EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
R34 Planning Grant
See Part 2, Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
The purpose of this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is to ressiue PAR-23-256 Feasibility Trials of the NIH Music-based Interventions Toolkit for Brain Disorders of Aging (R34 Clinical Trial Required) in order to support proof-of-concept feasibility trials guided by the NIH Music-based Interventions (MBI) Toolkit for research on brain disorders of aging. These early phase clinical trials will generate evidence supporting the validity of the NIH MBI Toolkits guiding principles as well as the necessary pilot data to design a subsequent clinical efficacy or effectiveness study (or pragmatic clinical trial) using music-based interventions in the context of brain disorders of aging, including but not limited to Alzheimers disease and Alzheimers disease-related dementias, Parkinsons disease, and stroke. The data collected should address gaps in scientific knowledge in order to facilitate development of a competitive large-scale clinical trial.
30 Days prior to the application due date.
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 |
June 20, 2024 | June 20, 2024 | July 25, 2024 | November 2024 | January 2025 | April 2025 |
October 21, 2024 | October 21, 2024 | November 19, 2024 | March 2025 | May 2025 | July 2025 |
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 How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
Purpose
The purpose of this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is to reissue PAR-23-256 "Feasibility Trials of the NIH Music-based Interventions Toolkit for Brain Disorders of Aging (R34 Clinical Trial Required)" in order to support proof-of-concept feasibility trials guided by the NIH Music-based Interventions (MBIs) Toolkit for research on brain disorders of aging. These early stage clinical trials will generate evidence supporting the validity of the NIH MBI Toolkit' s guiding principles as well as the necessary feasibility data to design a subsequent clinical efficacy or effectiveness study (or pragmatic clinical trial) using music-based interventions (MBIs) in the context of brain disorders of aging, including but not limited to Alzheimers disease and Alzheimers disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD), Parkinsons disease, and stroke. The data collected should address gaps in scientific knowledge in order to facilitate development of a competitive clinical efficacy or effectiveness clinical trial.
This NOFO will not support randomized clinical trials that propose to test or determine efficacy or effectiveness of MBIs, including preliminary efficacy or effectiveness, nor will this NOFO support repetition of feasibility or acceptability research that has been previously conducted in the same or similar patient population with the same or similar intervention. Applications that propose solely to write a protocol or manual of operations or to develop infrastructure for a clinical trial are not appropriate for this announcement. Applications must propose to conduct a feasibility clinical trial applying the guiding principles detailed in the NIH MBI Toolkit; a subsequent efficacy or effectiveness trial should have the potential to make a significant impact on public health.
Background
Empirical evidence supports that music engages many different areas of the brain and may aid in strengthening the neural networks and pathways involved in sensorimotor processes, emotion, affect, and memory. Music-based interventions (MBIs) may represent a valuable therapeutic opportunity for a wide range of disorders impacting these domains, especially given that these interventions are frequently low-cost, mostly devoid of side effects, potentially scalable in healthcare systems, and generally well accepted by patients. However, reports of the beneficial effects of music on human health have largely emerged from anecdotal evidence of small-scale clinical trials, and the scarcity of data from rigorous, well-powered studies presents a major limitation to widespread application of MBIs.
Harnessing the therapeutic potential of music is of wide interest across NIH: 21 of NIHs 27 Institutes and Centers have representatives in the Trans-NIH Music and Health Working Group. This group supported the issuance of three NOFOs in 2019 that were designed to promote research on music and health. Two of these NOFOs (RFA-NS-19-008 and RFA-NS-19-009) supported R01 and R21 awards, respectively, for research related to the fundamentals and application of music in health. The third NOFO (RFA-AT-19-001) utilized a phased R61/R33 mechanism to support research on music and health geared toward the development of MBIs. These NOFOs were followed in 2020 by the publication of three program announcements with special reviews (PAR-20-266, PAR-21-100, and PAR-21-099) to continue NIHs support for basic, mechanistic, translational, and clinical research on music and health.
In 2021, NIH collaborated with the Foundation for the NIH (FNIH) and the Renée Fleming Foundation to organize three workshops: Laying the Foundation: Defining the Building Blocks of Music-Based Interventions, Assessing and Measuring Target Engagement Mechanistic and Clinical Outcome Measures for Brain Disorders of Aging, and Relating Target Engagement to Clinical Benefit Biomarkers for Brain Disorders of Aging. Each workshop featured interdisciplinary panels of experts in neuroscience, music therapy and music medicine, behavioral intervention development, clinical trial methodology, and patient and arts advocacy. Notably, each expert panel included both scientists actively working in the field of music and health as well as experts in a relevant discipline but not directly involved in MBI research, thus bringing fresh and unbiased perspectives to every panel. The NIH MBI Toolkit, which was recently published by the journal Neurology, is a direct outcome of these workshops that addresses a pressing need for building blocks of music-based interventions, use of a core set of common data elements, recommended functional outcome measures and biomarkers, and a framework and guidelines for music-based intervention research to enhance the rigor and reproducibility of MBI studies.
