EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
This Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) encourages cooperative agreement applications for investigator-initiated, multi-site, clinical trials (Phase III and beyond) to study the effects of natural products (i.e. botanicals, probiotics, and products marketed as dietary supplements) in NCCIH designated areas of high research priority. For this NOFO, natural products include promising nutritional regimens that standardize the amount of a specific naturally occurring nutritional compound (e.g., omega-3 fatty acids, anthocyanidins, or polyphenols) and have compelling preliminary evidence. Applicants should describe plans for a Clinical Coordinating Center to develop and implement the proposed multi-site clinical trial. The objective of the Clinical Coordinating Center application is to provide the scientific rationale and a comprehensive scientific and operational plan for the clinical trial. Clinical Coordinating Center applications are expected to describe plans for project management, participant recruitment and retention strategies, performance milestones, scientific conduct, and dissemination of results. Clinical Coordinating Center applications submitted under this NOFO will utilize a two-phase, milestone-driven, cooperative agreement (UG3/UH3) funding mechanism.
In addition, an accompanying Data Coordinating Center application, submitted under PAR-24-125, proposing a data analysis and data management plan for the clinical project is required. Both a Clinical Coordinating Center application and a corresponding Data Coordinating Center (DCC) application need to be submitted simultaneously for consideration by NCCIH. For additional information about the mission, strategic vision, and research priorities of the NCCIH, applicants are encouraged to consult the NCCIH website: (https://nccih.nih.gov/about/plans).
Applicants are encouraged to contact the appropriate the Scientific/Research contact for the area of science for which they are planning to develop an application prior to submitting to this NOFO.
This NOFO requires a Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP), which will be assessed as part of the scientific and technical peer review evaluation. Applications that fail to include a PEDP will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to read the NOFO instructions carefully and view the available PEDP guidance material.
Not applicable
Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
March 04, 2024 | March 04, 2024 | March 13, 2024 | July 2024 | October 2024 | December 2024 |
June 21, 2024 | June 21, 2024 | July 15, 2024 | November 2024 | January 2025 | April 2025 |
February 20, 2025 | February 20, 2025 | March 10, 2025 | July 2025 | October 2025 | December 2025 |
June 23, 2025 | June 23, 2025 | July 17, 2025 | November 2025 | January 2026 | April 2026 |
February 23, 2026 | February 23, 2026 | March 17, 2026 | July 2026 | October 2026 | December 2026 |
June 22, 2026 | June 22, 2026 | July 14, 2026 | November 2026 | January 2027 | April 2027 |
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
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 instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) 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.
Background
The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) is committed to the rigorous investigation of promising complementary and integrative health approaches with nutritional therapeutic inputs (often called natural products). Promising natural products (i.e. botanicals, probiotics, and products marketed as dietary supplements) have compelling preclinical or preliminary clinical evidence for potential health benefit. For this notice of funding opportunity (NOFO), natural products include promising nutritional regimens that standardize the amount of a specific naturally occurring nutritional compound (e.g., omega-3 fatty acids, anthocyanidins, or polyphenols) and have compelling preliminary evidence suggesting potential benefit in treating a condition, disorder or disease.
Clinical trials of natural products are maximally informative if they incorporate well-formulated hypotheses built on a sound foundation of basic mechanistic and pharmacologic understanding. The first step in clinical trials of natural products is to demonstrate that the intervention exerts a measurable effect on a hypothesized target or mechanism of action rather than just focusing on demonstrating a change in clinical symptom(s). Target engagement refers to verification that the intervention has had the predicted effect on the target. Targets may be molecular, cellular, circuit, biological, tissue, organ, somatic, psychological, behavioral, or interpersonal. Following the initial demonstration of target engagement, the next step of novel intervention development involves replicating target engagement and evaluating whether intervention-induced changes in the target are associated with clinical benefit. In some cases, a fundamental understanding of a given natural products biologic target, or mechanism of action has been clearly established (e.g., compounds affinity for a specific receptor is well established). It is also recognized that for certain conditions (e.g., pain), demonstrating target engagement may not be possible or practical with human participants. When a mechanism of action has already clearly been established or when measuring target engagement is not possible, investigators should contact a Program Director at NCCIH to discuss what funding mechanism is appropriate.
There is a need to determine whether natural products are safe and efficacious or effective for given conditions or disorders. To accomplish this goal, multi-site clinical trials are needed to determine the efficacy or effectiveness in a fully powered clinical trial. NCCIH utilizes the UG3/UH3 funding mechanism to support the Clinical Coordinating Center for the trial and the companion U24 funding mechanism to support the independent Data Coordinating Center (PAR-24-125)
Overview of NCCIH Natural Products Clinical Trials Research Funding Opportunities.
NCCIH has designed a framework for research to describe the broad spectrum of complementary and integrative health research it supports (https://www.nccih.nih.gov/grants/nccih-research-framework). NCCIH supports investigators working on the continuum of the research framework, from basic science and demonstrating reproducible impact on a target engagement measure, through high impact efficacy trials (https://www.nccih.nih.gov/grants/funding/clinicaltrials). We encourage investigators to examine the full suite of natural product research NOFOs to determine which one best aligns with the proposed stage of intervention development and testing.
