Plan for Sharing Research Data
The precise content of the data-sharing plan will
vary, depending on the data being collected and how the investigator is planning
to share the data. Applicants who are planning to share data may wish to describe
briefly the expected schedule for data sharing, the format of the final dataset,
the documentation to be provided, whether or not any analytic tools also will
be provided, whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and,
if so, a brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for
deciding who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be
placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under their own
auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their institutional or personal
website, through a data archive or enclave). Investigators choosing to share
under their own auspices may wish to enter into a data-sharing agreement.
References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of the
application.
All applicants must include a plan for sharing
research data in their application. The data sharing policy is available at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing.
All investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a
description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data
sharing is not possible.
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or
the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers.
However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the
determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
Sharing of biomaterials, data, and software in a timely manner is essential for rapid progress in biomedical research. All applicants who respond to this PAS must propose plans for sharing data and biomaterials generated through the grant.
The sharing plan as approved, after
negotiation with the applicant when necessary, will be a condition of the
award.
Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy requires that grant awardee recipients
make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to
qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (See
the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part7.htm#_Toc54600131).
Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing
research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared
or explain why sharing is not possible.
The adequacy of the resources sharing plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3. Reporting.
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review criteria described below will
be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications submitted for this funding opportunity
will be assigned to the ICs on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines.
Appropriate scientific review groups convened in accordance
with the standard NIH peer review procedures (http://www.csr.nih.gov/refrev.htm)
will evaluate applications for scientific and technical merit.
As part of the initial merit review, all applications
will:
- Undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of applications under review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score.
- Receive a written critique.
- Receive a second level of review by an appropriate national advisory council or board.
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
- Scientific merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review
- Availability of funds
- Relevance to program priorities
The goals of NIH supported research
are to advance our understanding of biological systems, to improve the control
of disease, and to enhance health. In their written critiques, reviewers will
be asked to comment on each of the following criteria in order to judge the
likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the
pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered
in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application.
Note that an application does not need to be strong in all categories to be
judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority
score. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work
that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward.
Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of
the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice
be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods,
technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive
this field?
Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods,
and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate
to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem
areas and consider alternative tactics?
Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the
project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative
hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project
develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies
for this area?
Investigators: Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited
to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience
level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative
team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done
contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit
from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations,
or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional
support?
2.A. Additional Review Criteria:
In addition to the above criteria, the following
items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit
and the priority score:
Protection of Human Subjects from Research Risk:
The involvement of human subjects and protections from research risk relating
to their participation in the proposed research will be assessed. See item
6 of the Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).
Inclusion of Women, Minorities and Children in Research: The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders,
all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate
for the scientific goals of the research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment
and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. See item 7 of the Research
Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).
Care and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If
vertebrate animals are to be used in the project, the five items described
under item 11 of the Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R) will be
assessed.
Biohazards: If materials or procedures are proposed that are potentially
hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, determine if the proposed
protection is adequate.
2.B. Additional Review Considerations
Budget: The reasonableness of the proposed
budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research
may be assessed by the reviewers. Is the percent effort listed for the PD/PI
appropriate for the work proposed? Is each budget category realistic and justified
in terms of the aims and methods?
Period of Support: The appropriateness of the
requested period of support in relation to the proposed research.
2.C. Sharing Research Data
Data Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the
data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed
by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing
plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score. The
presence of a data sharing plan will be part of the terms and conditions of
the award. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the
data sharing policy.
Program staff will be responsible
for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research data.
2.D. Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy requires that grant awardee recipients
make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to
qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (See
NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part7.htm#_Toc54600131).
Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a plan
for sharing research resources addressing how unique research resources will
be shared or explain why sharing is not possible.
Program staff will be responsible for the administrative
review of the plan for sharing research resources.
The adequacy of the resources sharing
plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when
making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the
resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of
each Non-Competing Grant
Progress Report (PHS 2590), See Section VI.3.,
Reporting.
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Not applicable
Section VI. Award Administration
Information
1. Award Notices
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.
If the application is under consideration
for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the
applicant. For details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants
Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart
A: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part4.htm).
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award
(NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the
grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative
and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via
email notification from the awarding component to the grantee business official.
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. See Also Section IV.5.
Funding Restrictions.
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: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part4.htm)
and Part II Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and
Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part9.htm).
3. Reporting
Awardees will be required to submit the PHS Non-Competing
Grant Progress Report, Form 2590 annually (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm)
and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Section VII. Agency Contacts
We encourage your inquiries concerning
this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from
potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research,
peer review, and financial or grants management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contacts:
Jane W. Fountain, Ph.D.
Program Director
NINDS, NIH
Neuroscience Center, Room 2110
6001 Executive Blvd.
Bethesda, MD 20892-9521
FedEx or courier shipments use: Rockville,
MD 20852
Phone: (301) 496-1431
FAX: (301) 480-2424
E-mail: [email protected]
Claudio Dansky Ullmann, M.D.