This R34 NOFO will support proof-of-concept feasibility trials guided by the NIH MBI Toolkit for research on brain disorders of aging. These early stage clinical trials will generate evidence to determine the validity of the NIH MBI Toolkits guiding principles as well as the necessary data to design a subsequent clinical efficacy or effectiveness study (or pragmatic clinical trial) using MBIs in the context of brain disorders of aging, including but not limited to AD/ADRD, Parkinsons disease, and stroke. The NIH MBI Toolkit defines the essential components of MBIs and promotes inclusion in MBI studies of critical elements that enhance rigor and reproducibility, such as a conceptual model or framework to guide the design of the MBI, a clear research question, and supporting data for the hypothesis. The NIH MBI Toolkit also outlines a core set of common data elements or building blocks that must be included in every MBI, including a comprehensive description of the intervention, a detailed protocol for delivering the intervention, a defined population to be studied, and control groups or comparators. Validation, dissemination, and implementation of the NIH MBI Toolkits guiding principles are viewed as critical steps toward accumulating the large-scale, rigorous, and replicable evidence necessary to incorporate MBIs into clinical practice.
Requirements and Scope
This NOFO proposes to build upon the rapidly expanding evidence base linking music and health by supporting feasibility trials guided by the NIH MBI Toolkit for brain disorders of aging. The R34 planning grant will support planning activities and analyses of existing data needed to design a feasibility and acceptability clinical research project and develop a protocol, to gather data to prepare for a future efficacy trial. . The grant will also support new data collection for assessing feasibility of protocol components (e.g., recruitment strategies, outcome ascertainment). Applicants are encouraged to review NCCIH guidance on appropriate components of a feasibility study. Since the focus of this NOFO is on the feasibility of the intervention, delivery of the intervention must be limited to one site.
All projects should be rigorously designed according to the guiding principles of the NIH MBI Toolkit and within the mission of the participating Institutes, Centers, and Offices. In addition, all proposed projects should have the potential to increase our understanding of the science of music and health, as well as inform MBIs to enhance normal function and improve health using brain disorders of aging as a model system.
Applications to this NOFO must also address the following specific requirements:
Prospective applicants should note that funding of a planning grant does not guarantee or imply funding for any subsequent competitive application for support of a full-scale, multi-site clinical trial or clinical research study.
The following are examples of project goals that are appropriate for feasibility trials submitted in response to this NOFO when the literature has not already demonstrated evidence for the proposed (or a similar) intervention and study population:
Design Considerations
Investigators should propose a randomized controlled trial design with at least one intervention arm and one comparator arm. There should be strong rationale for the comparator condition (e.g., time and attention control, usual care, standard of care, sham condition, and/or active comparator(s)) based on the research question planned to be addressed in the future powered trial. Due to lack of rigor and potential expectancy effects, this NOFO will not support studies proposing a waitlist comparator condition.
Power Recommendations
Pilot or feasibility studies are carried out in preparation for future adequately powered studies and, therefore, should address key issues of process (e.g., recruitment, retention, feasibility, adherence, fidelity) and/or outcomes assessment (e.g., feasibility of the method, frequency, burdensomeness, and duration of data collection procedures). Given the limited sample sizes that can be supported under this R34 grant mechanism, proposing to conduct fully powered tests of clinical outcomes (i.e., efficacy) or underpowered test of outcomes (i.e., "preliminary efficacy") or attempting to utilize the highly variable point estimate of an effect size for power calculations is not allowed and is noted as non-responsive below. Applicants should define feasibility/acceptability with quantitative benchmarks corresponding to each assessment category.
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 peer-reviewed:
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.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply - 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.
This R34 is limited to direct costs requests of up to $450,000 over the entire project period. Although variations from year to year are permissible, in no case may any year be more than $225,000 in direct costs.
The maximum project period is 3 years.
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 How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - Application Guide.
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:
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.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
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 How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
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: [email protected]
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 How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Other Project Information
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
R&R or Modular Budget
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
R&R Subaward Budget
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Research Plan
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Research Strategy
Significance:
The significance of the proposed clinical trial and importance of the question must be clearly stated. It is particularly important that there be a discussion of how the trial will test the proposed hypotheses and how or why there is clinical equipoise.