NCCIH has an oversight process to provide stewardship and maintain excellence, integrity, and rigor in our supported clinical studies (https://www.nccih.nih.gov/grants/toolbox). Investigators are encouraged to review the NCCIH Clinical Terms of Award for Human Subjects Research (https://www.nccih.nih.gov/research/nccih-clinical-terms-of-award-for-human-subjects-research) to learn more about NCCIH's requirements for clinical research.
Prior to submitting and application, NCCIH strongly encourages consultation with the NCCIH Scientific/Research contacts relevant to the area of science for which they are planning to develop an application. Early contact provides an opportunity for NCCIH staff to discuss the scope and goals, and to provide information and guidance.
Research Objectives of the Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC; UG3/UH3) and the Data Coordinating Center (DCC; U24) for Multi-Site Investigator Initiated Clinical Trials of Natural Products
NCCIH requires companion applications to support a CCC and DCC for multi-site investigator initiated clinical trials to test the efficacy or effectiveness of natural products. The CCC and DCC will need to collaborate closely to develop the study protocol and select the most rigorous trial design. The CCC should have clinical content expertise to conduct the proposed intervention for a study population and is responsible for implementing the proposed multi-site clinical trial. The DCC should have expertise in clinical trial design and conduct and is responsible for overall project coordination, and administrative, data management, and biostatistical support for the proposed clinical trial, including sample size calculations and data analysis plan. NCCIH requires that the DCC be independent of the CCC (i.e., not include overlapping personnel) in order to provide for central coordination of study activities across multiple sites while ensuring the integrity of the intervention delivery, data collection, and study blinding.
Research Objectives for the CCC
This NOFO invites cooperative agreement applications for investigator-initiated fully powered multi-site, efficacy or effectiveness clinical trials (Phase III and beyond) to study the effects of natural products in NCCIH designated areas of high research priority. The CCC should develop and implement the proposed multi-site clinical trial. Proposed clinical trials may utilize a design anywhere along the continuum between explanatory and pragmatic. For this NOFO pragmatic trials are considered those that test an intervention under the usual clinical conditions in which it will be applied, while efficacy trials do so under more controlled conditions. The trial design should be appropriate for the study question.
For this NOFO, multi-site clinical trials are defined as trials that enroll research participants from at least three geographically distinct recruitment sites. Two sites will be permitted if there is a strong justification for how fewer sites can still achieve generalizability and meet the NIH diversity and inclusion requirements for a phase III clinical trial. Multiple sites are necessary in efficacy trials to increase generalizability of findings, and assure adequate number and diversity of eligible participants to enhance recruitment efforts.
In addition to scientific relevance and excellence, these clinical trials are expected to be conducted with a high degree of efficiency, with streamlined administrative procedures wherever possible. This CCC NOFO runs in parallel with and a companion Data Coordinating Center (DCC) NOFO (PAR-24-125). Both a CCC application and a corresponding DCC application need to be submitted simultaneously for consideration by NCCIH.
Considerations for Selection of Study Design and Power
The choice of study design (e.g., standard efficacy, effectiveness, and/or pragmatic randomized control trial) should be justified scientifically. Investigators may propose fully powered adaptive designs or optimization designs, depending on their research question. The natural product UG3/UH3 NOFO supports multi-site clinical trials (Phase III and beyond) and is appropriate once there is sufficient data on a natural products mechanism of action, dosing and safety, and optimal study processes and/or outcomes assessments to facilitate successful implementation of a fully-powered efficacy trial. The proposed multi-site clinical trial is expected to contribute to the evidence base for important health matters of relevance to the research mission of NCCIH and be designed with a minimum of 90 percent power to test the primary hypothesis. These trials are expected to achieve the Phase III trial requirements of NIH (see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/glossary-ct.htm and https://grants.nih.gov/policy/inclusion/women-and-minorities.htm). In all cases, there should be strong rationale for the proposed comparator condition(s) (e.g., time and attention control, usual care, standard of care, sham condition, and/or active comparator(s)) based on the research question you plan to address. Due to lack of rigor and potential expectancy effects, NCCIH will not support studies proposing a wait-list comparator condition.
Target Engagement Measures
There are often questions about whether efficacy, effectiveness, or pragmatic trials should include the target engagement measures previously demonstrated. Mechanistic outcomes should be included in trials submitted to this NOFO to assess whether the effect of the natural product is mediated or moderated via the target engagement measures proposed. The inclusion of target engagement measures should not introduce significant burden for participants or utilize a significant portion of the budget. NCCIH has other funding mechanisms to support basic, mechanistic and translational research (NOT-AT-21-006).
Regulatory Requirements to Consider:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) establishes and enforces the regulatory requirements for clinical research on natural products when they may be used as drugs. Because NCCIH is a Federal agency, any research supported with NCCIH funding must adhere to relevant FDA regulations. Prior to submitting an application Investigators must contact the FDA to determine whether an Investigational New Drug (IND) application is necessary for the proposed clinical research. For trials using an FDA regulated product and requiring an IND application, the applicant must either hold or be able to reference an open IND for the trial, or the applicant must obtain an IND with no clinical-hold prior to any award. If the FDA has granted a waiver for the trial proposed in the application, the applicant can provide this letter as part of the Regulatory Communication Plan. Guidance on the IND evaluation process can be found in the NCCIH Natural Products Clinical Trials web page: Resource https://www.nccih.nih.gov/grants/natural-products-clinical-trials-resource.