Program Director,
Clinical Grants and Contracts Branch
Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program
DCTD, National Cancer Institute
EPN, Room 7014
6130 Executive Boulevard
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7432
301-435-9065 (Direct)
301-496-8866
301-480-4663 (Fax)
[email protected]
2. Peer Review Contacts:
Not Applicable
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Ms. Kathleen Howe
Grants Management Branch
NINDS
6001 Executive Boulevard,
Rm 3266
Bethesda, MD 20892
Telephone: (301) 496-7392
Email: [email protected]
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Use of Animals in Research:
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving
live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use
of Laboratory Animals (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf)
as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm),
and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm)
as applicable.
Human Subjects Protection:
Federal regulations (45CFR46) require that applications
and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to
the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks,
the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the
importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety monitoring is required for all types
of clinical trials, including physiologic toxicity and dose-finding studies
(Phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II); efficacy, effectiveness and comparative
trials (Phase III). Monitoring should be commensurate with risk. The establishment
of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical
trials involving interventions that entail potential risks to the participants
(NIH Policy for Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts,
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking
$500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include
a plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their institutions
on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules, as well as
local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Rule.
Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan but will not factor the plan
into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
Access to Research Data through the Freedom of
Information Act:
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
A-110 has been revised to provide access to research data through the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first
produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds
and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an
action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed
through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope
of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.
Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity
in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage
the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application
should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and
include information about this in the budget justification section of the
application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed
consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential
for wider use of data collected under this award.
Sharing of Model Organisms:
NIH is committed to support efforts that encourage
sharing of important research resources including the sharing of model organisms
for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm).
At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors
to elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding
pursuant to the Bayh Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm).
All investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal, beginning
with the October 1, 2004 receipt date, are expected to include in the application/proposal
a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model
organism research resources generated using NIH funding or state why such
sharing is restricted or not possible. This will permit other researchers
to benefit from the resources developed with public funding. The inclusion
of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a cost threshold in any
year and is expected to be included in all applications where the development
of model organisms is anticipated.
Inclusion of Women And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the NIH that women and members
of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported
clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is
provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health
of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the
NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators
proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion
of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html);
a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm.
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical
research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new
OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical
trials consistent with the SF424 (R&R); and updated roles and responsibilities
of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require
for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or
proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct
analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic
groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report
annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender
and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical
Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals
under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research, conducted
or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not
to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human
subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion
of children as participants in research involving human subjects (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on the Protection of Human Subject
Participants:
NIH policy requires education on the protection of
human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH applications
for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key personnel.
The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC):
Criteria for federal funding of research on hESCs
can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp
and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html.
Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic
Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov). It is the responsibility
of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the
application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC line(s)to
be used in the proposed research. Applications that do not provide this information
will be returned without review.
NIH Public Access Policy:
NIH-funded investigators are requested to submit to
the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov)
at PubMed Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript
upon acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole
or in part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined
as the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all modifications
from the publishing peer review process.
NIH is requesting that authors submit manuscripts
resulting from 1) currently funded NIH research projects or 2) previously
supported NIH research projects if they are accepted for publication on or
after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies to all research grant
and career development award mechanisms, cooperative agreements, contracts,
Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service
Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies. The Policy applies to
peer-reviewed, original research publications that have been supported in
whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not apply to book
chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings. Publications resulting
from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be submitted.
For more information about the Policy or the submission
process please visit the NIH Public Access Policy Web site at http://PublicAccess.nih.gov/ and
view the Policy or other Resources and Tools including the Authors' Manual
(http://publicaccess.nih.gov/publicaccess_manual.htm).
Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable
Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually
Identifiable Health Information", the "Privacy Rule", on August
14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal regulation under the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection
of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and enforced
by the DHHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of
the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR
Website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides
information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and
a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information
on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review,
funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and research
contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must
be self-contained within specified page limitations. Unless otherwise specified
in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide
information necessary to the review because reviewers are under no obligation
to view the Internet sites. Furthermore, we caution reviewers that their anonymity
may be compromised when they directly access an Internet site.
Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving
the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People
2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This PA
is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may
obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and Regulations:
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the
intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems
Agency review. 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 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject
to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described
in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants Policy Statement
can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to
provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products.
In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking
in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which
regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood
development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the
PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American
people.
Loan Repayment Programs:
NIH encourages applications for educational loan repayment
from qualified health professionals who have made a commitment to pursue a
research career involving clinical, pediatric, contraception, infertility,
and health disparities related areas. The LRP is an important component of
NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the next generation of researchers by
providing the means for developing a research career unfettered by the burden
of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is not required for eligibility
and concurrent career award and LRP applications are encouraged. The periods
of career award and LRP award may overlap providing the LRP recipient with
the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP awardees must commit at
least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week based on a 40 hour week)
for two years to the research. For further information, please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
 |
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||