The clinical significance and, when applicable, the biological relevance of the future fully powered clinical trial should be clearly stated. The importance of the proposed feasibility trial should be described and why it is necessary to plan the subsequent future trial. It is particularly important that there be discussion of how the proposed early-stage trial will test the primary hypothesis focused on feasibility and how the results of the trial (positive or negative) will guide decisions about whether a subsequent study is feasible or justified, and/or evidence that additional studies must be completed before proceeding to a full-scale trial.
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/caregiver perspectives on acceptability of the proposed intervention. Characteristics of any 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 or guidelines. If not innovative, explain why alternative innovative approaches are not possible or practical and why the proposed research is necessary to establish feasibility of the intervention.
Approach:
Explain how the application addresses the appropriate regulatory requirements (i.e.,IDE, IRB).
A summary of the proposed feasibility trial protocol should be presented in the Research strategy and should include the items listed below as described in the NIH MBI Toolkit:
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by NIH) that results in the generation of scientific data are required to comply with the instructions for the Data Management and Sharing Plan. All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, must address a Data Management and Sharing Plan.
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
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 How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
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 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 the table must not exceed three pages.
The table columns should include:
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 How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
PHS Assignment Request Form
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)
See Part 2. 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
4. Submission Dates and Times
Part I. 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.
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.
7. Other Submission Requirements and Information
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - 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 components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the NCCIH Referral Office by email at [email protected] when the application has been submitted. Please include the NOFO number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
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:
Clinical Trial Experience Table (e.g., due to updated enrollment numbers, publication of trial results, or newly started clinical trials)
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:
How well does the applicant describe how the results of the feasibility trial will lead to the development of a larger more definitive clinical efficacy or effectiveness study (or pragmatic clinical trial) using MBIs in the context of brain disorders of aging? How compelling is the justification as to why it is important to perform the future larger clinical study in the context of the present knowledge on MBIs? Is the proposed feasibility trial essential to inform the design and implementation of subsequent steps in the evaluation of the MBI and incorporation into clinical practice? Would a conceptual framework (e.g., music therapy, behavioral, neural, social) be used to guide the proposed research (example frameworks are described in the NIH MBI Toolkit)?
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:
Is a multidisciplinary research team, with expertise such as clinical trial design, music therapy/music medicine, behavioral intervention development, neuroscience, social science, and/or patient-caregiver engagement proposed?
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:
If the proposed study design, methods, and intervention are not innovative, how necessary is the proposed research for establishing feasibility of the intervention?
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 well does the applicant describe how the proposed study relates to the NIH MBI Toolkit and development of the MBI, and will the proposed study generate feasibility data needed to support the validity of the NIH MBI Toolkits guiding principles? Are all MBI building blocks as outlined by the NIH MBI Toolkit addressed in the study design including a comprehensive description of the intervention, a detailed protocol for delivering the intervention, a defined population to be studied, and control groups or comparators? Are relevant clinical outcomes and/or biomarkers for brain disorders of aging (e.g., those provided in the NIH MBI Toolkit) identified? How reasonable is the rationale for the control group or comparator? How feasible is the proposed design? Does the application address appropriate regulatory requirements (IDE, IRB)? Is the study population appropriate for a focus on disorders of aging?
Regulatory Requirements
For applications that propose the use of an app or clinical decision support software, have the applicants provided documentation that they have consulted with their Institutional Review Board to determine whether the approach may qualify as a medical device, and met any other necessary regulatory requirements? 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).
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 documentation of the commitment of any subcontractors and consultants, as well as service agreements for personnel and facilities?
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.
Not applicable
Not applicable
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
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 policies and practices, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate national Advisory Council or Board. 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. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
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).
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, 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 Laws and Regulations Enforced by 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 System for Award Management (SAM.gov) requirements. SAM.gov requires Federal agencies to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently SAM.gov) prior to making an award. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the responsibility/qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the information available in the responsibility/qualification records in SAM.gov, 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.
Not Applicable
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.
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 (Responsibility/Qualification in SAM.gov, formerly 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: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
Sekai Chideya, M.D., M.P..H
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-827-1916
Email: [email protected]
Coryse St. Hillaire-Clarke, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Division of Neuroscience (DN)
Phone: 301-496-9350
E-mail: [email protected]
Lisa Onken, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Division of Behavioral and Social Research (DBSR)
Phone: (301) 496-3131
E-mail: [email protected]
Jessica McKlveen, PhD
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-8018
Email: [email protected]
Debbie Chen
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-3788
Email: [email protected]
Kathleen Moy
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Phone: 301.827.2856
E-mail: [email protected]
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.