For applications that propose the use of a mobile device, similar app or clinical decision support software, applicants must consult with their Institutional Review Board to determine whether the approach may qualify as a medical device. If so, applicants must contact the FDA prior to applying to determine whether an IDE application is necessary for the proposed clinical research (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/your-clinical-decision-support-software-it-medical-device).
Preliminary Data Requirements:
This NOFO is appropriate when there is a clear and compelling rationale, a rigorous empirical basis, and scientific premise to conduct a natural product multi-site efficacy or effectiveness clinical trials. The following preliminary data from human studies (published and citable data from the peer-reviewed literature) on the same natural product and specific formulation as proposed in the current application are required:
For the purposes of this NOFO, it is preferred that there be an established, measurable, reproducible, well-characterized target engagement measure for a given natural product in human subjects. However, NCCIH acknowledges that for some conditions, it may be impossible or impractical to directly measure the target engagement on a natural product. In these circumstances the study should be justified by: (1) a clear rationale for why studying target engagement in human participants is impossible or impractical; (2) potentially proposing other objective, reproducible measures, that may be proxy to, or indicative of target engagement of the natural product; and (3) strong compelling preliminary data to warrant further study of a natural product in clinical studies. In other cases, a fundamental understanding of a given natural products biologic target, or mechanism of action has been clearly established (e.g., compounds affinity for a specific receptor is well established). In these situations, investigators are also encouraged to contact NCCIH Scientific/Research staff to determine whether the UG3/UH3 is the appropriate NOFO for the proposed clinical trial.
Preliminary Data about the Team
In addition, all of the following preliminary data demonstrating the teams collective experience conducting clinical trials are required:
Structure
This NOFO will utilize a two-phase, milestone-driven cooperative agreement (UG3/UH3) mechanism consisting of a start-up phase of up to one year (UG3) and a full enrollment and clinical trial execution phase (UH3). There should be clear objectives for both a UG3 and a UH3 phases.
Phases of Award
The UG3 phase will support the development of case report forms and other resources necessary to the performance of the trial; further development and finalization of study partnerships including signed contracts with performing clinical sites; single Institutional Review Board approval as well as Data and Safety Monitoring Board approval of the trial protocol, informed consent(s), manual of operations, and clinical trial project management plans. Applications are required to provide a clinical trial project management plan that delineates how the study will monitor and evaluate critical processes impacting feasibility of trial launch, conduct, and completion, coupled with on-time and on-budget performance milestones. All regulatory approvals should be obtained prior to the end of the UG3 award. Provision of the necessary natural products, matched placebos, or other resources should be planned at the start of the UH3 award to allow for the successful launch and execution of the proposed clinical trial in the UH3 phase. Subject to NCCIH funding availability and scientific priorities, UH3 awards will be made after administrative review of a transition application with particular attention to the extent to which agreed upon milestones have been met.
Investigators will be asked to submit their UH3 phase transition application 2 months prior to transition, so the majority of UG3 phase milestones should be completed 2 months prior to transition to the UH3 phase. All milestones must be achieved prior to transition to the UH3 phase. Continued support for both the DCC and CCC will be contingent on the extent to which agreed-upon milestones have been met in the first year and on the availability of funds and scientific priorities to continue the project.
Milestones
The use of milestones is a key characteristic of this NOFO. A milestone is defined as a scheduled event in the project timeline, signifying the completion of a major project stage or activity. Plans must be guided by milestones that will be reached at the end of the UG3 phase. Milestones are to be objective and performance-based to achieve completion of the trial on time and on budget (see example milestones at https://www.nccih.nih.gov/grants/toolbox#milestone). UG3 projects that have met milestones will be assessed administratively to determine eligibility for transition to the UH3 implementation phase.
This NOFO will support applications that include a series of milestones for completion of the clinical trial (UH3 phase) and provide contingency plans to proactively confront potential delays or disturbances in attaining the milestones. Continuation of the award is conditional upon satisfactory progress, availability of funds, and scientific priorities of NCCIH. If, at any time, recruitment falls significantly below the projected milestones for recruitment, the NCCIH will consider ending support and negotiating an orderly phase-out of the award and retains, as an option, periodic external peer review of progress. NCCIH staff will closely monitor progress at all stages, milestones, accrual, and safety.
NCCIH Priorities for Developing and Pilot-testing Natural Products
As NCCIHs clinical research portfolio matures, NCCIH has identified targeted areas of investigation to align with the NCCIH Strategic Plan (https://www.nccih.nih.gov/about/strategic-plans-and-reports). Focus is on management of conditions for which natural products are used by the public and where there is evidence of postulated mechanism of action. For this NOFO, NCCIH considers the following topic areas to have high program priority:
All NIH funded research must adhere to the Code of Federal Regulations, which outlines specific requirements to enhance protections for pregnant women, human fetuses and neonates; children; and prisoners (https://grants.nih.gov/policy/humansubjects/policies-and-regulations/vulnerable-populations.htm). It is the policy of NIH that individuals of all ages, including children (i.e. individuals under the age of 18) and older adults, must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific or ethical reasons not to include them (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-18-116.html).
