Section 4 - Protocol Synopsis
4.1 Brief Summary
For all Clinical Trials include the following additional information:
In addition to the Application Guide instructions, this section must also include:
A clear definition of the protocol hypothesis; identify each study group(s)/arm(s) including dose/duration of intervention for each, total number of participants and number of participants in each group/arm, and stratification planned (if applicable).
Justification and support for selection of primary endpoint(s) as the most appropriate to inform future studies (clinical relevance, validity, and reliability of the measurement).
For surveys and questionnaires, note for what populations the instrument was previously validated and specifically if the instrument was previously validated for the target study population.
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.
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) using ASSIST or other electronic submission systems. 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.
For information on how your application will be automatically assembled for review and funding consideration after submission go to: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/files/Electronic_Multi-project_Application_Image_Assembly.pdf.
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) and component Project Leads must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential fieldof 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.
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 (SAM). 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.
Clinical trials must be registered with ClinicalTrials.gov within 21 days of enrollment of the first participant.
Prior Consultation with NIDCD Staff
If planning to conduct clinical trials within the P50, consultation with relevant NIDCD staff at least 10 weeks prior to the application due date is strongly encouraged including new and resubmission applications. (For example, for a receipt date in June, the PD/PI should contact IC staff no later than the end of March.) If requested, IC staff will consider whether the proposed clinical trial meets the goals and mission of the Institute, whether it addresses one or more high priority research areas, and whether it is appropriate to conduct as an investigator initiated clinical trial. Scientific merit will be determined during peer review using the review criteria indicated in this FOA. During the consultation phase, if the proposed trial does not meet the IC's programmatic needs, applicants will be strongly encouraged to consider other funding.
For clinical trials, an initial resource is information found a thttps://www.nidcd.nih.gov/clinical-studies/concept-proposal-nidcd-clinical-trials The NIDCD Clinical Trials Program Medical Officer can work with applicants to determine the risk level of the proposed trial, appropriate funding mechanism and delineate documentation that will be needed at the time of application submission. Written questions or requests for telephone consultation may be submitted to either Trinh Ly, MD ([email protected]) or Mary Purucker, MD PhD ([email protected] ).
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS) as part of the Resource Sharing Plan will not be evaluated at time of review.
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.
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.
Significance
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?
Investigator(s)
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?
Innovation
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?
Approach
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable:
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately 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?
Environment
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?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Scientific Achievement and Leadership
Does the application provide convincing evidence that the Center, if funded, will become a leader/resource in clinical research (hearing, balance, taste, smell, voice, speech and language)? What are the benefit(s) of combining the multi-components (research projects/cores) to form a Center? How cohesive are the projects of the Center, with respect to their interrelationship and coordination?
Evaluate the past accomplishments of the Center and/or the demonstrated ability of the projects and core personnel in conducting similar programs? Is there evidence of established leadership in scientific research and demonstrated capabilities in program administration?
Are internal or external advisory committees utilized to assist in making scientific/administrative decisions and evaluating progress and direction? How does the applicant demonstrate they will facilitate the interaction of participating investigators and assure a cohesive program (sharing and evaluation of results, new ideas)? What are the strengths and weaknesses?
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)?
Protections for Human Subjects
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.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan
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.
Vertebrate Animals
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.
Biohazards
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.
Resubmissions
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.
Renewals
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Revisions
For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Not Applicable
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures 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).
Resource Sharing Plans
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).
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources:
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.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Scored Review Criteria - Individual Research Projects
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.
Significance
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?
Is the project clearly related to the central unifying theme? To what extent are there synergy and substantial interaction between this project and all the other components?
How will the project contribute to the overall success of the Clinical Research Center?
In addition, for applications proposing 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 in the future 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?
Investigator(s)
Are the Project Lead, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)?
If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
Is the level of effort proposed for the Project Lead and other key personnel adequate?
Are the roles of the Project Lead and other collaborators and other administrative, technical and scientific responsibilities clearly delineated?
In addition, for applications proposing 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?
Innovation
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 proposing 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?
Approach
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have 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? Have the investigators ensured that the scientific method is robust and unbiased with respect to experimental design, methodology, analysis, interpretation and reporting of results and is there full transparency in reporting experimental details so that others may reproduce and extend the findings? Are communication plans, the process for making decisions on scientific direction and procedures for resolving conflicts clearly presented?
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?
In addition, for applications proposing clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately 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?
Environment
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 proposing 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?
Additional Review Criteria - Individual Research Projects
Study Timeline
Specific to applications proposing 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)?
Study Milestones
Are appropriate milestones clearly defined for the aims associated?
Protections for Human Subjects
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.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan
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.
Vertebrate Animals
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.
Biohazards
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.
Resubmissions
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.
Renewals
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Revisions
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.
Additional Review Considerations-Individual Research Projects
As applicable for the individual 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.
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures 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).
Resource Sharing Plans
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 .
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources
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.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Additional Review Criteria - Cores
Research activity is to be conducted in the research projects and is not allowed in the cores; the cores are to serve as infastructure/support. As applicable for the core proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Additional Review Criteria - Administrative Core
Is the proposed Administrative Core clearly described along with short- and long-term goals and metrics that will be used to assess progress? Is the proposed structure well described? Are the roles of the PD(s)/PI(s) and any other committees clear? Are there plans for allocating and prioritizing fiscal and other resources and ensuring good communication across all Center components?
Are the organizational structure and other plans for managing the Center's activities for prioritization of competing needs appropriate and clear? Is the Management Plan for fiscal accountability and communications between organizational components appropriate? Are the approaches, criteria and plans to measure, monitor, track and evaluate the progress and performance of all project activities thoroughly described and adequate to assess progress/performance?
Additional Review Criteria - Scientific Core(s)
Does the application adequately describe the scientific rationale and process used to select the proposed scientific core, as well as plans and procedures to monitor and assess progress? If shared core facilities are proposed, do they support at least two or more projects of the proposed research activities?
Are plans for prioritizing the use of shared facilities, for allocating availability to proposed research projects, and for ensuring they are used to the fullest extent, including access by non-Research Center investigators and institutions, feasible and clear? Are the qualifications, experience and commitment of key personnel for running the core facilities/activities appropriate? Is there documented need for the proposed scientific cores in the context of existing facilities in the applicant institution and region?
Protections for Human Subjects
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.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan
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.
Vertebrate Animals
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.
Biohazards
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.
Resubmissions
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 Core.
Renewals
Renewals must be submitted only after a minimum of 4 years of the project have been completed. Applications submitted before 4 years of funding have been completed will be withdrawn and not reviewed. For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Revisions
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.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Not Applicable
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures 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).
Resource Sharing Plans
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 .
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources
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.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 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 will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD). Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in theNIH 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 recipient's business official.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient 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: Generaland Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Recipients, and Activities, including of note, but not limited to:
If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
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 and 2 CFR Part 200.206 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
Not applicable
Data Management and Sharing
Note: The NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing is effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023.
Consistent with the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. NIH FOAs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 45 CFR Part 75.301 and 2 CFR Part 200.301.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All recipients 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 the threshold. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.
In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113and 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 and 2 CFR Part 200, 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 75and 2 CFR Part 200 Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
Holly L. Storkel, Ph.D.
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
Telephone: 301-496-5061
Email: [email protected]
Melissa Stick, Ph.D., MPH
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorder
Telephone: 301-496-8683
Email: [email protected]
Samantha Tempchin
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
Telephone: 301-435-1404
Email: [email protected]
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 and 2 CFR Part 200.