1 NIH-designated health disparity populations include racial and ethnic minorities (African Americans/Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, American Indians/Alaska Natives, Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Other Pacific Islanders), sexual and gender minorities, socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, under-served rural populations, and people with disabilities.
Applications proposing research topics not identified above as high programmatic priority can be submitted but are likely to be considered of lesser or low programmatic priority, which will significantly influence programmatic relevance and reduce the likelihood of funding. Applications proposing research studies using an intervention and patient population that are the same as or very similar to those used in studies already in progress, conducted, or published by other groups are likely to be lower programmatic priority.
Clinical Trials Not Responsive to this NOFO
The following types of clinical trials are not responsive to this NOFO and applications proposing such activities will be deemed non-responsive and will not be reviewed:
Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP)
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
Cooperative Agreement: A financial assistance mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this NOFO.
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 NOFO.
Required: Only accepting applications that propose clinical trial(s).
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Application budgets are not limited but need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.
The combined budgets of the CCC and DCC will be used to determine whether the policy regarding direct costs of $500,000 or more in any year will be applied (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/over500k-clinical-trials).
The scope of the proposed project should determine the requested project award period.
The project period for the UG3 phase will be up to 1 year.
The period of award for the UH3 phase is expected to be 4 years. With strong justification, up to 6 years for the UH3 may be requested.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
1. Eligible Applicants
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
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) 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. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information
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 their organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. See, Reminder: Notice of NIH's Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities, NOT-OD-22-019.
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.
Multiple PDs/PIs are allowed on any single application. Because the NOFO already supports a team approach between groups of experts across sites and collaborating applications, the designation of multiple PDs/PIs on a single application may be less likely to apply. PD(s)/PI(s) from each linked application can not be designated as multiple PDs/PIs on each application of a collaborative set.
2. Cost Sharing
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
3. Additional Information on Eligibility
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 NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
This NOFO only accepts applications that are part of a collaborative set of multiple applications. A set must contain 2 applications, 1 UG3/UH3 application to this NOFO PAR-24-123 and 1 U24 application to PAR-24-125.
1. Requesting an Application Package
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
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:
Jessica McKlveen, PhD
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-8018
Email: jessica.mcklveen@nih.gov
Page Limitations
All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply – Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
SF424(R&R) Cover
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Descriptive Title of Applicant's Project:
To allow NIH to identify a group of applications as a related set of collaborative applications, the titles for each application in the set must have the following format: a 1/N indicator + Identical Title (e.g., 1/2, where the 1/2 means this is site 1 of the clinical coordinating center of the set. The data coordinating center site will be labeled 2/2). Titles may not exceed 200 characters in length, including the tag, e.g., 1/2, at the beginning of the title.
Cover Letter Attachment:
The Cover Letter is one pdf file only. The following collaborative information is required in the cover letter: a listing of all the applications that are part of the set of collaborative applications being submitted, including for each: 1) the PD/PI(s) name(s), 2) the Title (including the tag, e.g., "1/2"), and 3) the Applicant institution. Each site should submit an identical listing. If applicable, the letter should indicate the name of the NCCIH program officer with whom the project has been discussed.
SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Other Project Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Other Attachments: The attachments listed below must be completed and attached or the application will not be peer reviewed.
Project Management Plan Attachment:
A Project Management Plan must be provided as an "other attachment" called "CCC Project Management Plan.pdf" and must not exceed 3 pages. The Project Management Plan should describe the evidence-based strategy that will be used throughout the project to ensure that the unique goals of the clinical trial are met. Project management planning should directly support the needs of scientific study leadership to identify barriers, make timely responses, and optimize the allocation of limited resources to meet pre-defined study objectives. The project management plan should describe the planning team and identify control points and processes that are key to scientific and fiscal performance. This will include a description of the organizational strategy that defines internal control points and business roles. A description of the key methodology, standards, and processes governing resource management, study deployment, operations/execution, and study closure should be included. The management plan should also describe how the team, in collaboration with the DCC, will proactively evaluate and prioritize issues that jeopardize study goals and lead to the development of corrective responses to resolve fiscal and logistical issues (risk planning) in a timely manner. Describe processes required for orderly project closure. In summary, the project management plan should provide sufficient detail to demonstrate the ability to achieve the goals of the clinical trial on-budget and on-time. The project management plan should include risk mitigation or contingency plans.
Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives
Examples of items that advance inclusivity in research and may be part of the PEDP can include, but are not limited to:
For further information on the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP), please see https://braininitiative.nih.gov/about/plan-enhancing-diverse-perspectives-pedp
SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Biographical Sketches: The application for the CCC must include only the personnel and corresponding biographical sketches for the key personnel for that application. All personnel involved in the conduct of the clinical trial are Key Personnel and must provide an NIH Biosketch whether or not they are budgeted. The Program Director (PD)/ Principal Investigator (Pl) (or Multi-PDs/Pls) for the companion DCC cannot be listed as key personnel in the CCC application.
The PD(s)/PI(s) of the clinical trial must be experienced in the conduct of clinical trials and have expertise in the content area of the trial, as well as experience conducting trials under an FDA IND. The experience of all key personnel must be carefully documented. Most clinical trials will require a multidisciplinary team (clinician, data manager, study coordinator(s), etc.) and the application should reflect their roles and responsibilities in the design and implementation of the study protocol. All trials will require a biostatistician, and the application should reflect their hands-on involvement in the design and implementation of the study protocol. Applicants are encouraged to provide strong evidence of the study team's qualifications and ability to conduct the proposed research, and previous investigative experience in related clinical trials.
R&R Budget
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Budgets should request only the costs that will be required for the activities to be performed in a given year. Generally, NCCIH expects the requested costs in year 1 (UG3) to be lower than in the following years, depending on recruitment targets. It is also expected that the CCC budget will be lower in the final year.
This application must include only its own budget, including any subcontract budgets associated with it. The application must provide detailed annual budgets that will enable the CCC to meet its milestones. In the budget justification, provide the detailed budget needs (per year for each site and total) and an implementation and cost management plan (e.g., capitation instead of salary support at sites). Do not include budget support for the DSMB. An independent DSMB will be established to monitor data and oversee participant safety in the clinical trial. As part of the collaborative activities under this cooperative agreement, the NCCIH will collaborate with the awardees to appoint and/or agree upon a single DSMB for monitoring the clinical trial. The DSMB will be appointed by the NCCIH and budget support for the DSMB will be provided by NCCIH.
Separate itemized budgets must be prepared for each subcontract and/or for each collaborating clinical site or core .
Include budget support for personnel to travel to a yearly in-person steering committee and/or other meeting of investigators and NCCIH. In addition, include budget support personnel to attend the semi-annual DSMB meeting/calls.
Include budget support for enrolling diverse and non-English speaking participants. Costs may include, but are not limited to recruitment and retention costs, translation services and/or interpreters, and costs for using validated measures in multiple languages.
If parts of the costs of the trial are to be provided by sources other than NCCIH, these contributions must be presented in detail in the budget justification. Third party support of the proposed research activity (if approved) will be incorporated as a specific term and condition in the Notice of Award. If the third-party support ceases and the trial is no longer tenable without the third-party support, a close-out plan may be requested. Applicants are reminded that although cost share is not required, if these types of costs are included in the research application and peer reviewed, it is expected that these costs will not be covered by NCCIH.
Include budget support for the publication and dissemination of results
PEDP implementation costs
R&R Subaward Budget
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Research Plan
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Research Strategy
Note: Discuss the following without duplicating information collected in the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information Form.
The Research Strategy should be organized in a manner that will facilitate peer review. The body of the application should present an overview of the state of the science, current status and relevance of the trial, a discussion of the specific protocol, and the approach to data collection and analysis.
The following criteria must be addressed:
Significance: The significance of the proposed clinical trial and importance of the question must be clearly stated. The application should make clear the need for and timeliness of the study with emphasis on how the results will address an evidence gap and therefore advance our knowledge of theory and practice in this area. A discussion of the costs and benefits of the study should be included for evaluation of the trial's significance.
Applications should address the reasons for selection of the intervention. This may include public health impact if subsequent efficacy trials are conducted and positive, ethical dimensions, and patient perspectives on acceptability of the proposed intervention. Characteristics of the required preliminary research results provided in support of the proposed project, whether conducted by the applicant or others, should be described in the application so that peer reviewers may evaluate the strength of the supporting evidence. The applicant should also discuss the limitations of those data.
Innovation: Explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms.
Approach: The research approach section should include a description of the supporting data (including strengths and weaknesses of the published literature), clinical trial experience, the experimental approach, and a milestone plan.
Supporting Data: The studies that led to the proposed clinical trial should be presented. Data from pilot studies that show the need for and the feasibility of the trial should also be presented in the application. Additional supporting data from other research should be included so that the approach chosen is clearly justified and adequately framed. Applications must include the following preliminary data from human studies of the same product and specific formulation as proposed in the current application (preferably published in the peer-reviewed literature):
If it is impractical/impossible to measure the impact of the natural product on target engagement or when there is a fundamental understanding of the products mechanism of action, such that it is not possible to provide item 1, applicants must provide the following:
In addition, all of the following preliminary data demonstrating the teams collective experience conducting clinical trials are required:
Experimental Approach: The proposed experimental approach should include an appropriate design and the rationale for the particular design chosen (e.g. explanatory, cluster-randomized, pragmatic). The experimental approach description should include:
Investigators should check https://reporter.nih.gov/ and https://clinicaltrials.gov/ to provide justification that the work proposed is not duplicative of completed or ongoing trials. Applicants should not propose work that duplicates other studies already funded or other trials that are underway using a similar intervention in a similar population.
For applications that propose the use of an app or clinical decision support software, applicants must consult with their Institutional Review Board to determine whether the approach may qualify as a medical device. If so, or if in doubt, applicants should contact the FDA prior to applying to determine whether an IDE application is necessary for the proposed clinical research (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/software-medical-device-samd/your-clinical-decision-support-software-it-medical-device).
Letters of Support
Letters of support from clinicians or clinical department chairs whose support is necessary to the successful conduct of the trial should be provided. Applicants are also encouraged to include documentation of the commitment of any subcontractors and consultants, as well as service agreements for personnel or facilities. Letters of commitment must be co-signed by the business official of the collaborating center.
In addition, a letter of support should document that sufficient supply of the natural product will be available for testing at the time of award, including expiration date; the supplier will meet CMC specifications; and the supplier will provide the data necessary for the investigator to adhere to NIH and FDA policies. Documentation should include a letter of agreement from the 3rd party supplying the natural product.
If parts of the costs of the trial are to be provided by sources other than NCCIH, provide Letter(s) of Support signed by an authorized representative.
For renewal applications, a summary of progress made during the initial funding period must be included.
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.
Other Plan(s): Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H application forms packages.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics
2.4 Inclusion of Women and Minorities
2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan
Describe the following: 1) the planned recruitment methods including use of contact lists, databases or other pre-screening resources, advertisements, outreach, media / social media and referral networks or groups; 2) if there are known participant or study-related barriers to accrual or participation (based on literature or prior experience), please list these barriers and describe plans to address them to optimize success; 3) contingency plans for participant accrual if enrollment significantly lags behind accrual benchmarks; 4) participant retention and adherence strategies; and 5) possible competition from other trials for study participants; Investigators are encouraged to review the NCCIH Study Accrual and Retention Plan (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/SARP).
Applicants must provide strong evidence of the availability of appropriate institutional resources, and suitable patient populations. Documentation of availability of eligible subjects at clinic sites, presented in tabular format must be provided. The application must include relevant information that addresses the feasibility of recruiting participants who are eligible for the clinical study or trial. Specifically, applicants must provide evidence that each recruiting center in the study or trial has access to a sufficient number of participants who meet the eligibility criteria as defined in the submitted protocol. For multisite applications, information must be provided for each participating site.
2.7 Study Timeline
Include a table or graph of the overall study timeline. This is expected to be a visual representation (such as a Gantt chart) of core milestones and key project management activities. A narrative is not expected in this section.
The CCC and DCC are expected to provide the same overall study timeline to reach the same major milestones. The study timeline should include core milestones that need to be met throughout the lifecycle of the clinical trial (to include both the UG3 and UH3 phases) to ensure its success, and the subtasks that will be used to reach the milestones. It is expected that the overall timeline will clearly indicate which subtasks will be performed by the CCC and which subtasks will be performed by the DCC. In the timeline, the study duration is expected to be displayed in months. The timeline should include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) When the study opens to enrollment
(b) When core milestones (see below) are met
(c) What subtasks are needed to reach the core milestones
(d) When final transfer of the data to the DCC will occur
(e) When analysis of the study data will occur
(f) When the primary study manuscript will be submitted for publication
Section 3 - Protection and Monitoring Plans
3.3 Data and Safety Monitoring Plan
In addition to the NIH application requirements for a data and safety monitoring for clinical trials, NCCIH requires independent monitoring for research involving human subjects. Applicants should refer to NIHs policy on data and safety monitoring (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-038.html) , as well as the NCCIH Guidelines for Data and Safety Monitoring (http://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/data-safety-monitoring). An independent DSMB will be established to monitor data and oversee participant safety in the clinical trial. As part of the collaborative activities under this cooperative agreement, the NCCIH will collaborate with the awardees to appoint and/or agree upon a single DSMB for monitoring the clinical trial. The DSMB will be appointed by the NCCIH. At the first meeting in the UG3 phase, the DSMB will review the awardees protocol and potentially recommend modifications. Subsequently, the DSMB will monitor and review recruitment, adverse events, data quality, outcome data, and overall awardee performance. The DSMB has the responsibility to review interim data and final data, and recommend whether the protocol should be modified, and, at each meeting, whether the study should be continued or should be terminated early. Thus, its ethical responsibilities, to the participants as well as to the integrity of the study, are of paramount importance to the NCCIH. The DSMB will meet in person or by phone at least twice a year. Applicants should not propose DSMB members in the application, or even inquire about the interest of possible DSMB members, because anyone so contacted would not be eligible to serve as a member of the peer reviewer committee that will evaluate the applications for scientific merit. For renewal applications, applicants should provide a list of the DSMB members in the application.
3.5 Overall Structure of the Study Team
Include a description of the following:
Section 4 - Protocol Synopsis
4.1.a. Detailed Description
Describe the protocol to be followed in each arm of the trial. Include a brief description of how the CCC will standardize and optimize adherence to the protocol at the sites. Specify concomitant interventions, if applicable. Describe the proposed experimental design, including a discussion of the clinical trial design and the rationale for the particular design chosen (pragmatic, explanatory, cluster-randomized, adaptive, etc.).
4.1.c Interventions
Describe the rationale for the choice of the intervention including such specific information as dose, frequency of dosing to be used, choice of formulation, name and ingredients of the product, rationale for the supplier, proposed methods for product characterization and standardization, and rationale for selection of and specified percentages or levels of marker compounds if applicable.
4.3 Statistical Design and Power
Include a brief statement indicating that the CCC has worked closely with the DCC to ensure that the number of expected subjects, the expected effect size, the power (minimum of 90 percent), and the statistical methods (with respect to each outcome measure) have been adequately addressed. In addition, clearly state that the Statistical Design and Power attachment is being submitted in its entirety as a part of the collaborating DCC application.
4.5. Will the study use an FDA-Regulated intervention?
4.5.a. If yes, describe the availability of Investigational Product (IP) and Investigational New Drug (IND)/Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) status
The proposed clinical trial must use a natural product (such as botanical, herbal, dietary supplement, probiotic, vitamin or mineral) for this NOFO. The attachment in this section should describe correspondence from the FDA indicating whether the proposed study will require an IND/IDE. Investigators should describe the process that will be used for attaining all necessary FDA or other applicable regulatory agency approvals necessary to the conduct the trial; and associated timeline to complete these approvals. For trials using an FDA regulated product that require an IND/IDE application, the grant application must include evidence regarding the outcome of a pre-IND meeting, or other evidence of communication with FDA. If the protocol is conducted under a non-US regulatory agency the applicant should submit a plan for attaining those regulatory approvals. If the protocol is exempt from an IND/IDE, a copy of the exemption letter from the FDA should be provided or a copy of correspondence with the FDA indicating an IND is not required. The FDA has provided guidance indicating that when substances that are Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) are used in a clinical trial to evaluate the product's ability to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent disease it may require an IND under part 312 (https://www.fda.gov/media/79386/download). If an IND is required by the FDA for the proposed trial, the IND must be submitted to the FDA with no clinical-hold imposed by the FDA prior to the application being funded.
4.7 Dissemination Plan
Section 5 - Other Clinical Trial-related Attachments
5.1 Other Clinical Trial-related Attachments
The following attachments must be included as a part of the cooperative agreement application. Attachments permit expansion of certain elements that cannot be appropriately described in the Research Strategy. All attachments listed below must be provided or the application will not be peer reviewed.
1. Clinical Trial Experience
Applicants must provide a detailed table listing the characteristics of trials that demonstrate Key Personnel experience in trial coordination in the last 5 years. One table must be provided for each study record with a unique filename for each study record as an attachment (e.g. "Clinical Trial Experience1.pdf" , "Clinical Trial Experience 2.pdf", etc) and must not exceed 3 pages.
The table columns should include:
2. Milestone Plan
One Milestone Plan must be provided for each study record with an unique filename for each study record (e.g. "CCC Milestone Plan1.pdf", "CCC Milestone Plan 2.pdf", etc)and must not exceed 5 pages.
The plan should describe the key milestones that need to be met throughout the lifecycle of the clinical trial (UG3 and UH3 phases) to ensure its success; the processes that will be used to reach the milestones; and a timetable identifying when each of these key milestones will be met (this can be provided as a table or a graph).
All applicants must use the following definition of a milestone in their application: a scheduled event in the project timeline that signifies the completion of a major project stage or activity. Milestones must be relevant, achievable, and measurable. The milestone plan should include anticipated challenges to meeting milestones and propose potential mitigation or corrective actions strategies. UH3 milestones should address overall recruitment and retention goals. The Terms and Conditions for a UG3 award under this NOFO will include a milestone plan that is mutually agreed upon by the investigators and NCCIH.
CCC milestones of particular interest during the UG3 phase that should be described in the application may include but are not limited to:
The application should also include a series of milestones for the completion of the specific aims of the clinical trial (UH3) phase and contingency plans. Milestones for the UH3 phase may need to be revised and finalized at the time of the UG3/ UH3 transition. Investigators and NCCIH will review and mutually agree upon a final revised UH3 milestone plan that will be included in the Terms and Conditions of the UH3 grant (if awarded).
CCC milestones of particular interest during the UH3 phase that should be included in the application include but are not limited to:
During the award phase, achievement of each milestone for the UG3 and UH3 phases will need to be communicated to the NCCIH Program Officer listed on the Notice of Award. Award continuation, even during the period recommended for support, is conditional upon satisfactory progress. If, at any time, recruitment, as defined in the NCCIH Study Accrual and Retention Plan (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/SARP), falls significantly below projections, or core milestones mutually agreed upon by the PD/PI and the NCCIH, are not met, the Center may consider ending support and negotiating an orderly phase-out of the award. The NCCIH retains, as an option, periodic external peer review of progress. NCCIH staff will closely monitor progress at all trial stages including milestones, accrual, and safety.
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.
PHS Assignment Request Form
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIHs 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 Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications. Each application of a collaborative set must be on-time. Considerations for late applications that are based on the institution or PD/PI apply only to his/her individual application.
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 How to Apply – Application Guide.
5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
6. Funding Restrictions
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 Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
Specific to this NOFO:
7. Other Submission Requirements and Information
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organizations profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by NCCIH, NIH. Applications that are incomplete,non-compliant, and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed. Each application of a collaborative set must be complete and compliant.
In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the NCCIH Referral Office by email at jessica.mcklveen@nih.gov when the application has been submitted. Please include the NOFO number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
Applications must include annual milestones. Applications that fail to include annual milestones will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn. Applications must include a PEDP submitted as Other Project Information as an attachment. Applications that fail to include a PEDP will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn before review. Applications must also include a project management plan, clinical experience table, and milestone plan as attachments. Applications that fail to include these attachments will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn.
Requests of $500,000 or more for direct costs in any year
Applicants requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year (excluding consortium F&A) must contact a Scientific/ Research Contact at least 6 weeks before submitting the application and follow the Policy on the Acceptance for Review of Unsolicited Applications that Request $500,000 or More in Direct Costs as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This policy applies when the combined budget for the collaborative DCC and CCC applications exceeds $500,000 in direct costs in any given year (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/over500k-clinical-trials).
Applications must include annual milestones. Applications that fail to include annual milestones will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn. Applications must include a PEDP submitted as Other Project Information as an attachment. Applications that fail to include a PEDP will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn before review.
Post Submission Materials
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.
In addition to the NIH policy allowed post-submission materials in NOT-OD-19-083, the follow post-submission materials are allowed:
1. Criteria
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.
A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
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?
Specific to this NOFO:
To what extent do the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives further the significance of the project?
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?
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?
Specific to this NOFO:
Have the investigators provided sufficient evidence to ensure that the clinical centers will employ the appropriate personnel to recruit subjects and implement the clinical protocol? How well does the application provide evidence of necessary experience and expertise of the investigators with the natural product, the study population, and the research methods to be employed? How strong is the evidence is provided to demonstrate that the investigative team has successfully conducted clinical trials under an Investigational New Drug (IND) application or DEA regulations (if applicable)?
To what extent will the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives strengthen and enhance the expertise required for the project?
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?
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?
Specific to this NOFO:
Does the proposed research have the potential to advance the field even if the proposed study design, methods, and intervention are not innovative?
To what extent will the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives meaningfully contribute to innovation?
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?
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?
Specific to this NOFO:
How strong is the evidence for equipoise? How well does the Clinical Protocol Synopsis attachment describe the necessary elements of the clinical trial and how likely is it that the protocol can be efficiently implemented at all of the sites? Is the natural product appropriately characterized? How well are the clinical outcome measures, biological signature, dose/duration of study and follow up, appropriateness of inclusion/exclusion criteria, and sample size justified and explained? Does the application provide sufficient evidence to justify that the study population has been appropriately defined? How effectively does the Project Management Plan identify and describe risks to implementation and how well are contingency plans described? How clear is the communication plan between DCC and CCC leadership and is it appropriate for implementing and conducting the trial? How well have the investigators described how they will follow Good Clinical Practices, Good Laboratory Practices, and Good Manufacturing Practices as appropriate?
Because this is a multi-center application, is there evidence of the ability of the individual centers 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? If the clinical trial is Phase III, does the application include all relevant data to assess whether or not the trial should include adequate numbers of subgroups of participants to allow for separate and adequately powered analyses?
Are the timeline and milestones associated with the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives well-developed and feasible?
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?
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
Specific to this NOFO:
Is there strong evidence that the institutions have the available resources needed to conduct a multi-site trial at the CCC and the performance sites? How well does the application document the availability of the requisite eligible subject pool in proposed clinical site(s)? Is there sufficient documentation of the commitment of any subcontractors and consultants, as well as service agreements for personnel and facilities?
To what extent will features of the environment described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (e.g., collaborative arrangements, geographic diversity, institutional support) contribute to the success of the project?)
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.
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
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.
Is the proposed Data and Safety Monitoring Plan appropriate for the proposed clinical trial?
How strongly do the milestones address the specific aims of each phase? Are the listed milestones appropriate for the goals of the project? To what extent are the milestones relevant, measurable, achievable, result-focused and timebound? Does the application provide reasonable and appropriate contingency plans in the event the UG3 and/or UH3 milestones are not achieved?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
Not Applicable
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NCCIH 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.
Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate N ational Advisory Council for Complementary and Integrative Health . The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
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 Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.
1. Award Notices
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the 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 NOFO 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: Recipient 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).
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
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.
If a recipient receives an award, the recipient must follow all applicable nondiscrimination laws. The recipient agrees to this when registering in SAM.gov. The recipient must also submit an Assurance of Compliance (HHS-690). To learn more, see the HHS Office for Civil Rights website.
HHS recognizes that NIH research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigators 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 NOFO.
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 applicants integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 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.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 2 CFR 200, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the recipients is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility reside with the recipients for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the recipients and NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Close interaction between the participating grantee(s) and the PO/PS team will be required, to manage, assess, and implement the activities of the UG3 and UH3 phases.
A Trial Management Committee organized by the PD(s)/PI(s) will be the main oversight body of the study.
Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual recipient. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the recipients's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR.
3. Data Management and Sharing
Consistent with the 2023 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.
4. Reporting
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.
Recipients will provide updates at least annually on implementation of the PEDP.
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 NOFOs 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 2 CFR Part 200.301.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 as amended (FFATA), 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 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to 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 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: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov
Wendy Weber, N.D., Ph.D. M.P.H
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-402-1272
Email: weberwj@mail.nih.gov
Jessica McKlveen, PhD
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-8018
Email: jessica.mcklveen@nih.gov
Debbie Chen
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-3788
Email: debbie.chen@nih.gov
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.